Why are there no women that can compete at the same level as men in starcraft? I find the lack of women at the top of even cerebral games interesting. for example in starcraft 2, the only woman most even consider to be a top player is scarlett, who was born male (not trying to take anything away from her.)
In the only two matches i have seen with female starcraft players, the two matches between startale and azubu during the preseason. the first match, between eve and aphrodite was a proxy voidray all-in which failed pretty spectacularly, followed by aphrodite getting rolled by supernova, with what looked to be minimal effort. To date, neither female player has been seen again in the GSL or GSTL. This makes me ask myself whether their inclusion on the teams are essentially publicity stunts or not.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
I do understand that there are more male players than female players, which means that there are going to be more men in the top than women, but to have NO women (biologically speaking) at the top of these games makes one wonder.
These are both games where there is, or rather should be little to no difference in the physical aspect of the game, unlike most sports where men are just physically able to compete at a higher level. So why is it that women are seemingly unable to compete at the highest level?
NOTE: no disrespect towards female starcraft players intended
Isn't it as simple as the top female players not currently being as skilled as the top male players? It's not an issue of sex, but one of a small amount of women not playing at the same level as the top tier in a massive pool of male players. If more girls start playing, odds are you'd see more girls playing at the top level.
EDIT: Not to mention that, generally speaking, girls who play video games regularly are a minority among females. How many of those girl gamers are willing to play a game as complex and difficult as StarCraft at a competitive level, and how many of THOSE are willing to train to become the best at that game?
I do understand that there are more male players than female players, which means that there are going to be more men in the top than women[...]
Far more male players, but most importantly the girls tend to be far more casual when it comes to Starcraft I guess (not meaning to be sexist, but a good chunk of them play to hang out with the boys / because it makes boyfriend happy). Basically, a lack of interest I guess.
On April 09 2013 02:58 LuisFrost wrote: I think most are just not interested. Your chess example shows that if they want to get into it they can, they just don't seem to care.
true, but even my chess example shows that even the top female players have never been as good as the top male players and the polgar's were raised to play chess at a grandmaster level. and while i will agree with archas the lack of women playing may have something to do with the lack of numbers at the top level, it shouldn't mean that there are NO women (again biologically speaking) playing at the top level, since the ladder is coed, the top women should still be playing against men that they are equal with, accordign to the MMR.
On April 09 2013 02:58 AGIANTSMURF wrote: Probably because woman don't want to sped 10hrs a day sitting in front of a computer
That and personally I find very few women actually have real dedication to hobbies, they seem to have phases of interest but it's usually not genuine. I've taught guitar to many girls who drop interest a few weeks later, for example.
This applies even to typically female dominated hobbies, IMO.
Simple answer: Statistics. There are much more male than female players both in chess and SC.
Bilalic looked at a set of data encompassing all known German players – over 120,000 individuals, of whom 113,000 are men. He directly compared the top 100 players of either gender and used a mathematical model to work out the expected difference in their Elo ratings, given the size of the groups they belong to.
The model revealed that the greater proportion of male chess players accounts for a whopping 96% of the difference in ability between the two genders at the highest level of play. If more women took up chess, you’d see that difference close substantially.
The gaming hobby itself started as a quite male-centric thing (regarding Starcraft-like games) and then progressed onwards from that. I would say that it's a matter of history, sosiological upbringing, expectations towards genders and the communication between genders. Women can be as good as men in Starcraft, this is not a sports that physical attributes affect much at all. The road for a female progamer is different than for a male though: You need to practice a game that is male-centric and if you get good enough, join a team that is going to be full of men as well. You're going to train with and against men and the events you get to are organized by men and hosted by men.
Feeling confident in an enviroment that is so geared towards men can be daunting, this even without considering the shitty aspects of the internet (towards women).
Prospective female progamers do have one good thing on their side: every single team (dunno about koreans, I can't predict their thinking well enough) would love a well-playing female progamer in their team. No doubt about that.
Everyone who is saying that women have fleeting hobbies and don't concentrate on one subject as well as men are just plain wrong. This is stereotypes and expectations that are talking, which in turn become more true for every person who thinks like that.
On April 09 2013 03:05 Bakkendepao wrote: luckily we have scarlett
people so often seem to forget her. she just won against mvp...
Eh, it's not even that people forget about her, it's that she's really the only shining example of a successful female StarCraft II progamer. Hell, I can probably name five or six female SCII players off the top of my head, tops... and of those, only Scarlett stands out as an exceptional player. Meanwhile, I can rattle off dozens and dozens of amazing male players.
Like I said, it's a matter of few females performing in a male-dominated environment, with even fewer of those females standing out.
Studies taken with a group of man and women playing some kind of go-like game in an MRI has shown, that the male brains pleasure center was more active when successful and therefore making it easier to learn an effective strategy.
On April 09 2013 03:13 Xarell wrote: Studies taken with a group of man and women playing some kind of go-like game in an MRI has shown, that the male brains pleasure center was more active when successful and therefore making it easier to learn an effective strategy.
Would you happen to a have a link to those studies? I'd be interested in taking a look at them.
Girls usually don't like that cosmos and universe stuff. Look at Dota/LoL or other genres like FPS. You will have a lot more women playing at high level there because of what girls like. Boys love spaceships when they're young.
The heart of the issue is not a lack of ability, but a lack of motivation. Perhaps another question we should be asking is this: why are so many men willing to devote near to all of their livelihood towards one game (or even just games in general) - even if it is a good game? This, to me, is a far more interesting question.
On April 09 2013 03:14 kennyf wrote: Girls usually don't like that cosmos and universe stuff. Look at Dota/LoL or other genres like FPS. You will have a lot more women playing at high level there because of what girls like. Boys love spaceships when they're young.
Pew pew etc
Somehow, I can't help but feel that this line of thinking is flawed when I compare it to the My Little Pony thread. Just sayin'. :/
"Why are there no women that can compete at the same level as men in starcraft? I find the lack of women at the top of even cerebral games interesting"
Its not only sc man, women cant play soccer, american football,tennis, golf ,pool ,chess or poker either.(and not only due to having weaker physics) It seems to be universal within the female genes,women are bad in male invented sports. Maybe they just dont like games with clearly defined rules lol. (and poster below is right, it is also a matter of numbers though i think there are more isues at hand tbh.)
Far more males playing, the males are generally taking the game more serious I would say and also male gamers are generally more competitive than females. Nothing concrete but I would say those are the main reasons why we do not see females at high level gaming.
Bilalic looked at a set of data encompassing all known German players – over 120,000 individuals, of whom 113,000 are men. He directly compared the top 100 players of either gender and used a mathematical model to work out the expected difference in their Elo ratings, given the size of the groups they belong to.
The model revealed that the greater proportion of male chess players accounts for a whopping 96% of the difference in ability between the two genders at the highest level of play. If more women took up chess, you’d see that difference close substantially.
Edit: Jesus. Guys. Women are "less dedicated than men" or "want to spend less time getting good"? I expected more from you. =/
interestign article but thats just my point, participation, if there are female player playing ladder and online tounaments, they are playing people as good, according the the MMR, as they are meaning as they get better, they should be playing better players and thereby getting better themselves....etc, until they reach a high level. And even then that article still can't seem to account for the disparity of the level of skill of those who make it to the highest level.
im not asking why are there so few, im asking why there are NONE.
because society (including the gaming culture) is constructed around male advantage young women are told video games are for boys and that the super nerds are all boys
in the case where a potential progammer must spend significant amount of time practicing, this behaviour is fround upon more when regarding young women
additionally people believe and propogate biotruthes regarding inherate gaming abilities, further demoralizing and segregating women trying to participate at the highest level
Similarly to why Koreans are better than foreigners - culture. We live in a culture that from birth treats women as non-competitive and men as competitive, so it gets in their brains in more ways than we could even analyze rigorously.
Even if at later age they actively decide to rebel against that, the roots are already there from ages they don't even remember.
On April 09 2013 03:07 r.Evo wrote: Simple answer: Statistics. There are much more male than female players both in chess and SC.
Bilalic looked at a set of data encompassing all known German players – over 120,000 individuals, of whom 113,000 are men. He directly compared the top 100 players of either gender and used a mathematical model to work out the expected difference in their Elo ratings, given the size of the groups they belong to.
The model revealed that the greater proportion of male chess players accounts for a whopping 96% of the difference in ability between the two genders at the highest level of play. If more women took up chess, you’d see that difference close substantially.
Edit: Jesus. Guys. Women are "less dedicated than men" or "want to spend less time getting good"? I expected more from you. =/
interestign article but thats just my point, participation, if there are female player playing ladder and online tounaments, they are playing people as good, according the the MMR, as they are meaning as they get better, they should be playing better players and thereby getting better themselves....etc, until they reach a high level. And even then that article still can't seem to account for the disparity of the level of skill of those who make it to the highest level.
im not asking why are there so few, im asking why there are NONE.
Because math.
Random mathjerkoff: 5million sales. 50 (?) pros people would be able to instantly name without looking it up. That means 1/100000 players gets recognized. Which also means you need 100000 women to buy the game for every single female player that will come to mind.
Unless you have data which says "We have xyz total females playing SC2 and qwe total males playing SC2" we can only speculate. This type of data is around for chess and explains everything with "well, it boils down to statistics" just fine.
Edit: The article above explains how 96% of the skill disparity between women and men can be explained by statistics. 4% difference boils down to all other factors combined. This is where culture, gender roles, having kids and all those random arguments that have been raised so far come into play.
Edit 2: Now the question why those things are dominated by males is a completely different question. If you trust statistics it is however not an issue of ability (unless you assume the total playing population is lower because the majority of women is too stupid for those things. I'm just hoping we're past that.)
I always dislike threads like these because it's usually 90% men responding, some with very good posts and some with posts that make me cringe. It seems silly, but it also mirrors the answer, doesn't it? There are far less women playing sports (and video games) competitively, which probably stems from the fact women are just not encouraged to be competitive in anything they do. Thus, the pool of potential amazing players is dramatically reduced. If the same amount of women were encouraged and had the same conditions as men, you'd probably see a good 50/50 split of great women and great men.
Maybe I'm biased, but I see it as simply a difference in how society treats us and what it encourages us to do. Unless you believe women just can never be on the level of men thanks to biology or something, which I don't think you are trying to say or even imply, yet many of the posters for this thread will.
Also, I like the post above me, although it might not tell my story (my parents always encouraged me to be competitive and break stereotypes, playing football, rugby, etc), it tells the story of a lot of women:
On April 09 2013 03:26 figq wrote: Similarly to why Koreans are better than foreigners - culture. We live in a culture that from birth treats women as non-competitive and men as competitive, so it gets in their brains in more ways than we could even analyze rigorously.
Even if at later age they actively decide to rebel against that, the roots are already there from ages they don't even remember.
On April 09 2013 03:07 r.Evo wrote: Simple answer: Statistics. There are much more male than female players both in chess and SC.
Bilalic looked at a set of data encompassing all known German players – over 120,000 individuals, of whom 113,000 are men. He directly compared the top 100 players of either gender and used a mathematical model to work out the expected difference in their Elo ratings, given the size of the groups they belong to.
The model revealed that the greater proportion of male chess players accounts for a whopping 96% of the difference in ability between the two genders at the highest level of play. If more women took up chess, you’d see that difference close substantially.
