Women in gaming vs. invisible ropes
by Gil Hova
I’m almost done with my year-long project to record the genders of all the people I have played with. It’s an interesting project, and it gains a new and interesting context with all the awful news going on around the video game world. I guess it’s a good thing that we’re finally talking about women in gaming, although I wish it didn’t have to take death threats against some of our bravest designers in order to start the discussion.
We’re lucky that there isn’t usually such overt sexism on such public display in the board game world. Nevertheless, I think we can do better. My gender project has taught me to pay more attention to women in board gaming. There’s more than meets the eye.
During this time, I’ve been able to see board gaming through my girlfriend’s eyes. She’s a newcomer to gaming, and while my friends try to welcome her into gaming, she doesn’t feel welcome. Through her, I’ve noticed that boardgaming, while not overtly hostile to women, still has a bunch of invisible ropes that keep many women from enjoying the hobby.
Before I go any further, let me be clear: I am a straight white guy, and I’ve led quite a privileged life. I can’t claim to speak for women. No one can, because there is no monolithic generalization one can make about half of the human population. So please don’t think I’m attempting to speak on behalf of all women everywhere. I’m writing this because I think my perspective can be helpful when we try to figure out why there are so many more men playing board games than women.
Another thing I must make clear: a lot of people usually take this kind of thing to mean offensiveness. They think there’s a line between “offensive” and “inoffensive”. If you’re on the “inoffensive” side, everything’s fine and peachy, but if you’re on the “offensive” side, then you’ve just insulted every single woman (or whatever non-straight-white-male demographic you’d like), without exception.
But I’m not talking about that line. We in the board game world don’t really have to deal with overtly offensive stuff, thankfully. Instead, I’m going to talk about invisible ropes.
An invisible rope is something that most people in gaming don’t notice, but that can turn off someone just entering the hobby. They start walking to us, but then they get stopped by one of these invisible ropes. They turn away, and try to approach from another direction, and hit another invisible rope. Then they try another approach, and hit another invisible rope.
And that’s it; they turn away. All these ropes add together to tell them: Gaming is not for them. They can’t tell us why, because they can’t easily see the ropes that kept them away.
Again, this isn’t about one huge wall keeping people away from gaming. This is death by a thousand tiny cuts. It’s a bunch of tiny actions we perform.
And we can have the best of intentions. We can be thinking that we’re all for women in gaming and inclusivity, and still be responsible for keeping these invisible ropes up. That’s why I don’t think this is a matter of simple offensiveness; that always winds up with apologies and accusations, sometimes sincere, sometimes insincere, none of which really get to the bottom of what’s going on.
Here are some examples of invisible ropes in gaming. For these examples, don’t consider a woman already in gaming; she’s already gotten past the ropes. Instead, consider a woman new to gaming. Think of a woman who is going to a game convention for the first time. Maybe she’s never played a modern game before; maybe she’s only got a couple of games of Settlers or Munchkin under her belt. What invisible ropes will she run into?
More men than women. Anyone familiar with the craft of game design will recognize a positive feedback mechanism, and we have one here. It’s unfair, but there we are. A woman will notice when she’s the only woman in the environment. And it becomes a self-perpetuating cycle.
Some react by disregarding it; others can’t help but notice it. The latter is not a fault of character, of course. And I’m sure it’s an irritating feeling to feel so singled out.
Representation. Perhaps our hypothetical subject has found a group where she’s not the only woman. Perhaps she’s decided to ignore it. So she goes ahead and plays one of the top 25 games on BoardGameGeek. And it has a guy on the cover.
I went ahead and checked. The top 25 games on BGG have a total of 58 featured characters. Of those characters, only 10 are clearly women. That’s 17.2%.
Some more stats…
- Of the top 25 games, 22 have featured human characters on their covers. (If you’re curious, Dominant Species, X-Wing Fighter Miniatures, and Race for the Galaxy have no featured human characters.)
