Poll: Is the ratio of women in the industry really a sign of sexism?

[Frybird]

As for the thread title question:

We'll never know.

Of course the ratio of women in the industry isn't entirely dictated by sexism, probably not even mainly.
But you cannot really measure whether or not a woman may have been not put in a certain position because of sexism, because no one will ever admit that, and even if it were the case, you'd still had to check EVERY position in the industry.

On topic:
I really hoped that would've been something that never sees the light of day outside of Kotaku.

I REALLY, REALLY DON'T CARE WHO GETS TO PRESENT PS4 STUFF

It's about the product, not about the presenters, and in terms of advertising and propaganda (wich that event was after all), i just can't see the need of a "female perspective"

 

[Aaron Sylvester]

It is more of a result of the fact that the target demographics of gamers tend to be male. Sexism however tends to crop up in areas that are generally perceived as male only. I would say that any sexism is the effect, not the cause.

I would go one step further and say that sexism is the illusion of the effect, at least in this case.
It has been said time again that females in games aren't "devalued" out of the developer's/writer's hatred for women, out of intentional misogyny or sexist motives. That is utter and complete bullshit 99% of the time and anyone who says otherwise is delusional, unless those people are seriously implying that all those devs/writers don't have girlfriends, sisters, mothers, etc and simply hate women. How utterly nonsensical. These are the same people who claim that male gamers who go for fanservice-pandering games (e.g. DoA volleyball) are people who don't respect women in real life, they just see them as sexual objects. In the game perhaps because it allows people to explore their fantasies, but in real life? Again, bullshit.

It's long been known that sexism at this point is something that only "happens" to women. There is really no denying it, hell even the Wikipedia definition (the very first line) says that's just how it usually is.
But what really blows my mind is WHY it is usually associated with women if men and women are truly equal in mental capability - and I'm a 100% believer they are, just in very slightly different areas. The difference in mental capability is negligible and irrelevant.

But the thing with sexism being a women-only-thing 95% of the time in today's era still doesn't make any logical sense, it really has left me scratching my head. It's as if women are objects with with no self-drive, motivation, personality or capability of equalizing or even reversing the situation. And we all know that is a load of bollocks.
Imagine if women were making all the games and men were making all claims of sexism...and women were constantly fending off male groups...it's such an alien concept to us, or at least it is to me! WHY?

captcha: space is big
No captcha, the universe is big. Space is just space.

 

[Mr. Eff_v1legacy]

I think it's possible that less women are interested in video game study/design. I was in a video game theory class this past semester. There were two women in a class of 20 or so.
It's easy to look at things at face value, especially raw numbers, and immediately draw conclusions. I think people do it far too often and see malice where it is not necessarily present.

 

[Abomination]

Imagine if women were making all the games and men were making all claims of sexism...and women were constantly fending off male groups...it's such an alien concept to us, or at least it is to me! WHY?

Clearly you haven't been paying attention to all the male nurses demanding equal male representation in that female dominated ro-- oh wait that doesn't happen.

Ah, how about all the men wanting a 50/50 split in midwifing? Yeah bet you didn't see that one - because it doesn't happen.

Secretarial roles? Teaching? Infant childcare? Nannies?

I find if a man wants one of those roles they just pursue it and obtain it on the merit of their ability... not try and make it a political/social issue.

Does that imply that women ARE inferior to men and require society's assistance whenever they want to do some-- I kid, I kid.

 

[Phasmal]

I think it's possible that less women are interested in video game study/design. I was in a video game theory class this past semester. There were two women in a class of 20 or so.
It's easy to look at things at face value, especially raw numbers, and immediately draw conclusions. I think people do it far too often and see malice where it is not necessarily present.

Sexism doesn't always equal malice.
Obviously, making a sexist remark intentionally to upset someone- malicious.
But was it `malicious` when I was always told as a child `Girls don't play games`?
Is it malicious that many people try and discourage boys from playing with dolls?

I would say it's more social conditioning.
And that some people seem to be mixing up sexism and misogyny.
Nobody is trying to say women aren't working in the games industry because you hate us.

 

[DoPo]

So, yeah, it is a sign of sexism, but not in the `OMAGAAAAWD CONTROVERSY` way you are making out.
Do I think it should be exactly 50/50? No. But I do think I shouldn't have to be told all the damn time that my opinion on games doesn't matter because it's `male dominated`/`for men`.