Edit: Jesus. Guys. Women are "less dedicated than men" or "want to spend less time getting good"? I expected more from you. =/
interestign article but thats just my point, participation, if there are female player playing ladder and online tounaments, they are playing people as good, according the the MMR, as they are meaning as they get better, they should be playing better players and thereby getting better themselves....etc, until they reach a high level. And even then that article still can't seem to account for the disparity of the level of skill of those who make it to the highest level.
im not asking why are there so few, im asking why there are NONE.
Because math.
Random mathjerkoff: 5million sales. 50 (?) pros people would be able to instantly name without looking it up. That means 1/100000 players gets recognized. Which also means you need 100000 women to buy the game for every single female player that will come to mind.
Unless you have data which says "We have xyz total females playing SC2 and qwe total males playing SC2" we can only speculate. This type of data is around for chess and explains everything with "well, it boils down to statistics" just fine.
yes, you are talking about recognition, but just because you can name those 50 doesn't mean they are the best, and look at some of those players you hadn't heard about that come through and tear everything up. im not talking about recognition, im talking about skill ranking, even in chess the best women in the world, compete at a lower level than the best men, why is that?
Why are woman so underrepresented everywhere in our society Why do they make earn 20% less money when similarly skilled Why girls are doing better in school, but then are underrepresented when it comes to certain disciplines Why is there companies that makes a business out of making believe that woman are stupid (women's magazines)
On April 09 2013 03:07 r.Evo wrote: Simple answer: Statistics. There are much more male than female players both in chess and SC.
Bilalic looked at a set of data encompassing all known German players – over 120,000 individuals, of whom 113,000 are men. He directly compared the top 100 players of either gender and used a mathematical model to work out the expected difference in their Elo ratings, given the size of the groups they belong to.
The model revealed that the greater proportion of male chess players accounts for a whopping 96% of the difference in ability between the two genders at the highest level of play. If more women took up chess, you’d see that difference close substantially.
Edit: Jesus. Guys. Women are "less dedicated than men" or "want to spend less time getting good"? I expected more from you. =/
interestign article but thats just my point, participation, if there are female player playing ladder and online tounaments, they are playing people as good, according the the MMR, as they are meaning as they get better, they should be playing better players and thereby getting better themselves....etc, until they reach a high level. And even then that article still can't seem to account for the disparity of the level of skill of those who make it to the highest level.
im not asking why are there so few, im asking why there are NONE.
Because math.
Random mathjerkoff: 5million sales. 50 (?) pros people would be able to instantly name without looking it up. That means 1/100000 players gets recognized. Which also means you need 100000 women to buy the game for every single female player that will come to mind.
Unless you have data which says "We have xyz total females playing SC2 and qwe total males playing SC2" we can only speculate. This type of data is around for chess and explains everything with "well, it boils down to statistics" just fine.
yes, you are talking about recognition, but just because you can name those 50 doesn't mean they are the best, and look at some of those players you hadn't heard about that come through and tear everything up. im not talking about recognition, im talking about skill ranking, even in chess the best women in the world, compete at a lower level than the best men, why is that?
On April 09 2013 03:05 Bakkendepao wrote: luckily we have scarlett
people so often seem to forget her. she just won against mvp...
And people seem to forget Scarlett is male.
User was warned for this post
I'm pretty sure his posts wanted to highlight the fact that women and men brains work slightly different (1). Biologically speaking her brain functions in a different way and since SC2 is a mostly male game (2), she is a top-tier player (3) and (1), he might've wanted to say that she shouldn't be considered a perfectly valid example.
On April 09 2013 03:26 figq wrote: Similarly to why Koreans are better than foreigners - culture. We live in a culture that from birth treats women as non-competitive and men as competitive, so it gets in their brains in more ways than we could even analyze rigorously.
Even if at later age they actively decide to rebel against that, the roots are already there from ages they don't even remember.
This. The parallels are strong. Let's say 1 in 10,000 people who try Starcraft can be Pros. So how many guys have tried Starcraft, and how many girls?
Add in cultural bias against girls doing anything bizarre and you're pretty much there.
It's just a matter of numbers. There are a huge numbers of guys playing, while a much much smaller amount of women are playing. In that giant pool of players, only a handful are going to be good enough and actually have the dedication to play. Statistically, the chances that this small group of players will contain women is really really small. If the number of women playing was more comparable to guys, then we'd probably see some, accounting for some bias that being a pro gamer is a guy thing.
On April 09 2013 03:13 Xarell wrote: Studies taken with a group of man and women playing some kind of go-like game in an MRI has shown, that the male brains pleasure center was more active when successful and therefore making it easier to learn an effective strategy.
yeah I would be also quite interested in some sort of source.
On April 09 2013 03:46 sabas123 wrote: the amount of woman who fully dedicate to something with insane work hours compared what the male do is verry slim most of the time.
This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever read on this forum. And that's saying something.
that's because men are much better than women at literally everything that requires a certain amount of practice and dedication (in general). why would that be different in starcraft?
On April 09 2013 03:42 askmc70 wrote: why does this shit always have to be brought up?
Because people post stuff and then we have the same discussion over and over and over, the search button is never used. It always starts with a man, a light house and a city...wait, I mean....A poster, a forum and a previously discussed topic. The outcome is always the same. The topic is discussed, idiots are banned and then it falls down the list of threads. Then the cycle begins anew.
On April 09 2013 03:46 sabas123 wrote: the amount of woman who fully dedicate to something with insane work hours compared what the male do is verry slim most of the time.
This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever read on this forum. And that's saying something.
It's a more ruthless version of what I said, but based on personal experience this is a truth. I think he should have worded it to say that women are less likely to fully dedicated to most male dedicated hobbies, as it is deemed a worthless skill to them. Women are plenty dedicated, but conditioned to be dedicated in other aspects of life.
On April 09 2013 03:46 sabas123 wrote: the amount of woman who fully dedicate to something with insane work hours compared what the male do is verry slim most of the time.
This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever read on this forum. And that's saying something.
Seriously... I am sitting in an office right now where most of the management is female and they are working harder than their male counterparts... and they are in front of a computer all day also. Some of them have pretty high Microsoft excel APM too.
I am looking into the nipples of the future, I see this thread closed
On April 09 2013 03:46 sabas123 wrote: the amount of woman who fully dedicate to something with insane work hours compared what the male do is verry slim most of the time.
This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever read on this forum. And that's saying something.
How is that a dumb thing? His statement does not same unlikely to me at all and might be 1 of the reasons behind this perceived underperformance of women in male sports/games. It is one of the smarter statements in this thread actually.
On April 09 2013 03:05 Bakkendepao wrote: luckily we have scarlett
people so often seem to forget her. she just won against mvp...
The problem with Scarlett is that you can't even mention in a completely inoffensive why she isn't a completely valid example without getting at least a warning. Regarding the topic, there's not much to say besides the obvious reason: there aren't nearly as many women trying to go pro as there are men, so the chances of that happening are way lower.
On April 09 2013 03:46 sabas123 wrote: the amount of woman who fully dedicate to something with insane work hours compared what the male do is verry slim most of the time.
This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever read on this forum. And that's saying something.
How is that a dumb thing? His statement does not same unlikely to me at all and might be 1 of the reasons behind this perceived underperformance of women in male sports/games. It is one of the smarter statements in this thread actually.
The generalization that women can't fully dedicate to anything with insane work hours is asinine. Ever carry a pregnancy for 9 months and raise a child? None of you would even exist if it wasn't for a woman fully dedicating herself to something.
no competitive thinking, the women that are educated into competitive thinking are even with males unless a physical disadvantage is given. Though many dislike this parental driven lifestyle. Males on the other hand are normally educated competitive and educating each other as well in trying to win. At the end we have to fight our own biology and social norm, while males usually get their hand held when it comes to competitive things. So if a women is even with you, if she would be a male she would stomp you. I am not sure if education will ever be dedicated to increase the womens competitive levels, but it would probably mean they lose any interest in raising a family. Which would be pretty bad if it would be norm.
I myself have no intention to compete, but I enjoy problem solving. And games against players create interesting problems. + Gamergirl, it was probably a bad idea to give me a computer without time restriction at the age of 4.
But those threads are old and it won't change in a few years, so just use the search function lol.
On April 09 2013 02:58 LuisFrost wrote: I think most are just not interested. Your chess example shows that if they want to get into it they can, they just don't seem to care.
Gender roles.
Some of them would care if there wasn't such a stigma around gaming especially female gamers. Women are raised to act in a certain way and men are raised and treated in a different way which results in less females playing video games.
I think that Blizzard also kind of targets the male community in first place. Also why not ask females about what makes them not interested in the starcraft and gaming business? There must be discussions of that on largely female inhabited fora.
On April 09 2013 03:46 sabas123 wrote: the amount of woman who fully dedicate to something with insane work hours compared what the male do is verry slim most of the time.
This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever read on this forum. And that's saying something.
How is that a dumb thing? His statement does not same unlikely to me at all and might be 1 of the reasons behind this perceived underperformance of women in male sports/games. It is one of the smarter statements in this thread actually.
No, its pretty stupid. It takes a limited sample set(if you can call it that), removes social issues, history, infrastructure and other data, and then draws a grand conclusion. He also provides not information to back up his claim, while there is nearly infinite information that contradicts his statement. It has everything that defines an uninformed, stupid statement.
Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
The reason there aren't any female players truly at the top of the SC2 food chain, so to speak, is hard to determine. But there's no legitimate conclusion we can draw from this, simply because there are far too few female players actually dedicated to the game, and even female players in general. It's really that simple. Uncertainty due to insignificant sample size. Whether you accept this or not, that's your decision to deal with.
On to the point that follows naturally. Why are there so few female players in StarCraft 2, and in hardcore gaming in general? It's very simple. Social stigma. Offline, in most social contexts in the western world, if a girl admits to being a hardcore gamer, she will most likely be berated and outcast by her fellow circle of friends and possibly even family, this is not considered a normal or respectable activity for a girl. There are obvious underlying issues here in terms of preconceptions, stereotypes and all that. So then what does the internet community offer? Griefers that also berate her, believing every girl gamer is just a poser whoring for attention, creepy stalkers that would probably meticulously assassinate people just to get to touch her, but probably worst of all tons of trolls. The internet is good at trolling, who'd've thunk it.
So that's one facet of it. Then you ask, "but gaming is getting more and more popular, how can the answer be that gaming is shunned?" Easy. Gaming is indeed becoming more and more popular, hardcore gaming however isn't. In an attempt to shatter the stereotype of the repulsive basement-dwelling WoW nerd, as well as for their own profit and interest, companies have indeed made games far more accessible. At the same time, they've diluted their product by a massive margin, leading to a big portion of the market being dominated by games that we would consider casual. You needn't look past mobile games or facebook-based games, but if you must, there's obviously the newer Call of Duty games and the lot. Even games such as League of Legends, Team Fortress 2 and Minecraft, despite their depth, are only popular because they are so very accessible and satisfying for the casual gamer, only the more hardcore players getting to explore said depth.
So it's really that they're almost entirely discouraged from pursuing such a past time as hardcore gaming, be it StarCraft 2 or Counter-Strike or what have you.
I could go even further into the social and psychological factors, but I think this is satisfactory for now.
On April 09 2013 03:07 r.Evo wrote: Simple answer: Statistics. There are much more male than female players both in chess and SC.
