On July 30 2013 22:44 Plansix wrote: [quote] People watch the stream, so I don't get to decide anything. However, I can look at it and go "I'm not interested in that for the following reasons..." and move on from there. People have their own tastes and can watch whatever they want. I mean, Baywatch was the most popular show in the world for a very long time. SC2 is not going to be immune to the same things that made that show popular.
I agree with your opinion on it, and I think the same when I see streams like it. It reminds me of bad tv shows like jersey shore. I just simply hate going that dark road of taking the high ground when a woman shows off her body.
I also hate when players like Destiny curse for 8 hours on streams to please pre-teens who feel bad ass and I hate players like dragon who do ridiculous stuff on screen just to get noticed.
It's okay to dislike the ways of others, so long as we stop ourselves from feeling superior to others. It's a very fine line.
That is sort of the point. We don’t look at Ellen Page and claim she is the same as the actresses from Baywatch(not to say that those actresses don’t work hard, everyone has got to make a living). I think the community needs to work harder to tell the difference between the real-SC2 girls and the girls who are taking the Baywatch route when it comes to streaming. But painting them all with one brush and claiming its all the same isn’t a valid argument or discussion point.
Yes, I agree with you.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
The community's problem is that we are able to isolate male problems as the problems of individuals, but we treat a woman's problems as a shared problem. Some people see one girl not being serious about the game and conclude that girls as a demographic are not serious about the game. The problem with the community is that when someone asks "where are the female casters" we then get a massive thread where people keep saying that girls suck at the game as if Husk, Wheat, or Artosis are Korean GM players.
Don't worry, we are in agreement.
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens way too much and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
So wait, if one female SC2 play is doing that, it justifies critiquing all of them on using sex appeal to hook viewer? We can't treat them a separate people, on a case by case basis? Or are all females the same and using the same tricks to hook viewers?
Also, I don't many women who are not competitive on some level and anything claims otherwise are just made up. I have deal with the some fierce female competitors in all walks of life, so I don’t really know where that stereotype comes from or why people keep claiming its true.
It's not one female player; it's multiple female personalities/players that far outnumber the ones that produce actual quality content. A vast majority of female personalities on twitch are streaming not because they enjoy streaming; they just enjoy attention. The females that try to simply stream and go based on their talents are few and far in between, so stop pretending like it's not an issue. I'll make a bet with you, for every 'non sex based' female channel you can find, I can find 3 other channels that are using sex appeal.
And read the fucking studies. Women generally do not like competitive environments. Those studies were done in a non-gender biased way. So stop spouting your nonsense and come up with some evidence for once.
On July 31 2013 03:26 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 31 2013 03:02 superstartran wrote:
On July 30 2013 23:13 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 30 2013 23:00 Plansix wrote:
On July 30 2013 22:50 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 30 2013 22:44 Plansix wrote: [quote] People watch the stream, so I don't get to decide anything. However, I can look at it and go "I'm not interested in that for the following reasons..." and move on from there. People have their own tastes and can watch whatever they want. I mean, Baywatch was the most popular show in the world for a very long time. SC2 is not going to be immune to the same things that made that show popular.
I agree with your opinion on it, and I think the same when I see streams like it. It reminds me of bad tv shows like jersey shore. I just simply hate going that dark road of taking the high ground when a woman shows off her body.
I also hate when players like Destiny curse for 8 hours on streams to please pre-teens who feel bad ass and I hate players like dragon who do ridiculous stuff on screen just to get noticed.
It's okay to dislike the ways of others, so long as we stop ourselves from feeling superior to others. It's a very fine line.
That is sort of the point. We don’t look at Ellen Page and claim she is the same as the actresses from Baywatch(not to say that those actresses don’t work hard, everyone has got to make a living). I think the community needs to work harder to tell the difference between the real-SC2 girls and the girls who are taking the Baywatch route when it comes to streaming. But painting them all with one brush and claiming its all the same isn’t a valid argument or discussion point.
Yes, I agree with you.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
The community's problem is that we are able to isolate male problems as the problems of individuals, but we treat a woman's problems as a shared problem. Some people see one girl not being serious about the game and conclude that girls as a demographic are not serious about the game. The problem with the community is that when someone asks "where are the female casters" we then get a massive thread where people keep saying that girls suck at the game as if Husk, Wheat, or Artosis are Korean GM players.
Don't worry, we are in agreement.
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens far more often and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
Did you really attempt to refute that statement by pointing out that Mia Rose shows her chest and hence that means that all women shows their chest?
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified.
What Mia Rose does is what she herself does, it isn't what the female community does. Much like Destiny being a dick is what Destiny does, not what the entire male community does.
You can't say "Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop" just because Mia Rose does it.
Nor can you say that
you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified
and then conclude that
gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
When the only person giving that female caster a bad name is the person who thinks the criticism is justified.
And just how exactly is it white knighting to talk about incontrol and Destiny? People like you keep throwing that word around whenever you come into threads like this but how exactly is it white knighting to say that when people make fun of incontrol's weight, they don't project it to all male gamers and just incrontrol?
1) A vast majority of females have done nothing but attention whore and or use their gender to steal money/used it to their own advantage. This is not something I made up; a vast majority of female personalities have commented on this already through their own video blogs. Want proof? Here you go.
2) People project Incontrol's 'fatness' all the time on the rest of the SC2 community, as well as Destiny's immaturity. Stop pretending that this is an exclusive 'female hate fest' when it's not. This is a 'stop bitching about a non-existent problem.'
3) Go onto Twitch, look up every female streamer. Tell me how many use sex appeal vs not using sex appeal. I can almost guarantee sex appeal out numbers non-sex appeal 3:1.
You're white knighting because you're bitching about a non-existent problem. In fact, it's almost an advantage to be a female in the SC2 community/gaming community in general, simply because you're going to get way more attention.
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
On July 30 2013 22:44 Plansix wrote: [quote] People watch the stream, so I don't get to decide anything. However, I can look at it and go "I'm not interested in that for the following reasons..." and move on from there. People have their own tastes and can watch whatever they want. I mean, Baywatch was the most popular show in the world for a very long time. SC2 is not going to be immune to the same things that made that show popular.
I agree with your opinion on it, and I think the same when I see streams like it. It reminds me of bad tv shows like jersey shore. I just simply hate going that dark road of taking the high ground when a woman shows off her body.
I also hate when players like Destiny curse for 8 hours on streams to please pre-teens who feel bad ass and I hate players like dragon who do ridiculous stuff on screen just to get noticed.
It's okay to dislike the ways of others, so long as we stop ourselves from feeling superior to others. It's a very fine line.
That is sort of the point. We don’t look at Ellen Page and claim she is the same as the actresses from Baywatch(not to say that those actresses don’t work hard, everyone has got to make a living). I think the community needs to work harder to tell the difference between the real-SC2 girls and the girls who are taking the Baywatch route when it comes to streaming. But painting them all with one brush and claiming its all the same isn’t a valid argument or discussion point.
Yes, I agree with you.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
The community's problem is that we are able to isolate male problems as the problems of individuals, but we treat a woman's problems as a shared problem. Some people see one girl not being serious about the game and conclude that girls as a demographic are not serious about the game. The problem with the community is that when someone asks "where are the female casters" we then get a massive thread where people keep saying that girls suck at the game as if Husk, Wheat, or Artosis are Korean GM players.
Don't worry, we are in agreement.
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens way too much and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
So wait, if one female SC2 play is doing that, it justifies critiquing all of them on using sex appeal to hook viewer? We can't treat them a separate people, on a case by case basis? Or are all females the same and using the same tricks to hook viewers?
Also, I don't many women who are not competitive on some level and anything claims otherwise are just made up. I have deal with the some fierce female competitors in all walks of life, so I don’t really know where that stereotype comes from or why people keep claiming its true.
It's not one female player; it's multiple female personalities/players that far outnumber the ones that produce actual quality content. A vast majority of female personalities on twitch are streaming not because they enjoy streaming; they just enjoy attention. The females that try to simply stream and go based on their talents are few and far in between, so stop pretending like it's not an issue. I'll make a bet with you, for every 'non sex based' female channel you can find, I can find 3 other channels that are using sex appeal.