- Of these remaining 22 games, only two have women exclusively featured on their covers: Android: Netrunner and Caverna. And only two others have at least as many women featured as men: Agricola and Battlestar: Galactica.
So representation on covers remains quite male-dominated. And I haven’t even gotten to the question of realistic versus sexualized portrayals of women yet.
Inadvertently condescending strategy help. Let’s chart this one out mathematically: if x is the number of seconds it takes for a man to think about his turn before the other players start pointing out his possible moves, and y a similar number for a woman, then y < x, especially when the woman is new to the group. Sometimes y < x/2. Regardless of how many games the woman owns or plays. I’d need a bunch of gamers and a stopwatch to confirm this mathematically, but look out for it at a game table next time you see a man play a woman he’s never met before. You will notice it.
The language factor. 20 years ago, I used to think that I could say things like “guys” as a non-gendered word. “Hey guys, what’s going on?” And if we made any significant progress in gender equity in the past two decades, I wouldn’t feel bad using it.
But if Gamergate has taught us anything, it’s that women still aren’t treated as equals. It’s made me re-think how I use language when I communicate.
“Guys” is exclusionary. I can think in my head that it’s not exclusionary when I say it, but that doesn’t mean it’s not exclusionary for the people who are listening. It’s an invisible rope. When I say it, I’m asking women who are listening to re-map the words in their heads from being gendered to being non-gendered. That’s asking a lot, and I don’t think it’s changed in the past 20 years.
Listen, I don’t want to tell you how to speak or write. I hate to sound like the PC police. I will tell you this: I’ve stopped addressing people as “guys” in writing unless I’m sure the people I’m writing to are all men. The rulebooks I wrote 10 years ago all use “he” as a singular pronoun. I now alternate between “he” and “she”, and I’m trying to get my brain to accept “they” as singular (it’s going to take a while).
Also, you’ll notice how I’m writing “women” in this post? Not “females”? I notice a lot of gamers use “female” as a noun. This is a really cold and dehumanizing way to write about half of the population. If you’re writing a scientific study, it might be all right. But in any other setting, use “women”. It comes off much more warmly. (Of course, “female” as an adjective is usually okay: “That female ninja, etc. etc.” Or how I use “female” in the very next sentence.)
And I will urge everyone in earshot to only use “girl” when referring to someone female under the age of 18.
For how I talk? It’s going to take a little longer. I say “guys” all the time. It’s going to be tough to change that behavior. But that seed is in my head. I’m only now understanding how much language matters, and how poorly the status quo is functioning.
Boys’ locker room mentality. Does your game group meet at a game store? What’s its clientele like? What’s its ambiance like? If it’s anything like the game stores I’ve played at in the past, there are a ton of pubescent boys at the store, shouting taunts like “fag” and “pussy” at each other.
Now, if you’re a person who’s obsessed with board games past a certain point, you can let this bounce off you. But not everyone is blessed with thick skin. And a local gaming environment that’s heavily biased towards teenaged boys is going to alienate a lot of women. No wonder I’ve noticed that I tend to play more women in private rather than in public – 21% of my opponents are women when playing in public, 30% are women when playing in private, at the time of this writing.
But if a woman is playing games in private, that means she’s either found a “safe” area to play games, or she’s built one up herself. Not all women get to that point. I’m sure a ton have hit this particular invisible rope and concluded that gaming is not for them.
Societal expectations. We live in a society where, by and large, women are expected to tend to home and family while men are allowed to follow their interests. This is something I don’t agree with and that I would love to see change significantly in my lifetime, but I think it’s important that we mention it.
I’ve mentioned Dr. Erin C. Davis’ preliminary report on women in boardgaming in some of my other posts. Here are some relevant quotes from women gamers she interviewed…
I can’t play a four hour game. Because I start thinking of everything I should be doing. I should be doing the laundry. I should be taking care of the dishes. I can’t play them. I don’t enjoy them because all I do is sit there and think I’m wasting my time. So any game that’s gonna take more than about two hours I really can’t stand…. (30 year old woman gaming for 1 year).