Bilalic looked at a set of data encompassing all known German players – over 120,000 individuals, of whom 113,000 are men. He directly compared the top 100 players of either gender and used a mathematical model to work out the expected difference in their Elo ratings, given the size of the groups they belong to.
The model revealed that the greater proportion of male chess players accounts for a whopping 96% of the difference in ability between the two genders at the highest level of play. If more women took up chess, you’d see that difference close substantially.
Edit: Jesus. Guys. Women are "less dedicated than men" or "want to spend less time getting good"? I expected more from you. =/
interestign article but thats just my point, participation, if there are female player playing ladder and online tounaments, they are playing people as good, according the the MMR, as they are meaning as they get better, they should be playing better players and thereby getting better themselves....etc, until they reach a high level. And even then that article still can't seem to account for the disparity of the level of skill of those who make it to the highest level.
im not asking why are there so few, im asking why there are NONE.
Ugh.... the article you are responding to addresses this exactly. Did you read it? It directly accounts for the disparity in the skill, saying it is almost exactly the distribution you would expect based purely on the number of women who play chess.
On April 09 2013 03:45 TheFish7 wrote: What about Tossgirl from BW?
Not going to lie. She wasn't very good yet she didn't have any competition between the women they put her up against. This is what happens when you have a very small player pool.
Probably the same reason why foreigners can't compete with the koreans in sc2. It's not a norm for women to play computer and in general society looks down on girls playing computer, classifying them as weird or nerds, compared to boys which is quite normal to play computer. Girl like social status aswell.
On April 09 2013 04:07 wptlzkwjd wrote: I'm curious: are female chess players allowed to compete with male chess players in games that affect their ratings?
On April 09 2013 04:07 wptlzkwjd wrote: I'm curious: are female chess players allowed to compete with male chess players in games that affect their ratings?
Women's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, women can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with men in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for men to do, not women.
It's as simple as men being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
On April 09 2013 04:01 Kanaz wrote: Probably the same reason why foreigners can't compete with the koreans in sc2. It's not a norm for women to play computer and in general society looks down on girls playing computer, classifying them as weird or nerds, compared to boys which is quite normal to play computer. Girl like social status aswell.
Well, that's the reason why there aren't as many female sc2 players, not the reason female sc2 players are less talented at the game. Many women (definitely not all women) who play sc2 actually fit in more with the boyish/gamer "society" than with a girlish society. Those women have the easiest chance to completely apply themselves to the game, but they still fall very short when compared to men, because they don't have the essentials needed to compete at the highest level.
Take AZUBU.Eve for example. She stated that she wants to try her hardest to be a top pro gamer, and not just a marketing tool to be used in eSports. Her goal is actually to compete at the highest level, but she still isn't able to accomplish that.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Well this is an old topic, these threads usually get locked within an hour. Women in esports is bit of a taboo topic to discuss if you're not a woman in esports.
On April 09 2013 03:48 wswas wrote: that's because men are much better than women at literally everything that requires a certain amount of practice and dedication (in general). why would that be different in starcraft?
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
On April 09 2013 03:26 figq wrote: Similarly to why Koreans are better than foreigners - culture. We live in a culture that from birth treats women as non-competitive and men as competitive, so it gets in their brains in more ways than we could even analyze rigorously.
Even if at later age they actively decide to rebel against that, the roots are already there from ages they don't even remember.
Exactly.
The problem is really not that girls can't achieve top class play like boys. The problem is, men are educated since childhood to be hyper competitive, to strive for success and shit while since very recently, women were not.
It is kind of similar to the thinking that men are supposed to focus on hunting to get food while women have to stay home to multitask (therefore not focusing or dedicating themselve to anything). Even though going back to the cavern age is irrelevant, it has been like this for centuries.
Now even if they are educated to be competitive as much as men are, at one point, if they decide to have a child, they will lose time and get out of the usual "system": the labor market for example, hardly integrate the fact that women have to be out for a fairly long period. Therefore when women decide to come back, they don't fit-in anymore because of the child and because they supposedly were disconnected from the labour market.
The whole thing is: not only men are educated to be highly competitive while women are not, and even when women are getting competitive, they suffer an unequal disadvantage: not because they have a child but because market (or competition overall) consider it as a burden.
Now the culture is really the same in video games and SC:
Video game is at the beginning very man-centered. You saw recently a wave of gender consideration getting in video games, it's probably the beginning but it clearly shows that women are an important part of video games, while the whole industry is rotting in macho-centric/sexist/gendered stereotypes. Yet women are getting their place slowly and painfully. Seeing all these stupids comment on women or this fucking scandalous harassment from the Fighting game community, on one of their own members. Seriously these guys are utter idiots.
I think it is only a matter of time before we see more girls reaching high level. And for the Scarlett story, she wanted to become a female, so lets consider her a woman with fucking huge skills. End of the story. Now, really there are so many negatives/stupids/harassing/violents comments when a girl join a game. And the community is often so childish, protecting their machismo. This makes me feel like throwing up, and i am serious.
And to those who thinks defending the place of women in video games is to get laid. They clearly have a problem with the other(s) gender. They see everything in a sexualized relation and can't get passed the image of the woman-object of men's pleasure.
TLDR: male gamers' behavior toward women/LGBT gamers sincerly makes me want to throw up and burn them to the bone. They are disgusting.
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
I am not sure I really want to know what they tought you in history.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
DING DING DING and he wins the thread.
There are many societal factors relating to gaming, most of them with some stigma attached to them. These are all multiplied for women and lessened (in some cases) for Koreans. Therefore: fewer good female sc2 players, more good korean sc2 players.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Can you back up these facts you are claiming with data from sources in the scientific community? Because there is overwhelming research that says you are incorrect in almost every way. Or are you just going to say they are fact and then challenge us to prove you wrong?
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Can you back up these facts you are claiming with data from sources in the scientific community? Because there is overwhelming research that says you are incorrect in almost every way. Or are you just going to say they are fact and then challenge us to prove you wrong?
No there isn't scientific data that proves me wrong. Try showing me some though, and I'll look through it and check out why it doesn't prove me wrong.
Also take note that I'm also smart enough to realize that as there are differences in every scenario, there are also exceptions in many of them.
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:19 Shinta) wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:17 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
I am not sure I really want to know what they tought you in history.
I bet he went to U of BioTruth >.< honestly so gross... my favorite is being like wtf are you doing on a computer go hunting its the only thing your good at bio truth man!
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
I dont think that only 2-3% of the amount of SC2/chess players are female. imo that has sth to do with idols that help you to keep your motivation up. For example after Timo Boll or Boris Becker had some success in their sport, more children took it up and more german players are kinda successful.
I am not a psychologist nor a biologist but my guess would be that the difference comes from very basic instincts as far as i am aware men among almost all mammals fight each other for the dominant position that to me explains the greater competitivenes of men which leads to more dedication
On April 09 2013 04:35 Spackofant wrote: I am not a psychologist nor a biologist but my guess would be that the difference comes from very basic instincts as far as i am aware men among almost all mammals fight each other for the dominant position that to me explains the greater competitivenes of men which leads to more dedication
NO! soceity tells men to be compeditive and tells women to not be competitive. thats why! dont blame the lions!
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:19 Shinta) wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:17 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
I am not sure I really want to know what they tought you in history.
The same thing we were all taught in history class. He is just a victim of his own selective memory, which cherry picks facts from the recesses of his mind to reinforce his view on the world. After all, most people who believe raciest or sexist things have been presented with overwhelming evidence they are incorrect. But, like a finely tuned machine, they process and disregard these facts with amazing speed. They have a set of redefined reasons why those facts are invalid and just plug in and apply when necessary.
Never underestimate the power of fools to ignore anything would disprove their belief in the way the world works. The proficiency with which they warp their own reality would be awe inspiring if it wasn’t so pathetic
On April 09 2013 04:35 Spackofant wrote: I am not a psychologist nor a biologist but my guess would be that the difference comes from very basic instincts as far as i am aware men among almost all mammals fight each other for the dominant position that to me explains the greater competitivenes of men which leads to more dedication
Yeah, that could play a role too. Would call it education and not basic instinct though.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Can you back up these facts you are claiming with data from sources in the scientific community? Because there is overwhelming research that says you are incorrect in almost every way. Or are you just going to say they are fact and then challenge us to prove you wrong?
No there isn't scientific data that proves me wrong. Try showing me some though, and I'll look through it and check out why it doesn't prove me wrong.
Also take note that I'm also smart enough to realize that as there are differences in every scenario, there are also exceptions in many of them.
No, I feel not need to provide you with proof of given fact that there that women are at no disadvantage when it comes to skills of hand eye coordination and multitasking. They can play the piano, drums and be prime minister of a nation. You and your beliefs are a relic of a previous time and have no baring on the modern world. You are wrong and people have done the work for me. You are just to much of a fool to admit it.
Proving you wrong is like me wasting my time arguing with someone who does not believe the moon landing took place. As pointless an exercise as screaming at the rain.
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:19 Shinta) wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:17 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
lol, to you and everyone else who thinks history is irrelevant. I hope you're able to catch on pretty soon on how wrong you are. History is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world. "Scientific findings" are proven wrong by "scientific findings" every day of the year, while history remains stone. There is so much to be learned through history. Please open your eyes.
Everyone needs to realize though, there is give and take in everything. Every piece of scientific evidence, every page in a history book, every first hand experience a person has, has some aspects that can be applied generally and others that can't. Don't be so close minded to think that 1 article or 1 scientist has the complete answer to an issue at hand. Expand your minds~!
On April 09 2013 04:43 TortoiseCa wrote: Because most women don't play it - it's as simple as that.
Studies have shown that 30%-40% of gamers are womens.
edit: On a side note most women said they play because of fun
my assumption here is that competition in video games is for them not fun
as here
On April 09 2013 03:13 Xarell wrote: Studies taken with a group of man and women playing some kind of go-like game in an MRI has shown, that the male brains pleasure center was more active when successful and therefore making it easier to learn an effective strategy.
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:19 Shinta) wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:17 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
lol, to you and everyone else who thinks history is irrelevant. I hope you're able to catch on pretty soon on how wrong you are. History is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world. "Scientific findings" are proven wrong by "scientific findings" every day of the year, while history remains stone. There is so much to be learned through history. Please open your eyes.
Everyone needs to realize though, there is give and take in everything. Every piece of scientific evidence, every page in a history book, every first hand experience a person has, has some aspects that can be applied generally and others that can't. Don't be so close minded to think that 1 article or 1 scientist has the complete answer to an issue at hand. Expand your minds~!
sexist person who thinks history is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world tells me to open my mind. theres something i can check off my forum scavenger hunt.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Well, I'll have you know, by facts, that there are more than two genders.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Can you back up these facts you are claiming with data from sources in the scientific community? Because there is overwhelming research that says you are incorrect in almost every way. Or are you just going to say they are fact and then challenge us to prove you wrong?
No there isn't scientific data that proves me wrong. Try showing me some though, and I'll look through it and check out why it doesn't prove me wrong.
Also take note that I'm also smart enough to realize that as there are differences in every scenario, there are also exceptions in many of them.
No, I feel not need to provide you with proof of given fact that there that women are at no disadvantage when it comes to skills of hand eye coordination and multitasking. They can play the piano, drums and be prime minister of a nation. You and your beliefs are a relic of a previous time and have no baring on the modern world. You are wrong and people have done the work for me. You are just to much of a fool to admit it.