And read the fucking studies. Women generally do not like competitive environments. Those studies were done in a non-gender biased way. So stop spouting your nonsense and come up with some evidence for once.
On July 31 2013 03:26 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 31 2013 03:02 superstartran wrote:
On July 30 2013 23:13 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 30 2013 23:00 Plansix wrote:
On July 30 2013 22:50 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 30 2013 22:44 Plansix wrote: [quote] People watch the stream, so I don't get to decide anything. However, I can look at it and go "I'm not interested in that for the following reasons..." and move on from there. People have their own tastes and can watch whatever they want. I mean, Baywatch was the most popular show in the world for a very long time. SC2 is not going to be immune to the same things that made that show popular.
I agree with your opinion on it, and I think the same when I see streams like it. It reminds me of bad tv shows like jersey shore. I just simply hate going that dark road of taking the high ground when a woman shows off her body.
I also hate when players like Destiny curse for 8 hours on streams to please pre-teens who feel bad ass and I hate players like dragon who do ridiculous stuff on screen just to get noticed.
It's okay to dislike the ways of others, so long as we stop ourselves from feeling superior to others. It's a very fine line.
That is sort of the point. We don’t look at Ellen Page and claim she is the same as the actresses from Baywatch(not to say that those actresses don’t work hard, everyone has got to make a living). I think the community needs to work harder to tell the difference between the real-SC2 girls and the girls who are taking the Baywatch route when it comes to streaming. But painting them all with one brush and claiming its all the same isn’t a valid argument or discussion point.
Yes, I agree with you.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
The community's problem is that we are able to isolate male problems as the problems of individuals, but we treat a woman's problems as a shared problem. Some people see one girl not being serious about the game and conclude that girls as a demographic are not serious about the game. The problem with the community is that when someone asks "where are the female casters" we then get a massive thread where people keep saying that girls suck at the game as if Husk, Wheat, or Artosis are Korean GM players.
Don't worry, we are in agreement.
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens far more often and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
Did you really attempt to refute that statement by pointing out that Mia Rose shows her chest and hence that means that all women shows their chest?
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified.
What Mia Rose does is what she herself does, it isn't what the female community does. Much like Destiny being a dick is what Destiny does, not what the entire male community does.
You can't say "Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop" just because Mia Rose does it.
Nor can you say that
you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified
and then conclude that
gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
When the only person giving that female caster a bad name is the person who thinks the criticism is justified.
And just how exactly is it white knighting to talk about incontrol and Destiny? People like you keep throwing that word around whenever you come into threads like this but how exactly is it white knighting to say that when people make fun of incontrol's weight, they don't project it to all male gamers and just incrontrol?
1) A vast majority of females have done nothing but attention whore and or use their gender to steal money/used it to their own advantage. This is not something I made up; a vast majority of female personalities have commented on this already through their own video blogs. Want proof? Here you go.
2) People project Incontrol's 'fatness' all the time on the rest of the SC2 community, as well as Destiny's immaturity. Stop pretending that this is an exclusive 'female hate fest' when it's not. This is a 'stop bitching about a non-existent problem.'
3) Go onto Twitch, look up every female streamer. Tell me how many use sex appeal vs not using sex appeal. I can almost guarantee sex appeal out numbers non-sex appeal 3:1.
You're white knighting because you're bitching about a non-existent problem. In fact, it's almost an advantage to be a female in the SC2 community/gaming community in general, simply because you're going to get way more attention.
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
And you didn't read the study either, execpt for the part that agreed with your argument.
Whether the poor performance of women relative to men in mixed gender group tournaments is a rational response or a psychological phenomenon, our results show that single-sex tournaments elicit more comparable performance from women and men. Furthermore, in our experiments, running single-sex as opposed to mixed tournaments came at no cost. The performance of the winners of single-sex tournaments is no lower than of the winners of mixed-sex tournaments (even though the winners of the single-sex tournaments are constrained to be always half women and half men).
Which points out that the negative results in mixed touraments was due to the relationship between men and women and the dip in results was not present in the same sex touranments.
Also, you forgot the section:
While the reasons for the attrition rate of women in science and engineering remain unclear, there exists mounting evidence that the women’s low feelings of condence and competence play a key role. A recent report titled “Women’s Experiences in College Engineering” [Goodman, Cunningham, and Lachapelle 2002] shows that women are not dropping out of engineering programs because of poor performance. Many women who left mentioned negative aspects of their school’s climate such as competition, lack of support, and discouraging faculty and peers. Positive perceptions of self-condence were highly associated with staying in the program, and increased with the existence of mentor programs, opportunities for networking with practicing female engineers and clubs like the society for Women Engineers. In general, condence in one’s abilities and optimism have been shown to be strongly related to academic performance [Chemers, Hu, and Garcia 2001]. Furthermore, in male-dominated graduate programs, female students show lower feelings of competence than male students show [Ulku-Steiner, Kurtz-Costes, and Kinlaw 2000].
Where the study you cite specificly states that difference in results in likely a SOCIAL ISSUES relating to their school climate and other problems that have nothing to do with genetics.
The study you cited reports that you are incorrect and points out that women are likely to be as competative as men if there are not other social conditions in place.
You might want to trying reading them before citing them next time.
What? Are you seriously stupid or something? How did you reach that conclusion at all? The only thing you can draw from the studies conclusively is that men are more likely to enter competitive environments (tournaments in the study) and are likely to perform better in a competitive environment than females are. Everything else is theory or bullshit. Like I said, whether you think it's 'societal' pressures that's up to you. Fact of the matter is, females shy away from competitive environments, and when they are in one, they tend to under perform in said competitive environment.
On July 30 2013 22:50 Thieving Magpie wrote: [quote]
I agree with your opinion on it, and I think the same when I see streams like it. It reminds me of bad tv shows like jersey shore. I just simply hate going that dark road of taking the high ground when a woman shows off her body.
I also hate when players like Destiny curse for 8 hours on streams to please pre-teens who feel bad ass and I hate players like dragon who do ridiculous stuff on screen just to get noticed.
It's okay to dislike the ways of others, so long as we stop ourselves from feeling superior to others. It's a very fine line.
That is sort of the point. We don’t look at Ellen Page and claim she is the same as the actresses from Baywatch(not to say that those actresses don’t work hard, everyone has got to make a living). I think the community needs to work harder to tell the difference between the real-SC2 girls and the girls who are taking the Baywatch route when it comes to streaming. But painting them all with one brush and claiming its all the same isn’t a valid argument or discussion point.
Yes, I agree with you.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
The community's problem is that we are able to isolate male problems as the problems of individuals, but we treat a woman's problems as a shared problem. Some people see one girl not being serious about the game and conclude that girls as a demographic are not serious about the game. The problem with the community is that when someone asks "where are the female casters" we then get a massive thread where people keep saying that girls suck at the game as if Husk, Wheat, or Artosis are Korean GM players.
Don't worry, we are in agreement.
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens way too much and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
So wait, if one female SC2 play is doing that, it justifies critiquing all of them on using sex appeal to hook viewer? We can't treat them a separate people, on a case by case basis? Or are all females the same and using the same tricks to hook viewers?
Also, I don't many women who are not competitive on some level and anything claims otherwise are just made up. I have deal with the some fierce female competitors in all walks of life, so I don’t really know where that stereotype comes from or why people keep claiming its true.
It's not one female player; it's multiple female personalities/players that far outnumber the ones that produce actual quality content. A vast majority of female personalities on twitch are streaming not because they enjoy streaming; they just enjoy attention. The females that try to simply stream and go based on their talents are few and far in between, so stop pretending like it's not an issue. I'll make a bet with you, for every 'non sex based' female channel you can find, I can find 3 other channels that are using sex appeal.
And read the fucking studies. Women generally do not like competitive environments. Those studies were done in a non-gender biased way. So stop spouting your nonsense and come up with some evidence for once.
On July 31 2013 03:26 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 31 2013 03:02 superstartran wrote:
On July 30 2013 23:13 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 30 2013 23:00 Plansix wrote:
On July 30 2013 22:50 Thieving Magpie wrote: [quote]
I agree with your opinion on it, and I think the same when I see streams like it. It reminds me of bad tv shows like jersey shore. I just simply hate going that dark road of taking the high ground when a woman shows off her body.