I think that the problem is for me is, when we are playing a game at home, and much to [my husband’s] annoyance sometimes, I am still doing five other things while we’re playing the game. I am making dinner. I’ve got other things I’m finishing up. I think it is just harder for women to detach from all of the other things that they have in their life to take the time out to play a boardgame. Where as men seem to have a much easier time making the time for themselves to go ahead and do that. (42 year old woman with 1 child who has been gaming for over 16 years)
In our group it seems like the women have other responsibilities that the men don’t do. It seems like the guys go to work and they come to the gaming things where women are like, ‘oh I’m off work I have to go home and make dinner or I have to go home and take care of the kids’ (44 year old woman gaming for 3 years)
Other men staying silent. This, out of all of them, is the hardest one.
I can’t count the number of times I’ve sat at a game table and seen an invisible rope get strung up. And I’ve almost always kept my mouth shut. It’s not the right time, I’d tell myself. Don’t make a pest of myself.
But if this environment is going to change, and if I’m ever going to see more than 25% of my overall opponents be women, I have to be part of the solution. And that means speaking up.
If I see someone being unintentionally sexist, I would like to be more vocal. I don’t want to be rude or alienating about it. But I’ve heard from other women that the best thing they can hear is a man tell his friend, “Too much. Back off.”
These invisible ropes doesn’t keep all women out of gaming. You might know plenty of women in your gaming groups. But that doesn’t mean that these invisible ropes don’t exist. Some women have thicker skin than others, and they love gaming so much that they’re willing to put up with all the invisible ropes they encounter. Which is awesome for them, but we can’t expect every woman to have that sort of thick skin. It’s just unfair. I think this is reflected in my gender project numbers, especially the split between public and private gaming. There are fewer invisible ropes when playing in private, hence the 10% swing for women I play with in a private setting.
By the way, the correct term for this kind of unconscious, exclusionary activity is “microaggression,” but I’ve found that term turns people off: “What? No! I’m not being aggressive. I’m didn’t mean anything by it! I’m only trying to help!” I think one of the obstacles to this sort of discussion is that people don’t like being called aggressive, or sexist, or privileged. They feel insulted by it and get defensive. I don’t mean to authoritatively set the tone of the discussion here; I just think people are less likely to get defensive when hearing “invisible rope” than if they hear “microaggression.”
So the next time you wonder why there so many more men than women in board gaming, look at these invisible ropes. Even better, try to see if you’re inadvertently setting up an invisible rope yourself.
If you’re interested in reading more, here are some excellent articles on the subject:
Ways Men in Tech are Unintentionally Sexist – This isn’t about board gaming specifically, but a lot of what the writer describes maps quite well to our hobby. I’ve even adapted a few of this article’s points into this post.
I am a Racist and I am a Sexist and Probably Some Other -Ists, Too – I’ve honestly never gotten around to reading anything Chuck Wendig’s written (yet) other than this post, but it exhibits a lot of self-awareness and a desire to get better.
Formal Ferret Games 
An interesting and thought-provoking read. I really like articles that will make me look at things from a different angle than I do naturally.
Extending your own study a bit, I’d be interested in knowing if — like with private in-home gaming — there would be a higher percentage of women (and, probably even, non-core-gamer men) at public social locations they are already familiar and comfortable with — libraries, churches, YMCA/YWCA, seniors centers, etc.
Sharing this. 🙂
Okay, so I hope you’ll take it as a sign that you are getting things at least somewhat right when I say that a lot of this sounds … pretty obvious to me? But I’m glad you’re making these observations.
I have a lot to say about this, but I’m having a lot of trouble organizing it in a way that makes sense. Let’s see.