Proving you wrong is like me wasting my time arguing with someone who does not believe the moon landing took place. As pointless an exercise as screaming at the rain.
lol, then you're doing me a favor by saving me the time proving you wrong in your own research.
Yes women can play the piano, drums, and be prime minister of a nation. You seem to be catching on to the fact that the world has changed more in the past few centuries than it did during the rest of its existence. I also do believe that I referenced this fact already in a previous post I made in this same thread. Women are becoming increasingly talented in things that they were not talented in before, due to their complete lack of experience. It doesn't take that long for this change to occur when the correct circumstances pull themselves together. Where there wasn't something before is exactly where something can and will be in the future. The biggest keypoint here is that it wasn't there before, and needs to be developed before it's there.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Well, I'll have you know, by facts, that there are more than two genders.
The word gender was carefully NOT used in his statement. Thanks though.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Well, I'll have you know, by facts, that there are more than two genders.
Pretty sure biologically all mammals,at least, have exactly two genders.
On April 09 2013 02:58 Archas wrote: Isn't it as simple as the top female players not currently being as skilled as the top male players? It's not an issue of sex, but one of a small amount of women not playing at the same level as the top tier in a massive pool of male players. If more girls start playing, odds are you'd see more girls playing at the top level.
EDIT: Not to mention that, generally speaking, girls who play video games regularly are a minority among females. How many of those girl gamers are willing to play a game as complex and difficult as StarCraft at a competitive level, and how many of THOSE are willing to train to become the best at that game?
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:19 Shinta) wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:17 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
lol, to you and everyone else who thinks history is irrelevant. I hope you're able to catch on pretty soon on how wrong you are. History is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world. "Scientific findings" are proven wrong by "scientific findings" every day of the year, while history remains stone. There is so much to be learned through history. Please open your eyes.
Everyone needs to realize though, there is give and take in everything. Every piece of scientific evidence, every page in a history book, every first hand experience a person has, has some aspects that can be applied generally and others that can't. Don't be so close minded to think that 1 article or 1 scientist has the complete answer to an issue at hand. Expand your minds~!
sexist person who thinks history is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world tells me to open my mind. theres something i can check off my forum scavenger hunt.
Hard to call me sexist when I'm one of the biggest supporters of females in eSports and sports in general. Luway was my favorite player when she was most active, and I will always support Eve and Luway so long as they play this game. Also long time fan of ColaGirl and MiSs.
I've always explained that women can and will become better at games, as they have with most other things. It's just a matter of time, but there are reasons they aren't yet, at this point in time.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
according to a study in 2012 48% of game purchasers were female so by your logic nearly half the gm ladder should be women. I would believe that the culture of gaming and just the west in general is more geared toward male gamers than female, but that doesn't explain why the females who do play don't play as well as the male players. http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2012.pdf
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Well, I'll have you know, by facts, that there are more than two genders.
Pretty sure biologically all mammals,at least, have exactly two genders.
Nope, It actually depends on the culture. Some even recognize up to 5 genders. Whether they are social or biological construct is another debate tho. ( I would guess a mix of both, but I'm no expert)
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
according to a study in 2012 48% of game purchasers were female so by your logic nearly half the gm ladder should be women. I would believe that the culture of gaming and just the west in general is more geared toward male gamers than female, but that doesn't explain why the females who do play don't play as well as the male players. http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2012.pdf
No, because the number of females buying video games is irrelevant when you're trying to figure out how many actively play starcraft.
As I said if someone can find numbers for that it would be pretty awesome but I doubt those are easy to find.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Well, I'll have you know, by facts, that there are more than two genders.
Pretty sure biologically all mammals,at least, have exactly two genders.
pretty possitive the word gender has nothing to do with biology
On April 09 2013 04:43 TortoiseCa wrote: Because most women don't play it - it's as simple as that.
Studies have shown that 30%-40% of gamers are womens.
edit: On a side note most women said they play because of fun
my assumption here is that competition in video games is for them not fun
Most men play games because they are fun too. They largely don't find games where you get your ass kicked 50% of the time as fun either. Seriously we post on TL, we are not normal gamers.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Well, I'll have you know, by facts, that there are more than two genders.
Pretty sure biologically all mammals,at least, have exactly two genders.
pretty possitive the word gender has nothing to do with biology
Yes and no. Gender roles are socials, but gender identity is biological.
On April 09 2013 04:43 TortoiseCa wrote: Because most women don't play it - it's as simple as that.
Studies have shown that 30%-40% of gamers are womens.
edit: On a side note most women said they play because of fun
my assumption here is that competition in video games is for them not fun
Most men play games because they are fun too. They largely don't find games where you get your ass kicked 50% of the time as fun either. Seriously we post on TL, we are not normal gamers.
50% their ass kicked... hmmm... you mean the MMR of starcraft 2 do you no?
edit: Competition enviroments (the questions was why there are so few female pro gamers) are not fun for the bigger part of female gamers
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Can you back up these facts you are claiming with data from sources in the scientific community? Because there is overwhelming research that says you are incorrect in almost every way. Or are you just going to say they are fact and then challenge us to prove you wrong?
No there isn't scientific data that proves me wrong. Try showing me some though, and I'll look through it and check out why it doesn't prove me wrong.
Also take note that I'm also smart enough to realize that as there are differences in every scenario, there are also exceptions in many of them.
No, I feel not need to provide you with proof of given fact that there that women are at no disadvantage when it comes to skills of hand eye coordination and multitasking. They can play the piano, drums and be prime minister of a nation. You and your beliefs are a relic of a previous time and have no baring on the modern world. You are wrong and people have done the work for me. You are just to much of a fool to admit it.
Proving you wrong is like me wasting my time arguing with someone who does not believe the moon landing took place. As pointless an exercise as screaming at the rain.
lol, then you're doing me a favor by saving me the time proving you wrong in your own research.
Yes women can play the piano, drums, and be prime minister of a nation. You seem to be catching on to the fact that the world has changed more in the past few centuries than it did during the rest of its existence. I also do believe that I referenced this fact already in a previous post I made in this same thread. Women are becoming increasingly talented in things that they were not talented in before, due to their complete lack of experience. It doesn't take that long for this change to occur when the correct circumstances pull themselves together. Where there wasn't something before is exactly where something can and will be in the future. The biggest keypoint here is that it wasn't there before, and needs to be developed before it's there.
Nah, I think I will just call you a sexist idiot and move on. By providing you with things to argue against, I am playing into your game. It easier for both of us and the most factual thing I could state by saying, your wrong and the world has proven it. Your points are invalid and you are simply trolling the thread with your sexist non-sense.
There are difference between men and women beyond muscle mass. Coordination, spacial orientation, and abstraction are all in the male's favor. Just look at golf, where many women play. Know the big difference between men and women players? It's not driving, it's putting, which has little to do with strength and is bases on skill and feel.
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:19 Shinta) wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:17 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
lol, to you and everyone else who thinks history is irrelevant. I hope you're able to catch on pretty soon on how wrong you are. History is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world. "Scientific findings" are proven wrong by "scientific findings" every day of the year, while history remains stone. There is so much to be learned through history. Please open your eyes.
Everyone needs to realize though, there is give and take in everything. Every piece of scientific evidence, every page in a history book, every first hand experience a person has, has some aspects that can be applied generally and others that can't. Don't be so close minded to think that 1 article or 1 scientist has the complete answer to an issue at hand. Expand your minds~!
sexist person who thinks history is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world tells me to open my mind. theres something i can check off my forum scavenger hunt.
Hard to call me sexist when I'm one of the biggest supporters of females in eSports and sports in general. Luway was my favorite player when she was most active, and I will always support Eve and Luway so long as they play this game. Also long time fan of ColaGirl and MiSs.
I've always explained that women can and will become better at games, as they have with most other things. It's just a matter of time, but there are reasons they aren't yet, at this point in time.
So I repeat, stop being so close minded.
its not hard to call you sexist
Women's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, women can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with men in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for men to do, not women.
On April 09 2013 04:43 TortoiseCa wrote: Because most women don't play it - it's as simple as that.
Studies have shown that 30%-40% of gamers are womens.
edit: On a side note most women said they play because of fun
my assumption here is that competition in video games is for them not fun
Most men play games because they are fun too. They largely don't find games where you get your ass kicked 50% of the time as fun either. Seriously we post on TL, we are not normal gamers.
50% their ass kicked... hmmm... you mean the MMR of starcraft 2 do you no?
Well now that this thread has turned into opinionated rage (Including one unnamed individual attacking and getting really offended over the discussion), I'll bring up a point that a female coworker here just made, she plays video games, but has no desire to play games that are difficult or not easily mastered because it's not her focus in life, she plays them socially or for fun. She also says women just don't find pleasure in getting good at things like that the way men do. She doesn't naturally find competition enjoyable. That's from a woman, not me.
On April 09 2013 05:08 sAxiS wrote: Well now that this thread has turned into opinionated rage, I'll bring up a point that a female coworker here just made, she plays video games, but has no desire to play games that are difficult or not easily mastered because it's not her focus in life, she plays them socially or for fun. She also says women just don't find pleasure in getting good at things like that the way men do. She doesn't naturally find competition enjoyable. That's from a woman, not me.
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
Chess is another great example, Judit polgar is the only female GM to peak at above 2700 elo (2735), and is currently 2695 the highest ranked female chess player in the world. at this moment there are nearly 50 male GM's above 2700, the highest ranked being magnus carlson at 2868.
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:19 Shinta) wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:17 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
lol, to you and everyone else who thinks history is irrelevant. I hope you're able to catch on pretty soon on how wrong you are. History is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world. "Scientific findings" are proven wrong by "scientific findings" every day of the year, while history remains stone. There is so much to be learned through history. Please open your eyes.
Everyone needs to realize though, there is give and take in everything. Every piece of scientific evidence, every page in a history book, every first hand experience a person has, has some aspects that can be applied generally and others that can't. Don't be so close minded to think that 1 article or 1 scientist has the complete answer to an issue at hand. Expand your minds~!
sexist person who thinks history is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world tells me to open my mind. theres something i can check off my forum scavenger hunt.
Hard to call me sexist when I'm one of the biggest supporters of females in eSports and sports in general. Luway was my favorite player when she was most active, and I will always support Eve and Luway so long as they play this game. Also long time fan of ColaGirl and MiSs.
I've always explained that women can and will become better at games, as they have with most other things. It's just a matter of time, but there are reasons they aren't yet, at this point in time.
Women's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, women can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with men in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for men to do, not women.
you're sexist
Good troll, here's a eTreat. nom nom yes, good troll.
On April 09 2013 04:12 Shinta) wrote: Black people's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, black people can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with white people in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for white people to do, not black people.
It's as simple as white people being more adept at games than women due to an entire history of experience compared to 0 experience.
So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Edit: and sorry, but although there are parts of that copy/paste editing you did that are true, but that wouldn't be the valid argument used for obvious reasons.
Well, I'll have you know, by facts, that there are more than two genders.
The word gender was carefully NOT used in his statement. Thanks though.
On April 09 2013 04:55 polysciguy wrote: according to a study in 2012 48% of game purchasers were female so by your logic nearly half the gm ladder should be women. I would believe that the culture of gaming and just the west in general is more geared toward male gamers than female, but that doesn't explain why the females who do play don't play as well as the male players. http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2012.pdf
I highly doubt 47% of SC2 purchases were by females. The brochure you've provided has no game specific numbers. On page 9 it lists games by units sold, but only competitive games were SC2 at 4th and Modern Warfare at 20th. The rest are mostly MMO's and Sims 3 expansion packs, some exceptions like Skyrim and Civilization V.