I also hate when players like Destiny curse for 8 hours on streams to please pre-teens who feel bad ass and I hate players like dragon who do ridiculous stuff on screen just to get noticed.
It's okay to dislike the ways of others, so long as we stop ourselves from feeling superior to others. It's a very fine line.
That is sort of the point. We don’t look at Ellen Page and claim she is the same as the actresses from Baywatch(not to say that those actresses don’t work hard, everyone has got to make a living). I think the community needs to work harder to tell the difference between the real-SC2 girls and the girls who are taking the Baywatch route when it comes to streaming. But painting them all with one brush and claiming its all the same isn’t a valid argument or discussion point.
Yes, I agree with you.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
The community's problem is that we are able to isolate male problems as the problems of individuals, but we treat a woman's problems as a shared problem. Some people see one girl not being serious about the game and conclude that girls as a demographic are not serious about the game. The problem with the community is that when someone asks "where are the female casters" we then get a massive thread where people keep saying that girls suck at the game as if Husk, Wheat, or Artosis are Korean GM players.
Don't worry, we are in agreement.
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens far more often and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
Did you really attempt to refute that statement by pointing out that Mia Rose shows her chest and hence that means that all women shows their chest?
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified.
What Mia Rose does is what she herself does, it isn't what the female community does. Much like Destiny being a dick is what Destiny does, not what the entire male community does.
You can't say "Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop" just because Mia Rose does it.
Nor can you say that
you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified
and then conclude that
gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
When the only person giving that female caster a bad name is the person who thinks the criticism is justified.
And just how exactly is it white knighting to talk about incontrol and Destiny? People like you keep throwing that word around whenever you come into threads like this but how exactly is it white knighting to say that when people make fun of incontrol's weight, they don't project it to all male gamers and just incrontrol?
1) A vast majority of females have done nothing but attention whore and or use their gender to steal money/used it to their own advantage. This is not something I made up; a vast majority of female personalities have commented on this already through their own video blogs. Want proof? Here you go.
2) People project Incontrol's 'fatness' all the time on the rest of the SC2 community, as well as Destiny's immaturity. Stop pretending that this is an exclusive 'female hate fest' when it's not. This is a 'stop bitching about a non-existent problem.'
3) Go onto Twitch, look up every female streamer. Tell me how many use sex appeal vs not using sex appeal. I can almost guarantee sex appeal out numbers non-sex appeal 3:1.
You're white knighting because you're bitching about a non-existent problem. In fact, it's almost an advantage to be a female in the SC2 community/gaming community in general, simply because you're going to get way more attention.
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
That is sort of the point. We don’t look at Ellen Page and claim she is the same as the actresses from Baywatch(not to say that those actresses don’t work hard, everyone has got to make a living). I think the community needs to work harder to tell the difference between the real-SC2 girls and the girls who are taking the Baywatch route when it comes to streaming. But painting them all with one brush and claiming its all the same isn’t a valid argument or discussion point.
Yes, I agree with you.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
The community's problem is that we are able to isolate male problems as the problems of individuals, but we treat a woman's problems as a shared problem. Some people see one girl not being serious about the game and conclude that girls as a demographic are not serious about the game. The problem with the community is that when someone asks "where are the female casters" we then get a massive thread where people keep saying that girls suck at the game as if Husk, Wheat, or Artosis are Korean GM players.
Don't worry, we are in agreement.
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens way too much and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
So wait, if one female SC2 play is doing that, it justifies critiquing all of them on using sex appeal to hook viewer? We can't treat them a separate people, on a case by case basis? Or are all females the same and using the same tricks to hook viewers?
Also, I don't many women who are not competitive on some level and anything claims otherwise are just made up. I have deal with the some fierce female competitors in all walks of life, so I don’t really know where that stereotype comes from or why people keep claiming its true.
It's not one female player; it's multiple female personalities/players that far outnumber the ones that produce actual quality content. A vast majority of female personalities on twitch are streaming not because they enjoy streaming; they just enjoy attention. The females that try to simply stream and go based on their talents are few and far in between, so stop pretending like it's not an issue. I'll make a bet with you, for every 'non sex based' female channel you can find, I can find 3 other channels that are using sex appeal.
And read the fucking studies. Women generally do not like competitive environments. Those studies were done in a non-gender biased way. So stop spouting your nonsense and come up with some evidence for once.
On July 31 2013 03:26 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 31 2013 03:02 superstartran wrote:
On July 30 2013 23:13 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 30 2013 23:00 Plansix wrote: [quote]
That is sort of the point. We don’t look at Ellen Page and claim she is the same as the actresses from Baywatch(not to say that those actresses don’t work hard, everyone has got to make a living). I think the community needs to work harder to tell the difference between the real-SC2 girls and the girls who are taking the Baywatch route when it comes to streaming. But painting them all with one brush and claiming its all the same isn’t a valid argument or discussion point.
Yes, I agree with you.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
The community's problem is that we are able to isolate male problems as the problems of individuals, but we treat a woman's problems as a shared problem. Some people see one girl not being serious about the game and conclude that girls as a demographic are not serious about the game. The problem with the community is that when someone asks "where are the female casters" we then get a massive thread where people keep saying that girls suck at the game as if Husk, Wheat, or Artosis are Korean GM players.
Don't worry, we are in agreement.
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens far more often and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
Did you really attempt to refute that statement by pointing out that Mia Rose shows her chest and hence that means that all women shows their chest?
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified.
What Mia Rose does is what she herself does, it isn't what the female community does. Much like Destiny being a dick is what Destiny does, not what the entire male community does.
You can't say "Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop" just because Mia Rose does it.
Nor can you say that
you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified
and then conclude that
gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
When the only person giving that female caster a bad name is the person who thinks the criticism is justified.
And just how exactly is it white knighting to talk about incontrol and Destiny? People like you keep throwing that word around whenever you come into threads like this but how exactly is it white knighting to say that when people make fun of incontrol's weight, they don't project it to all male gamers and just incrontrol?
1) A vast majority of females have done nothing but attention whore and or use their gender to steal money/used it to their own advantage. This is not something I made up; a vast majority of female personalities have commented on this already through their own video blogs. Want proof? Here you go.
2) People project Incontrol's 'fatness' all the time on the rest of the SC2 community, as well as Destiny's immaturity. Stop pretending that this is an exclusive 'female hate fest' when it's not. This is a 'stop bitching about a non-existent problem.'
3) Go onto Twitch, look up every female streamer. Tell me how many use sex appeal vs not using sex appeal. I can almost guarantee sex appeal out numbers non-sex appeal 3:1.
You're white knighting because you're bitching about a non-existent problem. In fact, it's almost an advantage to be a female in the SC2 community/gaming community in general, simply because you're going to get way more attention.
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Not to mention the world/sc2 community/gaming community in general is mixed. Not separated. As such, you're going to get less females, because they for whatever reason do not like competitive environments in general. This is backed by the studies that I linked you. There's a reason why the female population in 'non-competitive' games is far higher; League of Legends, World of Warcraft, and most MMOs/non-hardcore games in general are very popular among the females because they don't compete against other people directly. SC2 is about as hardcore competitive as it gets. Thus, you see less female progamers/casters. Simple as that.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SC2 COMMUNITY. I REPEAT. NOTHING.
I think the biggest reason that a pattern is observed where many women shy away from male dominated competition driven activities is that they were told to do so since they were born.
Men were raised on Mars, Women were raised on Venus.
Also since when is women acting sexual a bad thing? I thought we grew out of the whole medieval church mindset.
On July 31 2013 04:12 ComaDose wrote: I think the biggest reason that a pattern is observed where many women shy away from male dominated competition driven activities is that they were told to do so since they were born.
Men were raised on Mars, Women were raised on Venus.
Also since when is women acting sexual a bad thing? I thought we grew out of the whole medieval church mindset.
Ask Starstran, I'm sure he has a stanford study to "prove" his viewpoint there as well
On July 30 2013 23:13 Thieving Magpie wrote: [quote]
Yes, I agree with you.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
The community's problem is that we are able to isolate male problems as the problems of individuals, but we treat a woman's problems as a shared problem. Some people see one girl not being serious about the game and conclude that girls as a demographic are not serious about the game. The problem with the community is that when someone asks "where are the female casters" we then get a massive thread where people keep saying that girls suck at the game as if Husk, Wheat, or Artosis are Korean GM players.