There are a lot of reasons that women may prefer to join groups that already include women. Some obvious ones:
–Groups that include women are groups that haven’t already driven women away. So, there is less risk of experiencing microaggressions or other possible unpleasant consequences.
–Groups that include women send the message “women belong here.” I think that’s especially important for new gamers, because–it’s difficult to identify with a community where you feel out of place. (and your point about representation is important here too)
–Groups that include women mean LESS PRESSURE on women–less pressure to prove that they belong (which is really stressful and makes it hard to focus on the game), and also less pressure to Represent Women.
For me personally, groups that include women are also nice because they provide an opportunity to connect with other women that I often don’t get as a nerdgirl. But that’s a complicated thing to explain.
I think that if there were more women in public gaming spaces, there would be more women in public gaming spaces. But private gaming spaces, by their nature, carry the sense of invitedness. And then also–the sense I get from reading the forums, etc. is that a lot of women are introduced to games by their male romantic partners, and often two-player games are used for this purpose. So, as they continue playing games (if they do), then they continue playing them under similar circumstances. I’m extrapolating from my imagination here, but I’ve seen this a lot. For a lot of the women I know, it’s not that they are afraid to go game in public, it’s that they’ve come to know gaming another way.
(Personally? I have a preference for public gaming, because I’m socially awkward and feel weird about going into other people’s houses. But I’m an unusual person in this respect.)
Anyway, there’s certainly some sexism–conscious and unconscious, “benevolent” and otherwise–in the gaming community. Lots of it is in small things, but small things build up. Let’s not overlook them. Some examples:
–An opponent of mine in Ra at WBC saying (with 100% good intentions) that it was nice I was there because it is “good to get some estrogen in the tournament” (yay stereotype threat)
–A certain podcaster’s commentary on husband-and-wife codesigners: “some guys put their wife’s name on the box”
–Any random thread in the Women and Gaming forum of BGG; read that forum for a while and you’ll see posters who appear to be male talking past and over women instead of listening to them
–the designation of certain games as being more attractive to women (seriously, it took me forever to admit that I like set collection games, because Set Collection Is For Girls)
–the way that some male gamers recoil at any themes that appear to them to be coded feminine in any way. (check out the way people talk about Rococo, for instance)
–That it is a TON easier for me to be welcome in gaming groups because I’m there with Doug
etc. etc. etc. This is not a comprehensive list. It’s not, you know, gamergate stuff, but it should still stop.
Anyway, I’m one person, what do I know, but those are my observations.
And while I’m at it, let me just say that we need to think about race, too. I’m assuming you’ve seen Bruno Faidutti’s excellent blog post on orientalism in board games So, representation is often problematic in terms of race, and the gaming community as I’ve been exposed to isn’t at all racially diverse–there are a ton of white people, and some Asians.. and few others.
This is an awesome reply. Thank you!
This subject is so enormous, one blog post can’t hope to cover even a sliver of it. But I think it’s important to at least start somewhere. Since I’m not a woman myself, I can only take the discussion so far. So I’m really glad you’ve posted some of your experiences.
This was a tough post for me to write, because it’s an all-too-familiar subject to so many people, and I feel so new to it. I’m happy to admit how little I know about the subject, but I had to consciously avoid sounding like I had discovered anything revolutionary. I don’t want to seem like one of those know-it-all white men who seem too happy to talk at you about FEMALES IN GAMING.
Ultimately, I decided to write it because I started seeing invisible ropes everywhere, and yet I didn’t hear much discussion about it in my usual circles. I’m hoping this will get it on a lot more peoples’ consciousnesses.
I really wish I could have covered race as well. It feels crappy of me to focus on women only, but as unqualified as I am to discuss gender, I feel even less qualified to discuss race. I know that’s a cop-out, so I all I can do is beg forgiveness and hope that I can come back to it; it’s every bit as important as gender. Properly handling intersectionality is a big part of inclusiveness. I just feel like I have a tiny bit of perspective on gender right now, as opposed to no perspective at all about race.