On April 09 2013 03:58 r.Evo wrote: Please don't mindlessly add things to the OP to prove your point when it's not proving it at all.
[quote]
GM: 1380 total GMs, 1353 (98%) male, 27 female (2%).
IM: 3036total, IMs, 2953 male (97.3%), 83 female (2.7%)
Top 50: 49 male (98%), 1 female (2%)
...notice a pattern? There are just as many women in the top 50 as in the top 3000 if you look at percentages.
and why are only 2% of the top3000 female?
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:19 Shinta) wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:17 r.Evo wrote: [quote] So is this what you would argue if we'd ask "Why are there so few black people playing SC2 at a competitive level?" - just to show you that your argument is nothing but sexist at its best.
Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
lol, to you and everyone else who thinks history is irrelevant. I hope you're able to catch on pretty soon on how wrong you are. History is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world. "Scientific findings" are proven wrong by "scientific findings" every day of the year, while history remains stone. There is so much to be learned through history. Please open your eyes.
Everyone needs to realize though, there is give and take in everything. Every piece of scientific evidence, every page in a history book, every first hand experience a person has, has some aspects that can be applied generally and others that can't. Don't be so close minded to think that 1 article or 1 scientist has the complete answer to an issue at hand. Expand your minds~!
sexist person who thinks history is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world tells me to open my mind. theres something i can check off my forum scavenger hunt.
Hard to call me sexist when I'm one of the biggest supporters of females in eSports and sports in general. Luway was my favorite player when she was most active, and I will always support Eve and Luway so long as they play this game. Also long time fan of ColaGirl and MiSs.
I've always explained that women can and will become better at games, as they have with most other things. It's just a matter of time, but there are reasons they aren't yet, at this point in time.
So I repeat, stop being so close minded.
its not hard to call you sexist
Women's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, women can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with men in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for men to do, not women.
you're sexist
Good troll, here's a eTreat. nom nom yes, good troll.
I dont think you understand. Thinking women are a certain way becuase they are women is sexist... thats what you did... you are sexist.
On April 09 2013 04:55 polysciguy wrote: according to a study in 2012 48% of game purchasers were female so by your logic nearly half the gm ladder should be women. I would believe that the culture of gaming and just the west in general is more geared toward male gamers than female, but that doesn't explain why the females who do play don't play as well as the male players. http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2012.pdf
I highly doubt 47% of SC2 purchases were by females. The brochure you've provided has no game specific numbers. On page 9 it lists games by units sold, but only competitive games were SC2 at 4th and Modern Warfare at 20th. The rest are mostly MMO's and Sims 3 expansion packs, some exceptions like Skyrim and Civilization V.
Also lets not forget that some of those females are moms buying for their sons
On April 09 2013 05:08 sAxiS wrote: Well now that this thread has turned into opinionated rage (Including one unnamed individual attacking and getting really offended over the discussion), I'll bring up a point that a female coworker here just made, she plays video games, but has no desire to play games that are difficult or not easily mastered because it's not her focus in life, she plays them socially or for fun. She also says women just don't find pleasure in getting good at things like that the way men do. She doesn't naturally find competition enjoyable. That's from a woman, not me.
My brother told me the exact same thing. What's your point?
On April 09 2013 04:55 polysciguy wrote: according to a study in 2012 48% of game purchasers were female so by your logic nearly half the gm ladder should be women. I would believe that the culture of gaming and just the west in general is more geared toward male gamers than female, but that doesn't explain why the females who do play don't play as well as the male players. http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2012.pdf
I highly doubt 47% of SC2 purchases were by females. The brochure you've provided has no game specific numbers. On page 9 it lists games by units sold, but only competitive games were SC2 at 4th and Modern Warfare at 20th. The rest are mostly MMO's and Sims 3 expansion packs, some exceptions like Skyrim and Civilization V.
Games includes mobile games, the sims and anything that can be called a game. 47% of SC2 purchases were not women.
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:19 Shinta) wrote: [quote] Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
lol, to you and everyone else who thinks history is irrelevant. I hope you're able to catch on pretty soon on how wrong you are. History is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world. "Scientific findings" are proven wrong by "scientific findings" every day of the year, while history remains stone. There is so much to be learned through history. Please open your eyes.
Everyone needs to realize though, there is give and take in everything. Every piece of scientific evidence, every page in a history book, every first hand experience a person has, has some aspects that can be applied generally and others that can't. Don't be so close minded to think that 1 article or 1 scientist has the complete answer to an issue at hand. Expand your minds~!
sexist person who thinks history is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world tells me to open my mind. theres something i can check off my forum scavenger hunt.
Hard to call me sexist when I'm one of the biggest supporters of females in eSports and sports in general. Luway was my favorite player when she was most active, and I will always support Eve and Luway so long as they play this game. Also long time fan of ColaGirl and MiSs.
I've always explained that women can and will become better at games, as they have with most other things. It's just a matter of time, but there are reasons they aren't yet, at this point in time.
So I repeat, stop being so close minded.
its not hard to call you sexist
Women's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, women can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with men in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for men to do, not women.
you're sexist
Good troll, here's a eTreat. nom nom yes, good troll.
I dont think you understand. Thinking women are a certain way becuase they are women is sexist... thats what you did... you are sexist.
Listen to what our fathers said: Never argue with a drunk or a fool.
On April 09 2013 05:08 sAxiS wrote: Well now that this thread has turned into opinionated rage (Including one unnamed individual attacking and getting really offended over the discussion), I'll bring up a point that a female coworker here just made, she plays video games, but has no desire to play games that are difficult or not easily mastered because it's not her focus in life, she plays them socially or for fun. She also says women just don't find pleasure in getting good at things like that the way men do. She doesn't naturally find competition enjoyable. That's from a woman, not me.
My brother told me the exact same thing. What's your point?
A group of men are arguing with each other and getting pretty rage-induced over a topic involving females, and that was a statement made by a game playing female. A bit more relevant to the topic than your question. That's my point.
On April 09 2013 03:45 TheFish7 wrote: What about Tossgirl from BW?
Not going to lie. She wasn't very good yet she didn't have any competition between the women they put her up against. This is what happens when you have a very small player pool.
She was pretty good... depending on when she was anywhere from a very good B teamer to a practice partner.
I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
On April 09 2013 05:08 sAxiS wrote: Well now that this thread has turned into opinionated rage (Including one unnamed individual attacking and getting really offended over the discussion), I'll bring up a point that a female coworker here just made, she plays video games, but has no desire to play games that are difficult or not easily mastered because it's not her focus in life, she plays them socially or for fun. She also says women just don't find pleasure in getting good at things like that the way men do. She doesn't naturally find competition enjoyable. That's from a woman, not me.
The issue is whether 1) her lack of pleasure in competition represents most women and 2) if it is actually 'natural' or subtle learned behavior through socialization.
I think people often mistakenly claim things due to biology, and others mistakenly assume it's entirely biological or socialization and that the two don't interact or ever override each other.
In the past, when gaming became popular, it was mostly viewed as fun for kids and "lazy dropouts". This stigma is still true in some parts of the world. A lot of women I met in my life wouldn't touch a game, simply because they care about what others think about them. They don't want to be unpopular, so they'll not do something, which will set them aside.
But, there are more and more gamers, which happen to be females now, who don't give a crap about that and simply do what they enjoy. Which is a good trend, might I add, but look at the gap between guys and women => guys simply have a headstart. So women have to "catch up" to gain all the gaming experiences, let alone StarCraft experiences. Just as an example => how many women were in Masters league when the league came out? Probably could count them on figers of my one hand. Now, I know that there are quite few & there are women who try to go even higher than that. All it requires is, simply the time. Yes, women will be probably still a minority in SC2, but that minority will go higher and higher, in terms of experiences and skills, as long as they decide to stick with it.
It's not as much as issue of some "gender", as the later start and lack of experience in gaming in general, as well as mindset; not everyone wants to play the game for hours a day, to dedicate everything to it => but because there are fewer women playing the game, of course, there will be much less of them at the very top level one day. But, I believe they will get there.
On April 09 2013 05:08 sAxiS wrote: Well now that this thread has turned into opinionated rage (Including one unnamed individual attacking and getting really offended over the discussion), I'll bring up a point that a female coworker here just made, she plays video games, but has no desire to play games that are difficult or not easily mastered because it's not her focus in life, she plays them socially or for fun. She also says women just don't find pleasure in getting good at things like that the way men do. She doesn't naturally find competition enjoyable. That's from a woman, not me.
My brother told me the exact same thing. What's your point?
A group of men are arguing with each other and getting pretty rage-induced over a topic involving females, and that was a statement made by a game playing female. A bit more relevant to the topic than your question. That's my point.
I'm not buying that the explanation applies exclusively to females. I don't buy that it even applies to a larger percentage of the female population as than the male population. For all we know, an equal percentage of women enjoy competitive games than men. Perceptions of women's gaming habits are not really well understood and the change a lot.
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
On April 09 2013 05:19 dAPhREAk wrote: women are smarter than men. thus, women go into real careers to make real money, and men continue to play video games. =)
And dAPhREAk has won the thread. All other posts are now invalid.
On April 09 2013 05:08 sAxiS wrote: Well now that this thread has turned into opinionated rage (Including one unnamed individual attacking and getting really offended over the discussion), I'll bring up a point that a female coworker here just made, she plays video games, but has no desire to play games that are difficult or not easily mastered because it's not her focus in life, she plays them socially or for fun. She also says women just don't find pleasure in getting good at things like that the way men do. She doesn't naturally find competition enjoyable. That's from a woman, not me.
My brother told me the exact same thing. What's your point?
A group of men are arguing with each other and getting pretty rage-induced over a topic involving females, and that was a statement made by a game playing female. A bit more relevant to the topic than your question. That's my point.
I'm not buying that the explanation applies exclusively to females. I don't buy that it even applies to a larger percentage of the female population as than the male population. For all we know, an equal percentage of women enjoy competitive games than men. Perceptions of women's gaming habits are not really well understood and the change a lot.
It absolutely doesn't apply to 100%, as nothing ever does, but it was a fairly innocent and relevant post, why the argument?
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
how do they disagree?
Men and women's brains function very differently on certain tasks. Evolution decided that humans would be better off if men and women were different in some ways, adapted naturally to certain tasks, it's one of hte major reasons there are two genders in the first place.
There are asexual creatures, we could all be unisex worms but we aren't.
The core reason for brain differences seems to occur in utero. There is a stage of development when male fetuses receive an extra blast of testosterone that female fetuses do not, this is believed to have subtle, but real, changes on the brain.
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
Of course they are difference. Hormone, bone structure, etc. But how are those relevant in the ability of someone to play a computer game ? In case of physical sport, this is obvious, not so much in gaming.
Bilalic looked at a set of data encompassing all known German players – over 120,000 individuals, of whom 113,000 are men. He directly compared the top 100 players of either gender and used a mathematical model to work out the expected difference in their Elo ratings, given the size of the groups they belong to.
The model revealed that the greater proportion of male chess players accounts for a whopping 96% of the difference in ability between the two genders at the highest level of play. If more women took up chess, you’d see that difference close substantially.