Don't worry, we are in agreement.
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens way too much and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
So wait, if one female SC2 play is doing that, it justifies critiquing all of them on using sex appeal to hook viewer? We can't treat them a separate people, on a case by case basis? Or are all females the same and using the same tricks to hook viewers?
Also, I don't many women who are not competitive on some level and anything claims otherwise are just made up. I have deal with the some fierce female competitors in all walks of life, so I don’t really know where that stereotype comes from or why people keep claiming its true.
It's not one female player; it's multiple female personalities/players that far outnumber the ones that produce actual quality content. A vast majority of female personalities on twitch are streaming not because they enjoy streaming; they just enjoy attention. The females that try to simply stream and go based on their talents are few and far in between, so stop pretending like it's not an issue. I'll make a bet with you, for every 'non sex based' female channel you can find, I can find 3 other channels that are using sex appeal.
And read the fucking studies. Women generally do not like competitive environments. Those studies were done in a non-gender biased way. So stop spouting your nonsense and come up with some evidence for once.
On July 31 2013 03:26 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 31 2013 03:02 superstartran wrote:
On July 30 2013 23:13 Thieving Magpie wrote: [quote]
Yes, I agree with you.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
The community's problem is that we are able to isolate male problems as the problems of individuals, but we treat a woman's problems as a shared problem. Some people see one girl not being serious about the game and conclude that girls as a demographic are not serious about the game. The problem with the community is that when someone asks "where are the female casters" we then get a massive thread where people keep saying that girls suck at the game as if Husk, Wheat, or Artosis are Korean GM players.
Don't worry, we are in agreement.
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens far more often and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
Did you really attempt to refute that statement by pointing out that Mia Rose shows her chest and hence that means that all women shows their chest?
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified.
What Mia Rose does is what she herself does, it isn't what the female community does. Much like Destiny being a dick is what Destiny does, not what the entire male community does.
You can't say "Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop" just because Mia Rose does it.
Nor can you say that
you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified
and then conclude that
gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
When the only person giving that female caster a bad name is the person who thinks the criticism is justified.
And just how exactly is it white knighting to talk about incontrol and Destiny? People like you keep throwing that word around whenever you come into threads like this but how exactly is it white knighting to say that when people make fun of incontrol's weight, they don't project it to all male gamers and just incrontrol?
1) A vast majority of females have done nothing but attention whore and or use their gender to steal money/used it to their own advantage. This is not something I made up; a vast majority of female personalities have commented on this already through their own video blogs. Want proof? Here you go.
2) People project Incontrol's 'fatness' all the time on the rest of the SC2 community, as well as Destiny's immaturity. Stop pretending that this is an exclusive 'female hate fest' when it's not. This is a 'stop bitching about a non-existent problem.'
3) Go onto Twitch, look up every female streamer. Tell me how many use sex appeal vs not using sex appeal. I can almost guarantee sex appeal out numbers non-sex appeal 3:1.
You're white knighting because you're bitching about a non-existent problem. In fact, it's almost an advantage to be a female in the SC2 community/gaming community in general, simply because you're going to get way more attention.
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Ah, I missed that part. I apologize for the error. I am still not seeing anything that proves anything though. The study only shows that women do not perform as well as men when completing mazes in a competitive event. But it does not point to any findings that show it is genetics or any predisposition to non-competitive events. The study specifically focuses on the idea of confidence in performing a specific task directly relates to someone performance. And it also states that women were not as confident as men in a competitive event. But is also referenced a previous study and the issues of attrition in science programs and this was caused by a lack of confidence in a male dominated field.
The study doesn’t help your argument in any way and mostly hurts it. It only points out that fields that are male dominated seem to have a negative effect on women’s confidence in said field. It doesn’t provide any proof that women are naturally like this and strongly leans toward it being cause by culture and social issues.
On July 31 2013 04:12 ComaDose wrote: I think the biggest reason that a pattern is observed where many women shy away from male dominated competition driven activities is that they were told to do so since they were born.
Men were raised on Mars, Women were raised on Venus.
Also since when is women acting sexual a bad thing? I thought we grew out of the whole medieval church mindset.
Or what this guy said. They don't compete because they are told not to.
On July 31 2013 03:02 superstartran wrote: [quote]
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens way too much and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
So wait, if one female SC2 play is doing that, it justifies critiquing all of them on using sex appeal to hook viewer? We can't treat them a separate people, on a case by case basis? Or are all females the same and using the same tricks to hook viewers?
Also, I don't many women who are not competitive on some level and anything claims otherwise are just made up. I have deal with the some fierce female competitors in all walks of life, so I don’t really know where that stereotype comes from or why people keep claiming its true.
It's not one female player; it's multiple female personalities/players that far outnumber the ones that produce actual quality content. A vast majority of female personalities on twitch are streaming not because they enjoy streaming; they just enjoy attention. The females that try to simply stream and go based on their talents are few and far in between, so stop pretending like it's not an issue. I'll make a bet with you, for every 'non sex based' female channel you can find, I can find 3 other channels that are using sex appeal.
And read the fucking studies. Women generally do not like competitive environments. Those studies were done in a non-gender biased way. So stop spouting your nonsense and come up with some evidence for once.
On July 31 2013 03:26 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 31 2013 03:02 superstartran wrote: [quote]
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens far more often and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
Did you really attempt to refute that statement by pointing out that Mia Rose shows her chest and hence that means that all women shows their chest?
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified.
What Mia Rose does is what she herself does, it isn't what the female community does. Much like Destiny being a dick is what Destiny does, not what the entire male community does.
You can't say "Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop" just because Mia Rose does it.
Nor can you say that
you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified
and then conclude that
gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
When the only person giving that female caster a bad name is the person who thinks the criticism is justified.
And just how exactly is it white knighting to talk about incontrol and Destiny? People like you keep throwing that word around whenever you come into threads like this but how exactly is it white knighting to say that when people make fun of incontrol's weight, they don't project it to all male gamers and just incrontrol?
1) A vast majority of females have done nothing but attention whore and or use their gender to steal money/used it to their own advantage. This is not something I made up; a vast majority of female personalities have commented on this already through their own video blogs. Want proof? Here you go.
2) People project Incontrol's 'fatness' all the time on the rest of the SC2 community, as well as Destiny's immaturity. Stop pretending that this is an exclusive 'female hate fest' when it's not. This is a 'stop bitching about a non-existent problem.'
3) Go onto Twitch, look up every female streamer. Tell me how many use sex appeal vs not using sex appeal. I can almost guarantee sex appeal out numbers non-sex appeal 3:1.
You're white knighting because you're bitching about a non-existent problem. In fact, it's almost an advantage to be a female in the SC2 community/gaming community in general, simply because you're going to get way more attention.
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Ah, I missed that part. I apologize for the error. I am still not seeing anything that proves anything though. The study only shows that women do not perform as well as men when completing mazes in a competitive event. But it does not point to any findings that show it is genetics or any predisposition to non-competitive events. The study specifically focuses on the idea of confidence in performing a specific task directly relates to someone performance. And it also states that women were not as confident as men in a competitive event. But is also referenced a previous study and the issues of attrition in science programs and this was caused by a lack of confidence in a male dominated field.
The study doesn’t help your argument in any way and mostly hurts it. It only points out that fields that are male dominated seem to have a negative effect on women’s confidence in said field. It doesn’t provide any proof that women are naturally like this and strongly leans toward it being cause by culture and social issues.
The whole point is that you asking for males to treat females better isn't going to do anything. It isn't all of a sudden going to get more females into the SC2 community. The fact of the matter is, females for whatever reason on a scientific basis shy away from mixed competitive environments. This is seen in schools, most fields of work that are male dominant, etc.
So you and Thieving Magpie telling everyone to 'stop being young men' isn't going to do anything; the reality is that females for whatever reasons (whether it is biological/psychological/social) don't like mixed competitive environments. Period.
On July 31 2013 04:12 ComaDose wrote: I think the biggest reason that a pattern is observed where many women shy away from male dominated competition driven activities is that they were told to do so since they were born.