One other thing I didn’t discuss is non-binary gender. There are plenty of gamers who do not identify as men or women, or identify as some combination of both. So focusing on women is only a small part of the story. Sadly, I still don’t know enough about non-binary gamers to comment intelligently, and I really want to. As I was telling a friend today, all I can do is point to the large non-binary-shaped hole in my discussion and hope I learn enough to share something substantial later.
Ultimately, there’s no way to capture this entire issue in a single post. It’s just too damn big!
I met my wife through games in 1977. I think game sessions are improved when women are there. It may help that at my age (63) I don’t feel threatened by them, which is a considerable part of what fuels #gamergate.
Yet at some point we enter the world of hand-wringing “politically correct” ridiculousness. For example, listen to women. They don’t refer to groups of themselves as “ladies” or “girls” or “women”, they say “guys”. That’s not #gamergate, that’s simple reality. “Guys” is NOT exclusionary except in the minds of people who don’t pay attention. If you don’t use “guys”, what are you going to use?
(Two weeks ago an 18 year old woman at a game session pointed out that I’d said “guys”. But when I asked her how she referred to groups of women, she realized she used “guys”.)
While we’re at it, I sometimes interact with female gamers who are not women (that is, are not adults). “Female” is not ideal, but what should we use instead? 15 year olds don’t expect to be called women – they’re not. But I don’t want to call them “girls”, either, because teenagers *clearly* don’t care for that. The best thing is just to avoid any need to use females or girls, or women except where it actually fits. “Folks” can be a substitute in some situations.
I prefer to treat female gamers no differently than male gamers, rather than make exceptions for them. I cannot speak for anyone else, but that’s the way I’d prefer to be treated, no special treatment one way or the other.
Yet at some point we enter the world of hand-wringing “politically correct” ridiculousness. For example, listen to women. They don’t refer to groups of themselves as “ladies” or “girls” or “women”, they say “guys”. That’s not #gamergate, that’s simple reality. “Guys” is NOT exclusionary except in the minds of people who don’t pay attention. If you don’t use “guys”, what are you going to use?
Just because a woman says “guys” doesn’t automatically make it inclusive. Women can throw up invisible ropes too. This is one of the things that makes the situation so complicated. I don’t think it’s correct to assume that any given woman’s actions will be representative of some monolithic feminist hive-mind.
I prefer to treat female gamers no differently than male gamers, rather than make exceptions for them. I cannot speak for anyone else, but that’s the way I’d prefer to be treated, no special treatment one way or the other.
It took me a long time to accept that these invisible ropes were real things. Yet I’m not into the angry, confrontational approach. I’m not going to tell other people what to do (except maybe not say “girls” in reference to adult women).
If there is one thing I would ask others to do here, it’s this: observe silently. Watch and listen. Focus your antennae to these invisible ropes. Don’t try to frame the experience yourself, provide your own $.02, or play “devil’s advocate”. Just sit back and observe.
I’ve observed, silently and otherwise, for 50 years and more. I taught computer networking, then game development, for a decade, both fields where the percentages of women (about 15% and 6% where I was) are smaller than in tabletop gaming, and I had to do what I could to help women feel comfortable about what they were doing despite being a small minority.
Listen to women (and men), but talk with them as well. Don’t make assumptions (like that assumption that “girls” is OK with teenagers).
Just throwing in 2 cents here that:
1) Women can easily pick up and internalize gendered language like “guys.” I can’t tell you what it was like to play default-male videogames and then pick up Mass Effect and my main character was a woman, it wasn’t a big deal to the game, it wasn’t some special thing, she was just…a woman. I don’t think any guy in gaming could understand that feeling. What I’m saying is every time I’ve made a shift, big or small, from male-language-as-gender-neutral, which I grew up with, to inclusive or female-centered language (reading an RPG manual where the GM is called “her” and the players “him”? OMG), it has had a remarkable effect on my feeling like I belong in it.