"A rapidly burgeoning literature documents copious sex influences on brain anatomy, chemistry and function. This article highlights some of the more intriguing recent discoveries and their implications. Consideration of the effects of sex can help to explain seemingly contradictory findings. Research into sex influences is mandatory to fully understand a host of brain disorders with sex differences in their incidence and/or nature. The striking quantity and diversity of sex-related influences on brain function indicate that the still widespread assumption that sex influences are negligible cannot be justified, and probably retards progress in our field."
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
Funny, because most of the scientific material on the topic of your "little things" is "well, we really don't know exactly what's going on, here's what we found out." (Including the material you just posted)
I don't think anybody here really believes men and women are 100% identical except for sex organs. We don't really know precisely what is due to constructs of society and what is due to biology/chemistry/genetics. Perhaps there has been a tendency to pinning things on social constructs (possibly can be partly blamed on too-hard of a reversal on the classical views about the sexes?) I doubt you think it's 0% construct of society either. Too much unknown.
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
how do they disagree?
Men and women's brains function very differently on certain tasks. Evolution decided that humans would be better off if men and women were different in some ways, adapted naturally to certain tasks, it's one of hte major reasons there are two genders in the first place.
There are asexual creatures, we could all be unisex worms but we aren't.
The core reason for brain differences seems to occur in utero. There is a stage of development when male fetuses receive an extra blast of testosterone that female fetuses do not, this is believed to have subtle, but real, changes on the brain.
And there is no little evidence to support that women would be worst than men at any given task or skill. Some physical activities are limited by body growth, such as physical size, but that has little to with the topic at hand. There is not evidence to support that women are worst at SC2 than men, just like there is no evidence to support they would be any worse than piano.
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
Of course they are difference. Hormone, bone structure, etc. But how are those relevant in the ability of someone to play a computer game ? In case of physical sport, this is obvious, not so much in gaming.
Gaming requires reflexes, decision making, visual spacial processing, all very important aspects of "real world" activities.
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
how do they disagree?
Men and women's brains function very differently on certain tasks. Evolution decided that humans would be better off if men and women were different in some ways, adapted naturally to certain tasks, it's one of hte major reasons there are two genders in the first place.
There are asexual creatures, we could all be unisex worms but we aren't.
The core reason for brain differences seems to occur in utero. There is a stage of development when male fetuses receive an extra blast of testosterone that female fetuses do not, this is believed to have subtle, but real, changes on the brain.
So you believe someone that said a blast of testosterone in the uterus will have effects on the way someone thinks for their entire lives. And I do not. But I am brainwashed?
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
how do they disagree?
Men and women's brains function very differently on certain tasks. Evolution decided that humans would be better off if men and women were different in some ways, adapted naturally to certain tasks, it's one of hte major reasons there are two genders in the first place.
There are asexual creatures, we could all be unisex worms but we aren't.
The core reason for brain differences seems to occur in utero. There is a stage of development when male fetuses receive an extra blast of testosterone that female fetuses do not, this is believed to have subtle, but real, changes on the brain.
So you believe someone that said a blast of testosterone in the uterus will have effects on the way someone thinks for their entire lives. And I do not. But I am brainwashed?
This really isn't a matter of belief or opinion, it's a matter of a field of science that is pretty unexplored, and incredibly difficult to explore even with our current technology.
One could imagine conducting a study on the top SC2 players and their education background. I think it'd be within reason to imagine the result of that study showing that non-college graduates have had significantly more success at SC2 than college graduates. If that were the case, would it then be reasonable to state your belief that college graduates are inferior at playing strategic video games? Doubtful.
I only mean to point out by analogy that drawing conclusions from small amounts of information is a foolish endeavor.
I do think the question of "Why do so few X compared to Y play SC2?" would be a more a fundamental question to ask, though. I don't think this question is restricted to genders either.
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
Of course they are difference. Hormone, bone structure, etc. But how are those relevant in the ability of someone to play a computer game ? In case of physical sport, this is obvious, not so much in gaming.
Gaming requires reflexes, decision making, visual spacial processing, all very important aspects of "real world" activities.
But the studies not prove that women are any worse at a give task, only different. There are studies out there that show women have better eye sight and higher pain tolerance. But this is on average across the population. It doesn't mean they are worse or lack the ability to play SC2 at the same level as men.
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
how do they disagree?
Men and women's brains function very differently on certain tasks. Evolution decided that humans would be better off if men and women were different in some ways, adapted naturally to certain tasks, it's one of hte major reasons there are two genders in the first place.
There are asexual creatures, we could all be unisex worms but we aren't.
The core reason for brain differences seems to occur in utero. There is a stage of development when male fetuses receive an extra blast of testosterone that female fetuses do not, this is believed to have subtle, but real, changes on the brain.
So you believe someone that said a blast of testosterone in the uterus will have effects on the way someone thinks for their entire lives. And I do not. But I am brainwashed?
I'm sure all the people born with Down Syndrome will be happy to hear that how their brains were formed during early development will have no real world impact on how their brains will function for the rest of their lives.
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
Of course they are difference. Hormone, bone structure, etc. But how are those relevant in the ability of someone to play a computer game ? In case of physical sport, this is obvious, not so much in gaming.
Gaming requires reflexes, decision making, visual spacial processing, all very important aspects of "real world" activities.
Are those really biological ? They could easily be learned skills.
You're all being hyper sensative because you've been brainwashed by the PC police that if you don't contend men and women are identical you are some sort of chauvinist monster
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
how do they disagree?
Men and women's brains function very differently on certain tasks. Evolution decided that humans would be better off if men and women were different in some ways, adapted naturally to certain tasks, it's one of hte major reasons there are two genders in the first place.
There are asexual creatures, we could all be unisex worms but we aren't.
The core reason for brain differences seems to occur in utero. There is a stage of development when male fetuses receive an extra blast of testosterone that female fetuses do not, this is believed to have subtle, but real, changes on the brain.
So you believe someone that said a blast of testosterone in the uterus will have effects on the way someone thinks for their entire lives. And I do not. But I am brainwashed?
I'm sure all the people born with Down Syndrome will be happy to hear that how their brains were formed during early development will have no real world impact on how their brains will function for the rest of their lives.
I'm sorry you lost me. Were you trying to compare those things somehow and relate them to what we were talking about?
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
how do they disagree?
Men and women's brains function very differently on certain tasks. Evolution decided that humans would be better off if men and women were different in some ways, adapted naturally to certain tasks, it's one of hte major reasons there are two genders in the first place.
There are asexual creatures, we could all be unisex worms but we aren't.
The core reason for brain differences seems to occur in utero. There is a stage of development when male fetuses receive an extra blast of testosterone that female fetuses do not, this is believed to have subtle, but real, changes on the brain.
So you believe someone that said a blast of testosterone in the uterus will have effects on the way someone thinks for their entire lives. And I do not. But I am brainwashed?
I'm sure all the people born with Down Syndrome will be happy to hear that how their brains were formed during early development will have no real world impact on how their brains will function for the rest of their lives.
What does that have to do with the price of tea in china?
Because they don't have to be good at what they do, especially if they're good looking.
This isn't so much a dig at the Starcraft community, but society in general. There is no logical reason that women cannot display the same chops in SC as men (indeed, supposedly they are inherently better at multitasking). I put it down to the fawning over girl gamers.
Any streamer starting up as a guy has to work his absolutely arse off, or develop some niche to get any viewers and get off the ground. A lot of girls can simply put on a webcam (if attractive), show terrible play, no content and still get some kind of following.
Women get put on a pedestal simply for being women in whatever field it is, it's pathetic. Sexism isn't just displayed by misogynistic comments, but also in compliments too.
I mean, you could argue increased testosterone is better
you could argue lower levels are better
I mean women commit way less crime and violence too.
Better and worse are fake societal constructs. They are an interpretation or judgement of what evolution has done. Reality is what it is, without pro or con.
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
how do they disagree?
Men and women's brains function very differently on certain tasks. Evolution decided that humans would be better off if men and women were different in some ways, adapted naturally to certain tasks, it's one of hte major reasons there are two genders in the first place.
There are asexual creatures, we could all be unisex worms but we aren't.
The core reason for brain differences seems to occur in utero. There is a stage of development when male fetuses receive an extra blast of testosterone that female fetuses do not, this is believed to have subtle, but real, changes on the brain.
So you believe someone that said a blast of testosterone in the uterus will have effects on the way someone thinks for their entire lives. And I do not. But I am brainwashed?
And I call you ignorant, I did study biologie before dropping out. But I can tell you yes these little differences EFFECT someone the rest of their entire life.
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
how do they disagree?
Men and women's brains function very differently on certain tasks. Evolution decided that humans would be better off if men and women were different in some ways, adapted naturally to certain tasks, it's one of hte major reasons there are two genders in the first place.
There are asexual creatures, we could all be unisex worms but we aren't.
The core reason for brain differences seems to occur in utero. There is a stage of development when male fetuses receive an extra blast of testosterone that female fetuses do not, this is believed to have subtle, but real, changes on the brain.
So you believe someone that said a blast of testosterone in the uterus will have effects on the way someone thinks for their entire lives. And I do not. But I am brainwashed?
I'm sure all the people born with Down Syndrome will be happy to hear that how their brains were formed during early development will have no real world impact on how their brains will function for the rest of their lives.
I'm sorry you lost me. Were you trying to compare those things somehow and relate them to what we were talking about?
Are you trying to say that chemicals and hormone levels during the most developmental... Ok I'm done with forums for a while.
On April 09 2013 05:36 Zaqwert wrote: I mean, you could argue increased testosterone is better
you could argue lower levels are better
I mean women commit way less crime and violence too.
Better and worse are fake societal constructs. They are an interpretation or judgement of what evolution has done. Reality is what it is, without pro or con.
So you have no argument, you just want to come in there and point out that women are different than men, biologically? I feel safe is saying we all knew that and felt that those differences would have no noticeable effect on their ability to play SC2.
On April 09 2013 05:35 Wombat_NI wrote: Because they don't have to be good at what they do, especially if they're good looking.
This isn't so much a dig at the Starcraft community, but society in general. There is no logical reason that women cannot display the same chops in SC as men (indeed, supposedly they are inherently better at multitasking). I put it down to the fawning over girl gamers.
Any streamer starting up as a guy has to work his absolutely arse off, or develop some niche to get any viewers and get off the ground. A lot of girls can simply put on a webcam (if attractive), show terrible play, no content and still get some kind of following.
Women get put on a pedestal simply for being women in whatever field it is, it's pathetic. Sexism isn't just displayed by misogynistic comments, but also in compliments too.
This is so wrong.
They are put on a "pedestal" as you say because of lack of female in that particular field. Of course it's easier to become #1 girl streamer, because they are so few doing it. If there would be the same number of men and women trying to stream, this wouldn't happens.
"A rapidly burgeoning literature documents copious sex influences on brain anatomy, chemistry and function. This article highlights some of the more intriguing recent discoveries and their implications. Consideration of the effects of sex can help to explain seemingly contradictory findings. Research into sex influences is mandatory to fully understand a host of brain disorders with sex differences in their incidence and/or nature. The striking quantity and diversity of sex-related influences on brain function indicate that the still widespread assumption that sex influences are negligible cannot be justified, and probably retards progress in our field."
Did you actually read Cahill's article or are you join going to copy/paste an abstract? It's only like 6 pages, you should probably do it.
On April 09 2013 05:35 Wombat_NI wrote: Because they don't have to be good at what they do, especially if they're good looking.