Men were raised on Mars, Women were raised on Venus.
Also since when is women acting sexual a bad thing? I thought we grew out of the whole medieval church mindset.
When your job is to demonstrate your skill as a video gamer or as an analyst/play by play caster it becomes an issue. It's not so much for say personalities on stream, I honestly don't mind that too much. But if you are suppose to be good at something, don't use your sexuality to try and cover up your lack of skill.
On July 31 2013 03:02 superstartran wrote: [quote]
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens way too much and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
So wait, if one female SC2 play is doing that, it justifies critiquing all of them on using sex appeal to hook viewer? We can't treat them a separate people, on a case by case basis? Or are all females the same and using the same tricks to hook viewers?
Also, I don't many women who are not competitive on some level and anything claims otherwise are just made up. I have deal with the some fierce female competitors in all walks of life, so I don’t really know where that stereotype comes from or why people keep claiming its true.
It's not one female player; it's multiple female personalities/players that far outnumber the ones that produce actual quality content. A vast majority of female personalities on twitch are streaming not because they enjoy streaming; they just enjoy attention. The females that try to simply stream and go based on their talents are few and far in between, so stop pretending like it's not an issue. I'll make a bet with you, for every 'non sex based' female channel you can find, I can find 3 other channels that are using sex appeal.
And read the fucking studies. Women generally do not like competitive environments. Those studies were done in a non-gender biased way. So stop spouting your nonsense and come up with some evidence for once.
On July 31 2013 03:26 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On July 31 2013 03:02 superstartran wrote: [quote]
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
You know what's wrong with a woman showing her chest on her screen. It's when she does it repeatedly in order to garner views. And don't say that someone like Mia Rose doesn't do that, because she certainly does. As does to a slightly lesser extent Tara Babcock (she's not as bad; she only uses some sex appeal as a hook, but certainly does produce some level of content unlike Mia Rose), and various other female personalities out there.
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified. Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop. Fact of the matter is, it's not like we just made this shit up. It does happen, and more often than not, it happens far more often and gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
Edit : Removed YouTube video, probably a little borderline too close to 'porn.' If you want to see what I'm talking about it's Strip Halo with Mia Rose and Ava Rose.
Not to mention, females not being in competitive environments has nothing to do with sexist practices/community issues/etc. It's because females simply don't like competitive environments. And no I did not make that up, so don't be a white knighting nerd that calls me a chauvinistic pig or some bullshit like that.
The community is perfectly able to make fun of incontrol's weight and Destiny's manners and keep the insults as Destiny's insults and incontrol's insults.
I never hear people say "destiny calling people nigger/faggot means that all men in SC2 calls people nigger faggot" but when a girl shows her chest on her stream suddenly it's "women just show their chest on their stream."
Did you really attempt to refute that statement by pointing out that Mia Rose shows her chest and hence that means that all women shows their chest?
Honestly, when you have shit like this going on, you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified.
What Mia Rose does is what she herself does, it isn't what the female community does. Much like Destiny being a dick is what Destiny does, not what the entire male community does.
You can't say "Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop" just because Mia Rose does it.
Nor can you say that
you can't tell me that some of the criticisms against females isn't justified
and then conclude that
gives good female players/personalities/casters a bad name.
When the only person giving that female caster a bad name is the person who thinks the criticism is justified.
And just how exactly is it white knighting to talk about incontrol and Destiny? People like you keep throwing that word around whenever you come into threads like this but how exactly is it white knighting to say that when people make fun of incontrol's weight, they don't project it to all male gamers and just incrontrol?
1) A vast majority of females have done nothing but attention whore and or use their gender to steal money/used it to their own advantage. This is not something I made up; a vast majority of female personalities have commented on this already through their own video blogs. Want proof? Here you go.
2) People project Incontrol's 'fatness' all the time on the rest of the SC2 community, as well as Destiny's immaturity. Stop pretending that this is an exclusive 'female hate fest' when it's not. This is a 'stop bitching about a non-existent problem.'
3) Go onto Twitch, look up every female streamer. Tell me how many use sex appeal vs not using sex appeal. I can almost guarantee sex appeal out numbers non-sex appeal 3:1.
You're white knighting because you're bitching about a non-existent problem. In fact, it's almost an advantage to be a female in the SC2 community/gaming community in general, simply because you're going to get way more attention.
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
On July 31 2013 04:12 ComaDose wrote: I think the biggest reason that a pattern is observed where many women shy away from male dominated competition driven activities is that they were told to do so since they were born.
Men were raised on Mars, Women were raised on Venus.
Also since when is women acting sexual a bad thing? I thought we grew out of the whole medieval church mindset.
Or what this guy said. They don't compete because they are told not to.
Id like to amend "told not to" to "actively discouraged through every feasible means of interaction with society"
On July 31 2013 03:17 Plansix wrote: [quote] So wait, if one female SC2 play is doing that, it justifies critiquing all of them on using sex appeal to hook viewer? We can't treat them a separate people, on a case by case basis? Or are all females the same and using the same tricks to hook viewers?
Also, I don't many women who are not competitive on some level and anything claims otherwise are just made up. I have deal with the some fierce female competitors in all walks of life, so I don’t really know where that stereotype comes from or why people keep claiming its true.
It's not one female player; it's multiple female personalities/players that far outnumber the ones that produce actual quality content. A vast majority of female personalities on twitch are streaming not because they enjoy streaming; they just enjoy attention. The females that try to simply stream and go based on their talents are few and far in between, so stop pretending like it's not an issue. I'll make a bet with you, for every 'non sex based' female channel you can find, I can find 3 other channels that are using sex appeal.
And read the fucking studies. Women generally do not like competitive environments. Those studies were done in a non-gender biased way. So stop spouting your nonsense and come up with some evidence for once.
On July 31 2013 03:26 Thieving Magpie wrote: [quote]
Did you read what you quoted?
[quote]
Did you really attempt to refute that statement by pointing out that Mia Rose shows her chest and hence that means that all women shows their chest?
[quote]
What Mia Rose does is what she herself does, it isn't what the female community does. Much like Destiny being a dick is what Destiny does, not what the entire male community does.
You can't say "Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop" just because Mia Rose does it.
Nor can you say that
[quote]
and then conclude that
[quote]
When the only person giving that female caster a bad name is the person who thinks the criticism is justified.
And just how exactly is it white knighting to talk about incontrol and Destiny? People like you keep throwing that word around whenever you come into threads like this but how exactly is it white knighting to say that when people make fun of incontrol's weight, they don't project it to all male gamers and just incrontrol?
1) A vast majority of females have done nothing but attention whore and or use their gender to steal money/used it to their own advantage. This is not something I made up; a vast majority of female personalities have commented on this already through their own video blogs. Want proof? Here you go.
2) People project Incontrol's 'fatness' all the time on the rest of the SC2 community, as well as Destiny's immaturity. Stop pretending that this is an exclusive 'female hate fest' when it's not. This is a 'stop bitching about a non-existent problem.'
3) Go onto Twitch, look up every female streamer. Tell me how many use sex appeal vs not using sex appeal. I can almost guarantee sex appeal out numbers non-sex appeal 3:1.
You're white knighting because you're bitching about a non-existent problem. In fact, it's almost an advantage to be a female in the SC2 community/gaming community in general, simply because you're going to get way more attention.
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Ah, I missed that part. I apologize for the error. I am still not seeing anything that proves anything though. The study only shows that women do not perform as well as men when completing mazes in a competitive event. But it does not point to any findings that show it is genetics or any predisposition to non-competitive events. The study specifically focuses on the idea of confidence in performing a specific task directly relates to someone performance. And it also states that women were not as confident as men in a competitive event. But is also referenced a previous study and the issues of attrition in science programs and this was caused by a lack of confidence in a male dominated field.
The study doesn’t help your argument in any way and mostly hurts it. It only points out that fields that are male dominated seem to have a negative effect on women’s confidence in said field. It doesn’t provide any proof that women are naturally like this and strongly leans toward it being cause by culture and social issues.
The whole point is that you asking for males to treat females better isn't going to do anything. It isn't all of a sudden going to get more females into the SC2 community. The fact of the matter is, females for whatever reason on a scientific basis shy away from mixed competitive environments. This is seen in schools, most fields of work that are male dominant, etc.
