• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 03:14
CEST 09:14
KST 16:14
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview17Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6Code S RO8 Preview: herO, Zoun, Bunny, Classic7
Community News
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event13Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster12Weekly Cups (June 16-22): Clem strikes back1Weekly Cups (June 9-15): herO doubles on GSL week4Firefly suspended by EWC, replaced by Lancer12
StarCraft 2
General
How does the number of casters affect your enjoyment of esports? The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Hybrid setting keep reverting. HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster
Tourneys
HomeStory Cup 27 (June 27-29) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event $200 Biweekly - StarCraft Evolution League #1 SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] Darkgrid Layout
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Unit and Spell Similarities BW General Discussion ASL20 Preliminary Maps NaDa's Body
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] ProLeague LB Final - Saturday 20:00 CET Small VOD Thread 2.0 [ASL19] Grand Finals
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Trading/Investing Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Canadian Politics Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Korean Music Discussion
Sports
NBA General Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024 Formula 1 Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Blog #2
tankgirl
Game Sound vs. Music: The Im…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 722 users

Discussing the lack of top female starcraft gamers - Page 18

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
Prev 1 16 17 18 19 20 32 Next All
ETHANOL
Profile Joined May 2010
Canada68 Posts
November 20 2010 16:22 GMT
#341
If girls played starcraft

1) they would be extremley bm during their period
2)they would lose because they are watching grey's anatomy at the same time
3)who would do the dishes?
4)we would have to abolish chat in order for them to become effective

User was temp banned for this post.
Snowfield
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
1289 Posts
November 20 2010 16:22 GMT
#342
On November 21 2010 01:20 Fa1nT wrote:
Why is this still open? Just on this last page alone is so many stupid arguments based on opinion...


I don't think several studies done on how men and girls are different and why they have different hobbies is an opinion.
mordk
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
Chile8385 Posts
November 20 2010 16:24 GMT
#343
I believe the most important factor here is social, not biological. Yes, biologically boys are more inclined to play certain games and girls different girls, but this is an average of sorts, not an absolute. In the measure that it becomes socially acceptable, those girls that are outside the "average" in terms of games they like to play (say, 15%-20% of women), will start doing so without any problem whatsoever. Nowadays it is socially acceptable for a woman to do almost any sport without being looked down upon, but this is not yet true for gaming, hopefully some day it will be, it would be a lot of fun to have more girl gamers imo.

If they can be just as good as men? I'd dare say that with enough practice they can definitely make it, although, just as there will always be a fewer proportion of females in gaming, there will be a lesser proportion of females in pro-gaming. There's no reason for it to be any different.
Snowfield
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
1289 Posts
November 20 2010 16:26 GMT
#344
On November 21 2010 01:24 mordk wrote:
I believe the most important factor here is social, not biological. Yes, biologically boys are more inclined to play certain games and girls different girls, but this is an average of sorts, not an absolute. In the measure that it becomes socially acceptable, those girls that are outside the "average" in terms of games they like to play (say, 15%-20% of women), will start doing so without any problem whatsoever. Nowadays it is socially acceptable for a woman to do almost any sport without being looked down upon, but this is not yet true for gaming, hopefully some day it will be, it would be a lot of fun to have more girl gamers imo.

If they can be just as good as men? I'd dare say that with enough practice they can definitely make it, although, just as there will always be a fewer proportion of females in gaming, there will be a lesser proportion of females in pro-gaming. There's no reason for it to be any different.


The social factor is also huge, id say probably teh biggest, alot of teh girls that play games in my observations are "boys-girls" that spend alot of time with boys and have alot of male friends, even as young
SmoKim
Profile Joined March 2010
Denmark10301 Posts
November 20 2010 16:30 GMT
#345
On November 21 2010 01:22 ETHANOL wrote:
If girls played starcraft

1) they would be extremley bm during their period
2)they would lose because they are watching grey's anatomy at the same time
3)who would do the dishes?
4)we would have to abolish chat in order for them to become effective


hurr hurr ima so funny herba derp
"LOL I have 202 supply right now (3 minutes later)..."LOL NOW I HAVE 220 SUPPLY SUP?!?!?" - Mondragon
RoarMan
Profile Blog Joined January 2010
Canada745 Posts
November 20 2010 16:41 GMT
#346
On November 21 2010 01:30 SmoKim wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 21 2010 01:22 ETHANOL wrote:
If girls played starcraft

1) they would be extremley bm during their period
2)they would lose because they are watching grey's anatomy at the same time
3)who would do the dishes?
4)we would have to abolish chat in order for them to become effective


hurr hurr ima so funny herba derp

This is the kind of reason that I can't be playing games with a Kate or Ashley.