[Insert joke here]
Since I think you might be getting tired of those, I'll let you come up with something actually funny for yourself.

Game industry/community has woman issues->women are told gaming is a `guy thing` (as well as maths and science)->less women go for education to be in the industry->the industry stays a boy's club->Game industry/community has woman issues.

It's actually a multifaceted issue, some women I know didn't go into computing for reasons hovering around this but maybe not directly directed - one, for example, just wanted to study along with her best friend, so she had to take another subject, others just felt intimidated by the low percentage of women studying it, and reportedly, there are some who were intimidate by the other women there (something to do with having to competition between fewer people being more fierce). Simply put there are lots of reasons there are few girls into the computer science field but prevalently is because they are discouraged by society.

Interestingly, some years back it was the opposite. One of my lecturers shared that during her time of undergrad, women were encouraged to go into computing and maths. ...however, the reason was they were discouraged from going into "real engineering" disciplines. You know, because women wouldn't be able to handle them *sigh*.

It doesn't help women's case much that they are more willing to get into design and similar. It's probably viewed as a nice compromise for some reason (by...dunno, people) - they both get to be into the technological field and get a more "girly" section of it (because art and stuff). But designers get really underappreciated. Even if they do coding as well as design, they are considered "not true" developers, since there is so little elitism in the world, we need to have more. Web developers suffer from a similar stigma...and web development is another field I've seen more women tend to gravitate to. From the women I've studied with, a lot were doing computer vision, also a lot were into web development and similar (including business IT which has some webdev as well as more general IT and IT consultancy focus), and then there was general computer science, with software engineering and, I believe, AI/robotics having the least women.

I think it's more to do with societal gender roles than sexism. Erm, if there is a difference between the two, I don't know, it's a more scholarly exercise than I want to get into.

 

[Aaron Sylvester]

edit: Okay, double posts don't usually happen here. I think my browser had a hiccup.

 

[Altefforr]

Forced equality is no equality at all.

Also, The Escapist has the best Captchas, ever.

 

[Mr. Eff_v1legacy]

Sexism doesn't always equal malice.
Obviously, making a sexist remark intentionally to upset someone- malicious.
But was it `malicious` when I was always told as a child `Girls don't play games`?
Is it malicious that many people try and discourage boys from playing with dolls?

I would say it's more social conditioning.
And that some people seem to be mixing up sexism and misogyny.
Nobody is trying to say women aren't working in the games industry because you hate us.

Good point, but that was only part of my post. It seems to me that often times when people bring up these type of issues, they assume nefarious motives. I'm not mixing up the two.
My point being that perhaps women are less interested as a whole in the field than men.

 

[danon]

Yeah in modern countries each person pursues their interests regardless of gender. I'm sick and tired of hearing about how every thing in the whole world is sexism. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps, stop with the victim mentality and pursue your dreams.

 

[Little Duck]

I get the feeling the podcat had it right, there aren't enough women in higher positions in gaming and there won't be until our current generation begins retiring and a new generation can prove themselves.

BUT I get the feeling this could also be a cultural issue as well as an industry issue. There aren't many females in engineering, maths or programming degrees. Thus the industry won't be able to have that 50/50 availability of women until more are willing to do these degrees. THe fact there are women doing everyday jobs in the industry at a fairly well represented level considering backgrounds I believe is a good thing.

 

[Phasmal]

Good point, but that was only part of my post. It seems to me that often times when people bring up these type of issues, they assume nefarious motives. I'm not mixing up the two.
My point being that perhaps women are less interested as a whole in the field than men.

Which brings me back to social attitudes.
Are women `less interested` just because they are women, or because they are socialised differently?
It's something interesting to think about at least.

 

[maninahat]

A sexism topic.

Oh joy.

Yeah, seems a bit storm-in-a-teacup-ish.

That's what you said about the last sexism debate. What are you,......the-storm-in-a-teacup-policeman-guy? Huh?!

I can see how it could be perplexing for many - after all, no one is telling women they can't be game designers, so if the numbers are low that means women are just choosing not to be gamers, and so it's only their fault, right?

WELL NO, ACTUALLY.