So you and Thieving Magpie telling everyone to 'stop being young men' isn't going to do anything; the reality is that females for whatever reasons (whether it is biological/psychological/social) don't like mixed competitive environments. Period.
No matter what you say, people are going to just tell you it's society's fault. Weird how every society turned out exactly the same way...
On July 31 2013 03:17 Plansix wrote: [quote] So wait, if one female SC2 play is doing that, it justifies critiquing all of them on using sex appeal to hook viewer? We can't treat them a separate people, on a case by case basis? Or are all females the same and using the same tricks to hook viewers?
Also, I don't many women who are not competitive on some level and anything claims otherwise are just made up. I have deal with the some fierce female competitors in all walks of life, so I don’t really know where that stereotype comes from or why people keep claiming its true.
It's not one female player; it's multiple female personalities/players that far outnumber the ones that produce actual quality content. A vast majority of female personalities on twitch are streaming not because they enjoy streaming; they just enjoy attention. The females that try to simply stream and go based on their talents are few and far in between, so stop pretending like it's not an issue. I'll make a bet with you, for every 'non sex based' female channel you can find, I can find 3 other channels that are using sex appeal.
And read the fucking studies. Women generally do not like competitive environments. Those studies were done in a non-gender biased way. So stop spouting your nonsense and come up with some evidence for once.
On July 31 2013 03:26 Thieving Magpie wrote: [quote]
Did you read what you quoted?
[quote]
Did you really attempt to refute that statement by pointing out that Mia Rose shows her chest and hence that means that all women shows their chest?
[quote]
What Mia Rose does is what she herself does, it isn't what the female community does. Much like Destiny being a dick is what Destiny does, not what the entire male community does.
You can't say "Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop" just because Mia Rose does it.
Nor can you say that
[quote]
and then conclude that
[quote]
When the only person giving that female caster a bad name is the person who thinks the criticism is justified.
And just how exactly is it white knighting to talk about incontrol and Destiny? People like you keep throwing that word around whenever you come into threads like this but how exactly is it white knighting to say that when people make fun of incontrol's weight, they don't project it to all male gamers and just incrontrol?
1) A vast majority of females have done nothing but attention whore and or use their gender to steal money/used it to their own advantage. This is not something I made up; a vast majority of female personalities have commented on this already through their own video blogs. Want proof? Here you go.
2) People project Incontrol's 'fatness' all the time on the rest of the SC2 community, as well as Destiny's immaturity. Stop pretending that this is an exclusive 'female hate fest' when it's not. This is a 'stop bitching about a non-existent problem.'
3) Go onto Twitch, look up every female streamer. Tell me how many use sex appeal vs not using sex appeal. I can almost guarantee sex appeal out numbers non-sex appeal 3:1.
You're white knighting because you're bitching about a non-existent problem. In fact, it's almost an advantage to be a female in the SC2 community/gaming community in general, simply because you're going to get way more attention.
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Ah, I missed that part. I apologize for the error. I am still not seeing anything that proves anything though. The study only shows that women do not perform as well as men when completing mazes in a competitive event. But it does not point to any findings that show it is genetics or any predisposition to non-competitive events. The study specifically focuses on the idea of confidence in performing a specific task directly relates to someone performance. And it also states that women were not as confident as men in a competitive event. But is also referenced a previous study and the issues of attrition in science programs and this was caused by a lack of confidence in a male dominated field.
The study doesn’t help your argument in any way and mostly hurts it. It only points out that fields that are male dominated seem to have a negative effect on women’s confidence in said field. It doesn’t provide any proof that women are naturally like this and strongly leans toward it being cause by culture and social issues.
The whole point is that you asking for males to treat females better isn't going to do anything. It isn't all of a sudden going to get more females into the SC2 community. The fact of the matter is, females for whatever reason on a scientific basis shy away from mixed competitive environments. This is seen in schools, most fields of work that are male dominant, etc.
So you and Thieving Magpie telling everyone to 'stop being young men' isn't going to do anything; the reality is that females for whatever reasons (whether it is biological/psychological/social) don't like mixed competitive environments. Period.
LOL scientific basis. "I have a study that says people acted this way ergo women genetics bio truths logic". the for what ever reason is not a mystery. its cause we actively reinforce these ideals in every society globally.
EDIT: wtf... I dont include discrimination and sexism as being part of a young man please stop slandering my gender. and yeah if the reason they dont like mixed competitive environments is bad, let's stop oppressing women so that they stop "not liking" mixed competitive environments.
studies saying this is the way things are are so irrelevant to anything resembling this is why it is, or this is good.
On July 31 2013 03:27 superstartran wrote: [quote]
It's not one female player; it's multiple female personalities/players that far outnumber the ones that produce actual quality content. A vast majority of female personalities on twitch are streaming not because they enjoy streaming; they just enjoy attention. The females that try to simply stream and go based on their talents are few and far in between, so stop pretending like it's not an issue. I'll make a bet with you, for every 'non sex based' female channel you can find, I can find 3 other channels that are using sex appeal.
And read the fucking studies. Women generally do not like competitive environments. Those studies were done in a non-gender biased way. So stop spouting your nonsense and come up with some evidence for once.
[quote]
1) A vast majority of females have done nothing but attention whore and or use their gender to steal money/used it to their own advantage. This is not something I made up; a vast majority of female personalities have commented on this already through their own video blogs. Want proof? Here you go.
2) People project Incontrol's 'fatness' all the time on the rest of the SC2 community, as well as Destiny's immaturity. Stop pretending that this is an exclusive 'female hate fest' when it's not. This is a 'stop bitching about a non-existent problem.'
3) Go onto Twitch, look up every female streamer. Tell me how many use sex appeal vs not using sex appeal. I can almost guarantee sex appeal out numbers non-sex appeal 3:1.
You're white knighting because you're bitching about a non-existent problem. In fact, it's almost an advantage to be a female in the SC2 community/gaming community in general, simply because you're going to get way more attention.
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Ah, I missed that part. I apologize for the error. I am still not seeing anything that proves anything though. The study only shows that women do not perform as well as men when completing mazes in a competitive event. But it does not point to any findings that show it is genetics or any predisposition to non-competitive events. The study specifically focuses on the idea of confidence in performing a specific task directly relates to someone performance. And it also states that women were not as confident as men in a competitive event. But is also referenced a previous study and the issues of attrition in science programs and this was caused by a lack of confidence in a male dominated field.
The study doesn’t help your argument in any way and mostly hurts it. It only points out that fields that are male dominated seem to have a negative effect on women’s confidence in said field. It doesn’t provide any proof that women are naturally like this and strongly leans toward it being cause by culture and social issues.
The whole point is that you asking for males to treat females better isn't going to do anything. It isn't all of a sudden going to get more females into the SC2 community. The fact of the matter is, females for whatever reason on a scientific basis shy away from mixed competitive environments. This is seen in schools, most fields of work that are male dominant, etc.
So you and Thieving Magpie telling everyone to 'stop being young men' isn't going to do anything; the reality is that females for whatever reasons (whether it is biological/psychological/social) don't like mixed competitive environments. Period.
LOL scientific basis. "I have a study that says people acted this way ergo women genetics bio truths logic". the for what ever reason is not a mystery. its cause we actively reinforce these ideals in every society globally.
Give me a study that reinforces what you're saying. My only point is that trying to actively 'fix' the SC2 community isn't going to do anything. It isn't going to change the fact that females shy away from competitive environments (and SC2 is a highly cut throat competitive environment).
On July 31 2013 03:36 Thieving Magpie wrote: [quote]
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Ah, I missed that part. I apologize for the error. I am still not seeing anything that proves anything though. The study only shows that women do not perform as well as men when completing mazes in a competitive event. But it does not point to any findings that show it is genetics or any predisposition to non-competitive events. The study specifically focuses on the idea of confidence in performing a specific task directly relates to someone performance. And it also states that women were not as confident as men in a competitive event. But is also referenced a previous study and the issues of attrition in science programs and this was caused by a lack of confidence in a male dominated field.
The study doesn’t help your argument in any way and mostly hurts it. It only points out that fields that are male dominated seem to have a negative effect on women’s confidence in said field. It doesn’t provide any proof that women are naturally like this and strongly leans toward it being cause by culture and social issues.