This isn't so much a dig at the Starcraft community, but society in general. There is no logical reason that women cannot display the same chops in SC as men (indeed, supposedly they are inherently better at multitasking). I put it down to the fawning over girl gamers.
Any streamer starting up as a guy has to work his absolutely arse off, or develop some niche to get any viewers and get off the ground. A lot of girls can simply put on a webcam (if attractive), show terrible play, no content and still get some kind of following.
Women get put on a pedestal simply for being women in whatever field it is, it's pathetic. Sexism isn't just displayed by misogynistic comments, but also in compliments too.
This is so wrong.
They are put on a "pedestal" as you say because of lack of female in that particular field. Of course it's easier to become #1 girl streamer, because they are so few doing it. If there would be the same number of men and women trying to stream, this wouldn't happens.
Go to the Lauren Elise fanclub and tell me I'm wrong.
There's a lack of black guys at the forefront of Starcraft, but people don't go around fawning over anyone from that ethnicity every time they do anything.
On April 09 2013 05:36 Zaqwert wrote: I mean, you could argue increased testosterone is better
you could argue lower levels are better
I mean women commit way less crime and violence too.
Better and worse are fake societal constructs. They are an interpretation or judgement of what evolution has done. Reality is what it is, without pro or con.
So you have no argument, you just want to come in there and point out that women are different than men, biologically? I feel safe is saying we all knew that and felt that those differences would have no noticeable effect on their ability to play SC2.
Well until someone reputable does a properly controlled experiment it's all just speculation.
We have people denying the very existence of brain difference though.
I strongly suspect innate differences are at least partially responsible, for difference in men and women's gaming results. You tend to disagree, be it denying those difference exist or just thinking they have no impact.
There have been literally tens of thousands of studies on other things though that are clearly analogeous to SC2 or any other game or task.
Do a little research.
Science is a wondeful thing.
Lots of people here have clearly been brainwashed to believe that denying true, innate difference in the genders is someone a "bad" thing to do because it could be used for sexist purposes
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:19 Shinta) wrote: [quote] Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
lol, to you and everyone else who thinks history is irrelevant. I hope you're able to catch on pretty soon on how wrong you are. History is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world. "Scientific findings" are proven wrong by "scientific findings" every day of the year, while history remains stone. There is so much to be learned through history. Please open your eyes.
Everyone needs to realize though, there is give and take in everything. Every piece of scientific evidence, every page in a history book, every first hand experience a person has, has some aspects that can be applied generally and others that can't. Don't be so close minded to think that 1 article or 1 scientist has the complete answer to an issue at hand. Expand your minds~!
sexist person who thinks history is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world tells me to open my mind. theres something i can check off my forum scavenger hunt.
Hard to call me sexist when I'm one of the biggest supporters of females in eSports and sports in general. Luway was my favorite player when she was most active, and I will always support Eve and Luway so long as they play this game. Also long time fan of ColaGirl and MiSs.
I've always explained that women can and will become better at games, as they have with most other things. It's just a matter of time, but there are reasons they aren't yet, at this point in time.
So I repeat, stop being so close minded.
its not hard to call you sexist
Women's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, women can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with men in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for men to do, not women.
you're sexist
Good troll, here's a eTreat. nom nom yes, good troll.
I dont think you understand. Thinking women are a certain way becuase they are women is sexist... thats what you did... you are sexist.
Not at all. Discriminating against women because they are women is sexist.
IE. I can assume that a person who appears to be a woman probably has a vagina. That's not sexist.
If I don't let her into my establishment because she has a vagina, that's sexist. If I call her an obscene name, or abuse her because she has a vagina, that's sexist.
How to become a progamer as a male: >work your ass off >practice 15 hours a day >sacrifice your life >get picked up if you're lucky
How to become a progamer as a female: >be in plat league >have tits >don''t be ugly >at least start the game once in a while
Women are bad at any sport or anything competitive. They just can't for some reason. Well the reason is that they're inferior to men. At some point we just need to accept that there are mental differences between men and women that mean they have a natural disadvantage or they just don't have the drive since they've spent their entire lives having things handed to them because they've got a vagina.
No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them.
Ironically the greatest female StarCraft 2 progamer is a guy.
On April 09 2013 05:35 Wombat_NI wrote: Because they don't have to be good at what they do, especially if they're good looking.
This isn't so much a dig at the Starcraft community, but society in general. There is no logical reason that women cannot display the same chops in SC as men (indeed, supposedly they are inherently better at multitasking). I put it down to the fawning over girl gamers.
Any streamer starting up as a guy has to work his absolutely arse off, or develop some niche to get any viewers and get off the ground. A lot of girls can simply put on a webcam (if attractive), show terrible play, no content and still get some kind of following.
Women get put on a pedestal simply for being women in whatever field it is, it's pathetic. Sexism isn't just displayed by misogynistic comments, but also in compliments too.
This is so wrong.
They are put on a "pedestal" as you say because of lack of female in that particular field. Of course it's easier to become #1 girl streamer, because they are so few doing it. If there would be the same number of men and women trying to stream, this wouldn't happens.
Go to the Lauren Elise fanclub and tell me I'm wrong.
There's a lack of black guys at the forefront of Starcraft, but people don't go around fawning over anyone from that ethnicity every time they do anything.
Being a female streamer in SC2 is a niche.
People get all uppity about pro gamers and even pro athletes, and they tend to forget that this all a show. It's part of the entertainment industry. Fans like narratives and being the odd one out is a great narrative.
On April 09 2013 05:35 Wombat_NI wrote: Because they don't have to be good at what they do, especially if they're good looking.
This isn't so much a dig at the Starcraft community, but society in general. There is no logical reason that women cannot display the same chops in SC as men (indeed, supposedly they are inherently better at multitasking). I put it down to the fawning over girl gamers.
Any streamer starting up as a guy has to work his absolutely arse off, or develop some niche to get any viewers and get off the ground. A lot of girls can simply put on a webcam (if attractive), show terrible play, no content and still get some kind of following.
Women get put on a pedestal simply for being women in whatever field it is, it's pathetic. Sexism isn't just displayed by misogynistic comments, but also in compliments too.
This is so wrong.
They are put on a "pedestal" as you say because of lack of female in that particular field. Of course it's easier to become #1 girl streamer, because they are so few doing it. If there would be the same number of men and women trying to stream, this wouldn't happens.
Go to the Lauren Elise fanclub and tell me I'm wrong.
There's a lack of black guys at the forefront of Starcraft, but people don't go around fawning over anyone from that ethnicity every time they do anything.
Well Lauren Elise is not really a professional gamer and more of a media personality. That isn't a very good example, since she never makes any attempt to claim she is talented in the topic we are discussing.
On April 09 2013 05:18 Zaqwert wrote: I'm amazed at the amount of people who have been brainwashed to believe that every single difference between the sexes is 100% a fake construct of society.
Yeah, little things like evolution, genetics, biology, brain chemistry all disagree.
Feel free to keep believing men and women are 100% identical except for the sex organs.
how do they disagree?
Men and women's brains function very differently on certain tasks. Evolution decided that humans would be better off if men and women were different in some ways, adapted naturally to certain tasks, it's one of hte major reasons there are two genders in the first place.
There are asexual creatures, we could all be unisex worms but we aren't.
The core reason for brain differences seems to occur in utero. There is a stage of development when male fetuses receive an extra blast of testosterone that female fetuses do not, this is believed to have subtle, but real, changes on the brain.
So you believe someone that said a blast of testosterone in the uterus will have effects on the way someone thinks for their entire lives. And I do not. But I am brainwashed?
And I call you ignorant, I did study biologie before dropping out. But I can tell you yes these little differences EFFECT someone the rest of their entire life.
On April 09 2013 05:44 NaNiwaFan1998 wrote: How to become a progamer as a male: >work your ass off >practice 15 hours a day >sacrifice your life >get picked up if you're lucky
How to become a progamer as a female: >be in plat league >have tits >don''t be ugly >at least start the game once in a while
Women are bad at any sport or anything competitive. They just can't for some reason. Well the reason is that they're inferior to men. At some point we just need to accept that there are mental differences between men and women that mean they have a natural disadvantage or they just don't have the drive since they've spent their entire lives having things handed to them because they've got a vagina.
No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them.
Ironically the greatest female StarCraft 2 progamer is a guy.
On April 09 2013 05:35 Wombat_NI wrote: Because they don't have to be good at what they do, especially if they're good looking.
This isn't so much a dig at the Starcraft community, but society in general. There is no logical reason that women cannot display the same chops in SC as men (indeed, supposedly they are inherently better at multitasking). I put it down to the fawning over girl gamers.
Any streamer starting up as a guy has to work his absolutely arse off, or develop some niche to get any viewers and get off the ground. A lot of girls can simply put on a webcam (if attractive), show terrible play, no content and still get some kind of following.
Women get put on a pedestal simply for being women in whatever field it is, it's pathetic. Sexism isn't just displayed by misogynistic comments, but also in compliments too.
This is so wrong.
They are put on a "pedestal" as you say because of lack of female in that particular field. Of course it's easier to become #1 girl streamer, because they are so few doing it. If there would be the same number of men and women trying to stream, this wouldn't happens.
Go to the Lauren Elise fanclub and tell me I'm wrong.
There's a lack of black guys at the forefront of Starcraft, but people don't go around fawning over anyone from that ethnicity every time they do anything.
Well Lauren Elise is not really a professional gamer and more of a media personality. That isn't a very good example, since she never makes any attempt to claim she is talented in the topic we are discussing.
But yet has a profile over and above what her talents, on their own would merit. Streaming isn't a good example, because good stream numbers don't correlate to playing ability. I retract that as a bit irrelevant. You're right.
There's no coincidence in my mind that Scarlett developed as she did because she was cocooned away from over-hyping and worked solely on her game for ages and ages before entering the public eye.
On April 09 2013 05:44 NaNiwaFan1998 wrote: How to become a progamer as a male: >work your ass off >practice 15 hours a day >sacrifice your life >get picked up if you're lucky
How to become a progamer as a female: >be in plat league >have tits >don''t be ugly >at least start the game once in a while
Women are bad at any sport or anything competitive. They just can't for some reason. Well the reason is that they're inferior to men. At some point we just need to accept that there are mental differences between men and women that mean they have a natural disadvantage or they just don't have the drive since they've spent their entire lives having things handed to them because they've got a vagina.
No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them.
Ironically the greatest female StarCraft 2 progamer is a guy.
On April 09 2013 04:20 r.Evo wrote: [quote] Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote: [quote] Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
lol, to you and everyone else who thinks history is irrelevant. I hope you're able to catch on pretty soon on how wrong you are. History is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world. "Scientific findings" are proven wrong by "scientific findings" every day of the year, while history remains stone. There is so much to be learned through history. Please open your eyes.
Everyone needs to realize though, there is give and take in everything. Every piece of scientific evidence, every page in a history book, every first hand experience a person has, has some aspects that can be applied generally and others that can't. Don't be so close minded to think that 1 article or 1 scientist has the complete answer to an issue at hand. Expand your minds~!
sexist person who thinks history is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world tells me to open my mind. theres something i can check off my forum scavenger hunt.
Hard to call me sexist when I'm one of the biggest supporters of females in eSports and sports in general. Luway was my favorite player when she was most active, and I will always support Eve and Luway so long as they play this game. Also long time fan of ColaGirl and MiSs.