2) Once you start referring to political correctness (try substituting “treating people the way they’d like to be treated” and see how your sentence sounds) or treating everyone the same, it seems like you’re missing that things _are_ different. Yes, women shouldn’t be treated differently than men are in gaming. Except that we have to balance out a ton of stuff right now like taking down all these little ropes so they CAN be treated the same. Saying you’re treating women the same and then not addressing the cover art problem, for example, is not treating women the same. It’s asking women not to disturb your status quo.
(This is rather like people’s arguments that gay marriage is “special treatment” when all it is is altering a few things on some forms, but those alterations have to be made before everyone is treated the same.)
Thanks for the thoughtful approach to the question. Anna Rutledge took on this topic from her point of view as a woman on the Oakleaf Games blog. That, and her husband Nat Levan’s follow-on post, inspired me to take on the topic of how under-represented women are among boardgame designers in what turned into a three-part blog post series.
Thanks for the links, Paul!
I’d like to thank you for at least in a way mentioning that if you see a behavior you feel is sexist that you need to try and open discussion, not just accuse.
Just about any time this subject is brought up, it reminds me of a flame war I got involved in a year or two ago that started simply with me stating the absolutlely observable fact that signicantly more men than women are involved in strategy board gaming in general, and that my wife (specifically) is primarily interested in games that have themes that are appealing to her. This was warped into me being a sexist jerk because that obviously meant I felt women weren’t capable of playing strategy games and that women only cared about theme – which is not what I said at ALL, however the “defenders of womankind” (almost exclusively guys, I noticed) felt absolutely determined to attack what they apparently saw as a potential threat.
There are also other complications, such as how different comments can be taken differently by different people (for example, the “nice to have some estrogen in the tournament” comment that Anni said she was offended by, I would have just taken as someone expressing that it was nice to see more women involved in the hobby), that similarly what some people find offensive others don’t even notice (as an example I’ve known plenty of women over the years who *prefer* to be called a “girl” rather than a “woman,” if given the choice, while it’s true other’s don’t like the term at all) – and that you also have to remember a balance has to be struck between trying not to be off-putting to women while at the same time not sucking the fun out of the hobby by making everybody feel they have to walk on eggshells any time there’s a female player at the table.
As a side note, the game/hobby store groups aren’t just off-putting to women – I won’t play with them either – the group I play with found a restaurant that was OK with us periodically taking over part of a room for a few hours, and it’s a *much* more comfortable environment.
Something I wrote just yesterday at another blog:
“Keep in mind, rampant egalitarianism – that everyone must be THE SAME, not that everyone must have the same opportunities – governs much that happens in our society. Political correctness is one form. Trying to pretend that there is no difference between males and females is another form.”
There’s nothing you can do about people stupid enough to pretend men and women are exactly *the same*, any more than you can do anything about Obama “birthers”.
Many of the comments most women object to don’t recognize them as individuals (such as “estrogen in the tournament”). Most people want to be treated as an individual.
In the end, we’re in an age where many people have (or pretend to have) eggshell-thin-skins, and where “I’m offended” is a magic phrase (that may even get you some money). “Get over it” doesn’t go over well. Nor “That’s your problem, not mine”.
(Interesting about those who prefer “girls”. My wife thinks teenage females object to “girls” because the word has been used in a condescending fashion so often. My wife clearly dislikes it.)
“Many of the comments most women object to don’t recognize them as individuals (such as “estrogen in the tournament”). Most people want to be treated as an individual.”
No. I mean, yes, it is very important to me to be treated as an individual and not have assumptions made about me just because of my gender. But this is NOT primarily what bothered me about that comment. It bothered me because it carries the message (yes, unintentionally on the part of the speaker) that I don’t belong there, that my presence cannot be taken for granted. That it’s kind of a novelty for me to play in the tournament. That it really requires comment at that particular moment.