The whole point is that you asking for males to treat females better isn't going to do anything. It isn't all of a sudden going to get more females into the SC2 community. The fact of the matter is, females for whatever reason on a scientific basis shy away from mixed competitive environments. This is seen in schools, most fields of work that are male dominant, etc.
So you and Thieving Magpie telling everyone to 'stop being young men' isn't going to do anything; the reality is that females for whatever reasons (whether it is biological/psychological/social) don't like mixed competitive environments. Period.
LOL scientific basis. "I have a study that says people acted this way ergo women genetics bio truths logic". the for what ever reason is not a mystery. its cause we actively reinforce these ideals in every society globally.
Give me a study that reinforces what you're saying. My only point is that trying to actively 'fix' the SC2 community isn't going to do anything. It isn't going to change the fact that females shy away from competitive environments (and SC2 is a highly cut throat competitive environment).
i disagree. i believe actively trying to fix things is the best way to fix things
On July 31 2013 03:17 Plansix wrote: [quote] So wait, if one female SC2 play is doing that, it justifies critiquing all of them on using sex appeal to hook viewer? We can't treat them a separate people, on a case by case basis? Or are all females the same and using the same tricks to hook viewers?
Also, I don't many women who are not competitive on some level and anything claims otherwise are just made up. I have deal with the some fierce female competitors in all walks of life, so I don’t really know where that stereotype comes from or why people keep claiming its true.
It's not one female player; it's multiple female personalities/players that far outnumber the ones that produce actual quality content. A vast majority of female personalities on twitch are streaming not because they enjoy streaming; they just enjoy attention. The females that try to simply stream and go based on their talents are few and far in between, so stop pretending like it's not an issue. I'll make a bet with you, for every 'non sex based' female channel you can find, I can find 3 other channels that are using sex appeal.
And read the fucking studies. Women generally do not like competitive environments. Those studies were done in a non-gender biased way. So stop spouting your nonsense and come up with some evidence for once.
On July 31 2013 03:26 Thieving Magpie wrote: [quote]
Did you read what you quoted?
[quote]
Did you really attempt to refute that statement by pointing out that Mia Rose shows her chest and hence that means that all women shows their chest?
[quote]
What Mia Rose does is what she herself does, it isn't what the female community does. Much like Destiny being a dick is what Destiny does, not what the entire male community does.
You can't say "Until females stop using sex appeal to hook in viewers, the criticisms against them isn't going to stop" just because Mia Rose does it.
Nor can you say that
[quote]
and then conclude that
[quote]
When the only person giving that female caster a bad name is the person who thinks the criticism is justified.
And just how exactly is it white knighting to talk about incontrol and Destiny? People like you keep throwing that word around whenever you come into threads like this but how exactly is it white knighting to say that when people make fun of incontrol's weight, they don't project it to all male gamers and just incrontrol?
1) A vast majority of females have done nothing but attention whore and or use their gender to steal money/used it to their own advantage. This is not something I made up; a vast majority of female personalities have commented on this already through their own video blogs. Want proof? Here you go.
2) People project Incontrol's 'fatness' all the time on the rest of the SC2 community, as well as Destiny's immaturity. Stop pretending that this is an exclusive 'female hate fest' when it's not. This is a 'stop bitching about a non-existent problem.'
3) Go onto Twitch, look up every female streamer. Tell me how many use sex appeal vs not using sex appeal. I can almost guarantee sex appeal out numbers non-sex appeal 3:1.
You're white knighting because you're bitching about a non-existent problem. In fact, it's almost an advantage to be a female in the SC2 community/gaming community in general, simply because you're going to get way more attention.
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Ah, I missed that part. I apologize for the error. I am still not seeing anything that proves anything though. The study only shows that women do not perform as well as men when completing mazes in a competitive event. But it does not point to any findings that show it is genetics or any predisposition to non-competitive events. The study specifically focuses on the idea of confidence in performing a specific task directly relates to someone performance. And it also states that women were not as confident as men in a competitive event. But is also referenced a previous study and the issues of attrition in science programs and this was caused by a lack of confidence in a male dominated field.
The study doesn’t help your argument in any way and mostly hurts it. It only points out that fields that are male dominated seem to have a negative effect on women’s confidence in said field. It doesn’t provide any proof that women are naturally like this and strongly leans toward it being cause by culture and social issues.
The whole point is that you asking for males to treat females better isn't going to do anything. It isn't all of a sudden going to get more females into the SC2 community. The fact of the matter is, females for whatever reason on a scientific basis shy away from mixed competitive environments. This is seen in schools, most fields of work that are male dominant, etc.
So you and Thieving Magpie telling everyone to 'stop being young men' isn't going to do anything; the reality is that females for whatever reasons (whether it is biological/psychological/social) don't like mixed competitive environments. Period.
What are you talking about?
He asked you not to treat the female population like Mia Rose and I told you that Incontrol and Destiny get flack that doesn't translate to all males getting flack.
We haven't even asked you to stop being a dick to people.
And why would you say
It isn't all of a sudden going to get more females into the SC2 community
When the discussion was about the females *already* in the community.
In fact, this is what you said when you intruded into my and Planxis discussion.
That's funny, because pretty sure Artosis could easily be one of the better players in NA if he wasn't caught up with his casting gig. Or are we going to start with Day9 is bad now too?
And you said that as a response to my saying that Artosis is not a Korean GM.
So which part are of my and Planxis argument is about, as you say "stop being young men" whatever that means. Is it "being young men" to treat women who are not Mia Rose the same way as Mia Rose? Is it "being young men" to defend Destiny's derogatory remarks and make fun of Incontrol?
What is the point of your argument and how does it stem forth as a response to the discussion Planxis and I were having?
On July 31 2013 03:36 Thieving Magpie wrote: [quote]
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Ah, I missed that part. I apologize for the error. I am still not seeing anything that proves anything though. The study only shows that women do not perform as well as men when completing mazes in a competitive event. But it does not point to any findings that show it is genetics or any predisposition to non-competitive events. The study specifically focuses on the idea of confidence in performing a specific task directly relates to someone performance. And it also states that women were not as confident as men in a competitive event. But is also referenced a previous study and the issues of attrition in science programs and this was caused by a lack of confidence in a male dominated field.
The study doesn’t help your argument in any way and mostly hurts it. It only points out that fields that are male dominated seem to have a negative effect on women’s confidence in said field. It doesn’t provide any proof that women are naturally like this and strongly leans toward it being cause by culture and social issues.
The whole point is that you asking for males to treat females better isn't going to do anything. It isn't all of a sudden going to get more females into the SC2 community. The fact of the matter is, females for whatever reason on a scientific basis shy away from mixed competitive environments. This is seen in schools, most fields of work that are male dominant, etc.
So you and Thieving Magpie telling everyone to 'stop being young men' isn't going to do anything; the reality is that females for whatever reasons (whether it is biological/psychological/social) don't like mixed competitive environments. Period.
LOL scientific basis. "I have a study that says people acted this way ergo women genetics bio truths logic". the for what ever reason is not a mystery. its cause we actively reinforce these ideals in every society globally.
Give me a study that reinforces what you're saying. My only point is that trying to actively 'fix' the SC2 community isn't going to do anything. It isn't going to change the fact that females shy away from competitive environments (and SC2 is a highly cut throat competitive environment).
Define fix for us please? Because most of us are just saying people shoudlnt' be sexist jerks or assume that a woman isn't intrested in the SC2 scene just because she is a woman.
On July 31 2013 03:36 Thieving Magpie wrote: [quote]
Did you read them? The only differences came about when the context of the tasks were changed, the tasks themselves remained the same. And you know what that context was? Willingness to enter tournaments. They both had similar results and had similar consistencies, but only when given the choice to enter a tournament or not is when differences became involved. Last I checked, laddering is not a fucking tournament. Neither is casting.
You clearly read the top lines of the studies and that's it.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Ah, I missed that part. I apologize for the error. I am still not seeing anything that proves anything though. The study only shows that women do not perform as well as men when completing mazes in a competitive event. But it does not point to any findings that show it is genetics or any predisposition to non-competitive events. The study specifically focuses on the idea of confidence in performing a specific task directly relates to someone performance. And it also states that women were not as confident as men in a competitive event. But is also referenced a previous study and the issues of attrition in science programs and this was caused by a lack of confidence in a male dominated field.