Whilst no one tells women they can't be engineers, math grads, or game designers, any person's decision as to what to be when they are older is heavily influenced by their environment and upbringing. In other words, a woman's choice in jobs is largely decided by the gender allocated to her from birth. All the way through childhood, girls are generally discouraged from "boy stuff" and encouraged to like "girl stuff", and as it happens, boy stuff consists of technical orientated toys, games and entertainment whilst girl stuff consists of magic, pink and haircare. The process is self-sustaining too - parents get kids the toys they would have got as a child, whilst girls and boys will want the toys they see their corresponding friends and siblings playing with. This carries over almost all the way into adulthood, and is reflected in televisions shows, deeply entrenched attitudes, and even things as simple as colour.

So whenever you see gender imbalance in job roles, it might not be indicative of sexism within that industry, but it is indicative of sexism in society at large.

 

[Mr. Eff_v1legacy]

Which brings me back to social attitudes.
Are women `less interested` just because they are women, or because they are socialised differently?
It's something interesting to think about at least.

It's an interesting question. I think it has some merit, however I also think it takes some of the agency away from women. They can make their own choices, and are free to do so.

 

[Lilani]

I don't doubt that the industry has its fair share of sexism, but a general lack of interest on the part of women is probably the major cause. It's kind of a self-perpetuating thing. The industry is male dominated, so fewer women consider it, so it continues to be male dominated.

And that's sort of the condensed version of my opinion, as well. Nobody can say that there is no sexism within the industry, because sexism can crop up anywhere and anybody. I'm sure there's a sexist worker or manager in just about every single industry somewhere or another. Personally I think the most sexism that we have the most evidence to prove exists is in the games that are produced themselves, but that's another discussion altogether.

But yeah. Males dominate the industry, so fewer women consider it, which means males dominate the industry. Why fewer women are interested, like the sexism in games issue, is yet another discussion that I think has already erupted in this thread, but I'm not going to instigate that as well. Man OP, you are really skirting the edge here between "cut-and-dry" and "controversial." While the ratio issue is pretty cut and dry, the reasons the ratio exists are "storms in a teacup."

 

[maninahat]

If this industry is sexist, then the dressmaking industry is sexist because there aren't enough men in it.

In other words, it's unrealistic to expect a 50/50 split across all industries.

The dressmaking industry is sexist because there aren't enough men in it. It's also sexist because men are more likely to occupy the top managerial or senior roles in fashion industry, despite being in the minority.

The thing is, the issue is more egregious with games. Not many men wear dresses, but most women play games. In fact, it is predicted that this year there will be more female gamers than males. In spite of this, games are still seen by senior levels as a boy's thing, which is reflected in conventions, advertising and the games themselves. Whilst we probably could do to change the gender attitudes towards men wearing dresses and male interests in fashion, the need to change with regards to gaming is far more apparent.

 

[Andy Shandy]

To be fair, the Kotaku article was written by Patricia Hernandez, who I'm pretty sure introduces herself not by saying hello, but by shouting "SEXISM!" at the nearest male. So I'd take any article by her with a truckload of salt.

And anyway, for most of the conference, Sony were bringing out the people who'd been in the industry for decades, your Mark Cernys, David Cages, Chris Metzens, etc. And unfortunately there aren't that many big name women from that era. (not that I can think of anyway)

 

[zxvcasdfqwerzxcv]

It's absolutely not sexist, I don't imagine there are barriers of entry to the industry for women. If we consider that the majority of gamers 10-15 years ago were male, it's not surprising that the majority of those choosing a career in game design are male. With increasing numbers of female gamers in the last decade (a trend that may likely continue) the industry will likely see a rise in female game designers over the next decade.

However I agree that there may be a level of intimidation for entering a male-dominated industry. I work as as a sound engineer and music producer. The music industry is extremely male dominated, and for the life of me, the only reason I can think of why it is, is because it has always been male-dominated since its inception. That and the possibility that women in the industry tend to veer towards being artists rather than producers (by choice or by being placed there).

 

[The Lugz]

honestly, when people cry about women's representation in gaming or black representation
in gaming or bald people's representation in gaming

or w/e the eff you care to label people

you're objectifying people by labels.

there simply isn't a leg to stand on with that argument nobody cares because it makes no difference
people are people, end.

who you 'want' to program games is down to you
i couldn't care less as-long as the game is good frankly because gawd knows there aren't enough of those.