Plus, as I mentioned, it’s stereotype threat! (For the record, I was totally on a roll with Ra that year and won anyway, but that doesn’t matter.)
Thanks Steve! I’m so glad people are openly and honestly discussing this, and not just throwing “well actuallys” around.
“for example, the “nice to have some estrogen in the tournament” comment that Anni said she was offended by, I would have just taken as someone expressing that it was nice to see more women involved in the hobby”
I said I know that his intentions were good! Your paraphrase is certainly what he was trying to express, but I was still unsettled (not exactly “offended,” just, you know, rattled) by it. It’s stereotype threat, it’s condescending (I’d probably been attending WBC longer than he had, I am a GM, etc) and it singles me out at just the wrong moment.
(it’s also cissexist, by the way)
One piece of context that I think is helpful here is that WBC tournaments tend to have VERY different gender distribution depending on the game being played. There are a few tournaments with a high percentage of women, and some others that are mostly men. Ra is a really big tournament, so it’s mostly men. He probably wouldn’t have said that if we were playing Saint Petersburg or Thurn and Taxis.
And yeah, I definitely want to seem women in more of the tournaments, so, yeah, it is good. There are lots of good times to talk about that! For instance: After the game. In the hallways, to a friend. In a general commentary on the tournament. But I just think it’s not good to begin a game with a reminder that few women are playing in the tournament.
Anyway, having good intentions does not guarantee good results. This is true for sexism just like anything else.
—
And, just to add some context to your comments about accusations, attacks, walking on on eggshells and so on: I didn’t say anything about it. In fact, I didn’t write a WBC Geeklist that year, because I wasn’t sure how I would write about that session without saying something that might embarrass that guy. And now that some years have passed and I can safely point out that this happened to me without appearing to attack anybody… I still have to come back and defend the fact that I made this observation. And I spent about half an hour carefully editing this comment to achieve the most measured tone of which I am capable. So, who is walking on eggshells again?
What I am saying is this: calls for people (and particularly women) to be careful of men’s feelings when pointing out sexism can be silencing, and can themselves function as invisible ropes.
*sigh* while I know this is a post about women in gaming that’s buy a man, your entire comment is full of hypothetical women and “if I were a woman” type thoughts which…you’re not. The reply below puts it exactly–when people comment on your being the sole woman, they’re intimating that you don’t belong or that they see you as representing women. If you mess up, you worry it’ll lead to “ugh, girls suck at games” comments later. You feel like The Other.
You know what’s simple? Asking women the same kind of questions you’d ask men. “What kind of deck are you playing?” (if Magic) not “Oh so you play Magic?” “This is my second time at one of these gamedays. Have you been before?” …it’s simple if you just see women as human. No eggshells required, just not acting like women are another species at these events.
Your last bit minimizes the concerns of women who find gaming stores (and comic book stores) to often be unwelcome places. You’ve got your solution so you don’t worry about it instead of asking why they do/respecting that they do.
My husband linked me to this entry, because just this morning I was trying to articulate some of the problems I’m feeling as a female gamer. I am in a predominately male gaming community. I’ve experienced some of these ropes, even though I am a dedicated female gamer. The biggest one is when the men decide to coach me through my turn instead of letting me figure it out myself. I don’t need assistance, I need to learn how to do it myself, so butt out. I had it happen in my own gaming group (where I became noticeably agitated and have sought to not play with that person anymore) and I had it happen at GenCon in almost EVERY gaming situation I was in. I’m not an idiot. I’m a teacher for goodness sake, but I am looking at the game through my own eyes, playing it for the first time. . . let me get my bearings before you ride in on your white horse.