The study doesn’t help your argument in any way and mostly hurts it. It only points out that fields that are male dominated seem to have a negative effect on women’s confidence in said field. It doesn’t provide any proof that women are naturally like this and strongly leans toward it being cause by culture and social issues.
The whole point is that you asking for males to treat females better isn't going to do anything. It isn't all of a sudden going to get more females into the SC2 community. The fact of the matter is, females for whatever reason on a scientific basis shy away from mixed competitive environments. This is seen in schools, most fields of work that are male dominant, etc.
So you and Thieving Magpie telling everyone to 'stop being young men' isn't going to do anything; the reality is that females for whatever reasons (whether it is biological/psychological/social) don't like mixed competitive environments. Period.
LOL scientific basis. "I have a study that says people acted this way ergo women genetics bio truths logic". the for what ever reason is not a mystery. its cause we actively reinforce these ideals in every society globally.
Give me a study that reinforces what you're saying. My only point is that trying to actively 'fix' the SC2 community isn't going to do anything. It isn't going to change the fact that females shy away from competitive environments (and SC2 is a highly cut throat competitive environment).
That's how civil rights, workers rights, voting rights, etc... has always been done. A majority rules, the minority suffers, a few rabble rousers "whine" about the situation for X amount of time until change becomes forced to happen.
And why is it so bad to ask the community to treat women better? Even if it doesn't make them play SC2, how exactly are you against treating women better than they are being treated now? Will you only treat them better if they go online and play with you? Like requirements do people have to fit before you start treating them better?
When you have few women I think is work of Blizzard, MLG and others to find a female caster to help. Of course, a good one, not just anyone bad that will back fire.
Men perform signicantly higher in mixed tournaments than under both noncompetitive incentive schemes, the piece rate and the random pay. The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test that compares performance of men in mixed tournaments with the piece rate is 0.001, while for the comparison to the random pay treatment it is 0.006.
In a mixed tournament situation, men perform significantly higher than the women did. That's exactly the same situation that you have in the caster/pro gamer/etc. world. Men and women in the same setting, competing against each other for tournament winnings, job positions, etc.
Every single study will tell you that men perform significantly higher when there is an incentive to perform. Women generally do not, especially in a mixed gender situation.
A fourth one?
Sure.
In the benchmark treatment, the pay- off to participants depends only on their own performance: each one is paid a xed piece rate for every maze solved over a period of fteen minutes. We nd no statistically signicant gender difference in performance.
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Ah, I missed that part. I apologize for the error. I am still not seeing anything that proves anything though. The study only shows that women do not perform as well as men when completing mazes in a competitive event. But it does not point to any findings that show it is genetics or any predisposition to non-competitive events. The study specifically focuses on the idea of confidence in performing a specific task directly relates to someone performance. And it also states that women were not as confident as men in a competitive event. But is also referenced a previous study and the issues of attrition in science programs and this was caused by a lack of confidence in a male dominated field.
The study doesn’t help your argument in any way and mostly hurts it. It only points out that fields that are male dominated seem to have a negative effect on women’s confidence in said field. It doesn’t provide any proof that women are naturally like this and strongly leans toward it being cause by culture and social issues.
The whole point is that you asking for males to treat females better isn't going to do anything. It isn't all of a sudden going to get more females into the SC2 community. The fact of the matter is, females for whatever reason on a scientific basis shy away from mixed competitive environments. This is seen in schools, most fields of work that are male dominant, etc.
So you and Thieving Magpie telling everyone to 'stop being young men' isn't going to do anything; the reality is that females for whatever reasons (whether it is biological/psychological/social) don't like mixed competitive environments. Period.
LOL scientific basis. "I have a study that says people acted this way ergo women genetics bio truths logic". the for what ever reason is not a mystery. its cause we actively reinforce these ideals in every society globally.
Give me a study that reinforces what you're saying. My only point is that trying to actively 'fix' the SC2 community isn't going to do anything. It isn't going to change the fact that females shy away from competitive environments (and SC2 is a highly cut throat competitive environment).
That's how civil rights, workers rights, voting rights, etc... has always been done. A majority rules, the minority suffers, a few rabble rousers "whine" about the situation for X amount of time until change becomes forced to happen.
And why is it so bad to ask the community to treat women better? Even if it doesn't make them play SC2, how exactly are you against treating women better than they are being treated now? Will you only treat them better if they go online and play with you? Like requirements do people have to fit before you start treating them better?
As someone who has been doing it for a while, being nice to women is generally how you get them to hang out with you. Normally, the more amusing and nicer you are, while avoiding the creep factors, the more they enjoy being around you. Not being sexist and avoiding commenting on other women's "tits" and physical features is a core tenent in this process and the key to success.
On July 31 2013 03:52 Thieving Magpie wrote: [quote]
A fourth one?
Sure.
[quote]
The task itself is simple and does not change (navigating a maze). When put in a tournament format, the women performed similarly to when they were not in a tournament format, the men performed better in a tournament format.
In that study, the women were neither encouraged nor discouraged by the format of the activity. The men tried harder in the activity. When outside of a tournament setting, both the men and women performed equally. Hence, the only difference is that the men cared more than the women--that's it.
Lmao, so it proves my original point that women are less likely inclined to perform in a competitive environment? They are unwilling to participate, and then they don't perform as well.
Did you read the reports findings as to what caused that to happen or what happened in the same sex touranments? Because that part does not prove you correct.
Clearly you don't read.
In single-sex tournaments, women solve more mazes than in mixed tournaments. However, this difference is not signicant. (The p-value of the two-sided Mann-Whitney U test is 0.1025. Using a one-sided test of course makes the results signicant at conventional levels.)
Ah, I missed that part. I apologize for the error. I am still not seeing anything that proves anything though. The study only shows that women do not perform as well as men when completing mazes in a competitive event. But it does not point to any findings that show it is genetics or any predisposition to non-competitive events. The study specifically focuses on the idea of confidence in performing a specific task directly relates to someone performance. And it also states that women were not as confident as men in a competitive event. But is also referenced a previous study and the issues of attrition in science programs and this was caused by a lack of confidence in a male dominated field.
The study doesn’t help your argument in any way and mostly hurts it. It only points out that fields that are male dominated seem to have a negative effect on women’s confidence in said field. It doesn’t provide any proof that women are naturally like this and strongly leans toward it being cause by culture and social issues.
The whole point is that you asking for males to treat females better isn't going to do anything. It isn't all of a sudden going to get more females into the SC2 community. The fact of the matter is, females for whatever reason on a scientific basis shy away from mixed competitive environments. This is seen in schools, most fields of work that are male dominant, etc.
So you and Thieving Magpie telling everyone to 'stop being young men' isn't going to do anything; the reality is that females for whatever reasons (whether it is biological/psychological/social) don't like mixed competitive environments. Period.
LOL scientific basis. "I have a study that says people acted this way ergo women genetics bio truths logic". the for what ever reason is not a mystery. its cause we actively reinforce these ideals in every society globally.
Give me a study that reinforces what you're saying. My only point is that trying to actively 'fix' the SC2 community isn't going to do anything. It isn't going to change the fact that females shy away from competitive environments (and SC2 is a highly cut throat competitive environment).
That's how civil rights, workers rights, voting rights, etc... has always been done. A majority rules, the minority suffers, a few rabble rousers "whine" about the situation for X amount of time until change becomes forced to happen.
And why is it so bad to ask the community to treat women better? Even if it doesn't make them play SC2, how exactly are you against treating women better than they are being treated now? Will you only treat them better if they go online and play with you? Like requirements do people have to fit before you start treating them better?
As someone who has been doing it for a while, being nice to women is generally how you get them to hang out with you. Normally, the more amusing and nicer you are, while avoiding the creep factors, the more they enjoy being around you. Not being sexist and avoiding commenting on other women's "tits" and physical features is a core tenent in this process and the key to success.
I have a friend who is a total asshole to women, calls them stupid, farts on them (I'm not lying), disrespects them, and comes home with a 10 every night.
EPT