I've always explained that women can and will become better at games, as they have with most other things. It's just a matter of time, but there are reasons they aren't yet, at this point in time.
So I repeat, stop being so close minded.
its not hard to call you sexist
Women's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, women can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with men in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for men to do, not women.
you're sexist
Good troll, here's a eTreat. nom nom yes, good troll.
I dont think you understand. Thinking women are a certain way becuase they are women is sexist... thats what you did... you are sexist.
Not at all. Discriminating against women because they are women is sexist.
IE. I can assume that a person who appears to be a woman probably has a vagina. That's not sexist.
If I don't let her into my establishment because she has a vagina, that's sexist. If I call her an obscene name, or abuse her because she has a vagina, that's sexist.
On April 09 2013 05:44 NaNiwaFan1998 wrote: How to become a progamer as a male: >work your ass off >practice 15 hours a day >sacrifice your life >get picked up if you're lucky
How to become a progamer as a female: >be in plat league >have tits >don''t be ugly >at least start the game once in a while
Women are bad at any sport or anything competitive. They just can't for some reason. Well the reason is that they're inferior to men. At some point we just need to accept that there are mental differences between men and women that mean they have a natural disadvantage or they just don't have the drive since they've spent their entire lives having things handed to them because they've got a vagina.
No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them.
Ironically the greatest female StarCraft 2 progamer is a guy.
User was banned for this post.
So much stupidity in one post... this account didn't last long i guess
On April 09 2013 05:47 Zaqwert wrote: I'm done with this thread, certain people have clearly made judgements without looking at data
"Men and women are exactly the same! Anyone who disagrees is a big meanie sexist!"
"The scientific data says there are differences, specifially...."
"BOOO! Sexism! Boo!"
People who claim there are no differences are wrong.
You making assertions about human function based on preliminary brain research on rats (which isn't testing for what you're claiming) and heroin addicts is also wrong. We don't know exactly what all the differences are nor how they're represented (including how strongly they're represented) in adult humans.
There are many different types of scientific studies and the ones in that review are not the ones to support the claims you began making. The review is saying, "Hey! We should look into this!" You're saying, "This proves ____, ______ and ______."
On April 09 2013 05:47 Zaqwert wrote: I'm done with this thread, certain people have clearly made judgements without looking at data
"Men and women are exactly the same! Anyone who disagrees is a big meanie sexist!"
"The scientific data says there are differences, specifially...."
"BOOO! Sexism! Boo!"
You put forth an argument with poor data that was not 100% on point and then failed to back up that argument in any way. Providing us with a study saying that development of men and women is different and effects their path through life. No one disagreed, but pointed out that it did not prove that they could not compete with men in SC2.
On April 09 2013 04:20 r.Evo wrote: [quote] Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote: [quote] Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
lol, to you and everyone else who thinks history is irrelevant. I hope you're able to catch on pretty soon on how wrong you are. History is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world. "Scientific findings" are proven wrong by "scientific findings" every day of the year, while history remains stone. There is so much to be learned through history. Please open your eyes.
Everyone needs to realize though, there is give and take in everything. Every piece of scientific evidence, every page in a history book, every first hand experience a person has, has some aspects that can be applied generally and others that can't. Don't be so close minded to think that 1 article or 1 scientist has the complete answer to an issue at hand. Expand your minds~!
sexist person who thinks history is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world tells me to open my mind. theres something i can check off my forum scavenger hunt.
Hard to call me sexist when I'm one of the biggest supporters of females in eSports and sports in general. Luway was my favorite player when she was most active, and I will always support Eve and Luway so long as they play this game. Also long time fan of ColaGirl and MiSs.
I've always explained that women can and will become better at games, as they have with most other things. It's just a matter of time, but there are reasons they aren't yet, at this point in time.
So I repeat, stop being so close minded.
its not hard to call you sexist
Women's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, women can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with men in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for men to do, not women.
you're sexist
Good troll, here's a eTreat. nom nom yes, good troll.
I dont think you understand. Thinking women are a certain way becuase they are women is sexist... thats what you did... you are sexist.
Not at all. Discriminating against women because they are women is sexist.
IE. I can assume that a person who appears to be a woman probably has a vagina. That's not sexist.
If I don't let her into my establishment because she has a vagina, that's sexist. If I call her an obscene name, or abuse her because she has a vagina, that's sexist.
there are some circumstances where having a vagina and breasts is the exact reason they are removed from situations, and it is not sexist. prison guards in all-male prisons comes immediately to mind. banal point i know.
On April 09 2013 05:44 NaNiwaFan1998 wrote: How to become a progamer as a male: >work your ass off >practice 15 hours a day >sacrifice your life >get picked up if you're lucky
How to become a progamer as a female: >be in plat league >have tits >don''t be ugly >at least start the game once in a while
Women are bad at any sport or anything competitive. They just can't for some reason. Well the reason is that they're inferior to men. At some point we just need to accept that there are mental differences between men and women that mean they have a natural disadvantage or they just don't have the drive since they've spent their entire lives having things handed to them because they've got a vagina.
No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them.
Ironically the greatest female StarCraft 2 progamer is a guy.
As a guy, you're competing against ten thousands of other players.
As a girl, you're competing against a few hundred at most for the top spot.
Scarlett is a trans woman. It is believed that trans have brain that resemble their gender identity (Source). She also most likely has undergone hormone therapy, which means she has a very low level of testosterone and higher level of estrogen, yet she keeps getting better.
On April 09 2013 05:44 NaNiwaFan1998 wrote: How to become a progamer as a male: >work your ass off >practice 15 hours a day >sacrifice your life >get picked up if you're lucky
How to become a progamer as a female: >be in plat league >have tits >don''t be ugly >at least start the game once in a while
Women are bad at any sport or anything competitive. They just can't for some reason. Well the reason is that they're inferior to men. At some point we just need to accept that there are mental differences between men and women that mean they have a natural disadvantage or they just don't have the drive since they've spent their entire lives having things handed to them because they've got a vagina.
No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them.
Ironically the greatest female StarCraft 2 progamer is a guy.
As a guy, you're competing against ten thousands of other players.
As a girl, you're competing against a few hundred at most for the top spot.
Scarlett is a trans woman. It is believed that trans have brain that resemble their gender identity (Source). She also most likely has undergone hormone therapy, which means she has a very low level of testosterone and higher level of estrogen, yet she keeps getting better.
Why though? Females should be competing with males in Starcraft. There is no reason that certain competitive activities that aren't as effected by physiological differences between the sexes should be segregated.
On April 09 2013 05:44 NaNiwaFan1998 wrote: How to become a progamer as a male: >work your ass off >practice 15 hours a day >sacrifice your life >get picked up if you're lucky
How to become a progamer as a female: >be in plat league >have tits >don''t be ugly >at least start the game once in a while
Women are bad at any sport or anything competitive. They just can't for some reason. Well the reason is that they're inferior to men. At some point we just need to accept that there are mental differences between men and women that mean they have a natural disadvantage or they just don't have the drive since they've spent their entire lives having things handed to them because they've got a vagina.
No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them.
Ironically the greatest female StarCraft 2 progamer is a guy.
As a guy, you're competing against ten thousands of other players.
As a girl, you're competing against a few hundred at most for the top spot.
Scarlett is a trans woman. It is believed that trans have brain that resemble their gender identity (Source). She also most likely has undergone hormone therapy, which means she has a very low level of testosterone and higher level of estrogen, yet she keeps getting better.
Why though? Females should be competing with males in Starcraft. There is no reason that certain competitive activities that aren't as effected by physiological differences between the sexes should be segregated.
For the same reason you want a strong Irish SC scene, and you probably don't let Swedes and Koreans enter your tournaments.
Finding the best player in the world isn't the goal of every tournament.
Because, I'm speculating since I can't find numbers on this, the overall chess playing population only has ~2% women. The only legitimate question you can ask in a thread like this is: "Why do so few women start playing SC2/chess?"
You need to understand that the two questions go hand in hand. You can't be so biased in your counter arguments.
On April 09 2013 04:23 r.Evo wrote:
On April 09 2013 04:19 Shinta) wrote: [quote] Sexist at best.... Don't you know that human bodiest are sexist? Some are male and some are female, how sexist!!!!
Sorry, but facts are facts. The fact that you feel facts to be offensive is another helpless fact.
Can you please provide a scientific source for the statement: "Women are worse at games than men because thanks to evolution their brains are worse at it"?
Try opening a history book and stop trolling the internet.
History is irrelevant. It's just show what gender role and expectation were.There's no proof there that women are biologically inferior than man in games. And I might add that this is kind of a sexist comment to make.
lol, to you and everyone else who thinks history is irrelevant. I hope you're able to catch on pretty soon on how wrong you are. History is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world. "Scientific findings" are proven wrong by "scientific findings" every day of the year, while history remains stone. There is so much to be learned through history. Please open your eyes.
Everyone needs to realize though, there is give and take in everything. Every piece of scientific evidence, every page in a history book, every first hand experience a person has, has some aspects that can be applied generally and others that can't. Don't be so close minded to think that 1 article or 1 scientist has the complete answer to an issue at hand. Expand your minds~!
sexist person who thinks history is one of the most clear pieces of evidence in the world tells me to open my mind. theres something i can check off my forum scavenger hunt.
Hard to call me sexist when I'm one of the biggest supporters of females in eSports and sports in general. Luway was my favorite player when she was most active, and I will always support Eve and Luway so long as they play this game. Also long time fan of ColaGirl and MiSs.
I've always explained that women can and will become better at games, as they have with most other things. It's just a matter of time, but there are reasons they aren't yet, at this point in time.
So I repeat, stop being so close minded.
its not hard to call you sexist
Women's bodies and brains both work differently than those of men. Over time, women can, and are developing the ability and motivation to compete with men in games, but as history has dictated, games are something for men to do, not women.
you're sexist
Good troll, here's a eTreat. nom nom yes, good troll.
I dont think you understand. Thinking women are a certain way becuase they are women is sexist... thats what you did... you are sexist.
I don't think you understand. It's not because they are women, it's because women lived and developed a certain way. The reason as to why you can't understand that is beyond me.
They are living and developing much differently now, and are thus developing the ability, and some will say have already developed the ability, but that hasn't been proven much in historical terms, to do things such as play SC2 at a competitive level.
You can't read, thus you're no longer worth having a discussion with.
They're free to enter, but I won't be paying for their flights Jibba.
There is plenty of female talent in the scene, don't get me wrong. I just feel that too many people get a break solely for being female, even referring to the media side of things. For every Soe or Maddelisk who knows E-sports, are articulate interviewers and generally are competent, there are those who aren't. Every time this is mentioned people throw Clutch back as evidence that this isn't gender-specific, but I do feel it's an issue.
On April 09 2013 05:44 NaNiwaFan1998 wrote: How to become a progamer as a male: >work your ass off >practice 15 hours a day >sacrifice your life >get picked up if you're lucky
How to become a progamer as a female: >be in plat league >have tits >don''t be ugly >at least start the game once in a while
Women are bad at any sport or anything competitive. They just can't for some reason. Well the reason is that they're inferior to men. At some point we just need to accept that there are mental differences between men and women that mean they have a natural disadvantage or they just don't have the drive since they've spent their entire lives having things handed to them because they've got a vagina.
No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them.
Ironically the greatest female StarCraft 2 progamer is a guy.
EPT