The other problem I’m having as a female gamer is being my own person. As several of these comments mention, women in gaming are frequently attached to their boyfriend, husband, fiancee, “friend.” I didn’t often see a non-RPG gamer woman playing a game without one of the aforementioned male companions. Yes, my husband and I are huge gamers, but I try to stand alone as a woman gamer. Create my own gaming identity. Strip people of associating us TOGETHER as gamers. Look at me for who I am as an individual, don’t clump me as a side-kick to my husband.
Another thing that is ignored is the women-to-women-gamer problem. It’s not always the men who are the problem, but sometimes the women. They adopt the arrogant attitude of the men they are with and throw it out and start to actually ostracize the individual woman gamer. They have an elitist attitude that turns off other women from wanting to be in that environment. So its not always the men, sometimes it truly is the other women who have become so comfortable adopting the throwing up of ropes that they do it just like the men.
Then there’s the Poker-Night mentality of the male gamers. It’s not inviting, sometimes to women. What I’m trying to do with some of my articles and game reviews is appeal to women, almost beckoning them to create their own gaming spaces and gaming nights that appeal to what is female about us. Maybe we enjoy entertaining or cooking up snacks or just having a “gaming party” that would still include “serious” games. Men need to be open to allowing women to put their touches on the game space.
Also, people who have been involved in the hobby for a long time can come off to a new gamer-anyone (man and woman) as dismissive of the new participant’s tastes. This could be brought on by the clash of the cult of the new or the old-elite mentality of gaming. Almost like they’re trying to weed out people or throw up rope nets to catch people that are riding the wave of popularity. So as a woman, when I go to a game group and I suggest playing Sushi Go!, the men in the group will immediately label me as a certain type of gamer. Not someone who would want to play Power Grid or Dead of Winter. I’m not a serious gamer if I suggest playing lighter fare. But if a man comes into the group and suggests it, they think nothing of it. It’s all good, because he’s a man and clearly seriously about gaming no matter what. This example comes from real life experiences from myself and my husband (so there is a man confirming that this does in fact go on whether men realize it or not. . . again it’s not every man or every group. . . but I can’t even begin to tell you how common it is).
Having your taste in games constantly called into question based on your gender is seriously offensive and makes it hard for women to connect in the gaming world. I frequently feel belittled and demeaned for my game choices, even what I choose to teach my middle school kids in our gaming club.
There can be something that is learned from the release of Goldiblox and the Goldiblox line about involving women in what has been considered the male-dominated world. We process things differently. We see joy from a different perspective. But we’re being taught that having the logical, critical, strategizing, aloof mind of man is the ideal mind. We cannot be emotional, analytical, impulsive, creative, and thoughtful. I can play any game a man can play. I’ll just probably play it differently. That can be unacceptable to some male gamers.
Acceptance, not closed-mindedness. We have no immediately solutions, but the discussion will prove vital in igniting the machine of change.
Thank you, Sarah! This is an amazingly insightful comment.
Sarah, yes, THIS. So much of this resonates very strongly with me.
Especially this:
“So as a woman, when I go to a game group and I suggest playing Sushi Go!, the men in the group will immediately label me as a certain type of gamer. Not someone who would want to play Power Grid or Dead of Winter. I’m not a serious gamer if I suggest playing lighter fare.”
Yep. I don’t even have anything to add to this, but it happens to me all the time.
The woman-to-woman gamer problem is an important point too. I think once a woman acquires some status in a gaming group, it can be really tempting to defend that status by not being associated with other women who haven’t achieved it. But it’s awful. I need to be careful I avoid this myself.
Anyway, I’m glad you articulated this so eloquently– I wish I’d been able to explain it so clearly.
Thirded. Sarah’s comment was a very good take on things I wanted to say.
Nice article, Gil. As a woman-gamer, the biggest turn-off for me is the way women are portrayed in the art. Much of it almost screams to be hung on the walls of car repair shops. I do my best to NOT buy games where every (or even most) women pictured are hussies or revealing an inordinate amount of cleavage.
I use ‘folks’ talking to bunches of people instead of ‘guys’.