I for one would love to see some more diversity, it wouldn't harm anyone at all.
All the pros got dat Ichie.
MegaBUD
Profile Joined September 2010
Canada179 Posts
November 20 2010 17:14 GMT
#347
But The Sims is so much better.
Bidouleroux
Profile Joined October 2009
Canada24 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-20 17:49:17
November 20 2010 17:43 GMT
#348
On November 21 2010 00:33 Ropid wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 20 2010 23:50 Bidouleroux wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

The Polgar sisters are a great example of why more women don't do well in competitive games. Of course one of the reason is that women don't have the same competitive "spirit" as men, but that simply means there are less potential women gamers, not that there can't be. In the case of the Polgar sisters, their father decided to develop a way to bring up genius, quite literally. His approach to teaching Chess was based on pattern recognition (recognizing "good" and "bad" positions on parts of the board of various sizes) instead of series of sequential moves and general strategies. Of course, you need to know opening moves and endgame sequences, but these are more rote memory and experience, areas in which women are not inferior to men. But in pattern recognition, women are actually better in general. So the Polgar sisters did great. The oldest though maybe lacked the competitive spirit of the youngest and as such she stopped competing after being the first female to achieve the title of grandmaster.

Now, one may look at this and think, if women can do great in Chess with the right education, why not in other games? Let's take Go for example. Go is also heavily dependent on pattern recognition, but is much more complex than Chess. Opening sequences cannot be memorized as easily and the end game is pure mathematical heuristics (i.e. lots of calculation). Maybe, if someone could devise for Go a teaching system like Lazlo Polgar did for Chess (not going to happen anytime soon by the way), some women could get really strong at Go ; but I doubt it considering the end game that is pure calculation, for women are generally weaker than men in this regard as much as they are better at pattern recognition.

So this takes us to Starcraft. What are the defining characteristics of RTS games that make them different than Chess and Go? First, like the name says they take place in real time. Second, you do not have perfect information. Third, you need to manage both a static base and a moving army (divide time between macro and micro if you like). Base management should be no problem for women and with TossGirl we see that if it's not Flash like at least it isn't a problem. Micro shouldn't be a problem either on it's own. Women are known to be great at detailed work. After all, they've had thousands of years of experience sewing us men clothes. But we will see later how juggling the two can be very bad for women gamers.

So all right, before taking on the real-time aspects, let's get this information conundrum out the way first. This is where I think women really get the evolutionary short end of the proverbial stick. Who hunts food? Men. Who contends with dangerous situations day-to-day? Men. Who doesn't know when or where his next kill will to be or even if he'll come back in one piece? Men. Men have lots of experience with unknown situations and pressure situations. In general they will secrete lots of adrenaline at the dimmest hint of danger. They have evolved to cope with unknowns. This is why men can orient themselves better than women without a map. With a map, the playing field is leveled (as long as you know how to use it properly, which is a pitfall many women encounter simply because they never had an opportunity to learn). It is no wonder either that men are better at advanced math (real math, not simple equation solving which has more to do with pattern recognition). You could say the difference here is that women like to match known quantities together, whereas men extrapolate better (or simply more readily) based on incomplete information, while also having the added advantage that they aren't as uncomfortable with unknown situations as women are in general. Hence men take more risks. How many successful female VCs or traders have you seen lately? It's not like women are not trying to make a quick buck too. But like Virgil said, "fortune favors the bold".

Next, RTS games are real-time, another area where women must give the evolutionary edge to men, albeit not as much as with coping with imperfect information. Many mistakenly believe that real-time means multitasking, but that is false. What it means, in an RTS game, is task-switching (in fact, I am not sure you could design a competitive RTS game designed around multitasking playable only with mouse and keyboard. Maybe some form of management game like The Sims, but not an RTS and neither an FPS for that matter. No wonder both recreate situations of war). So, in RTS games in general and in Starcraft in particular you have to switch between macro mode and micro mode and do it fast. Men are good at that. For example, here's the daily routine of the primitive man : stalk the prey, get caught, now switch to run-for-your-life mode pronto ; and don't forget to yell and warn others on your way out! Or, switch to kill mode if you have the opportunity: load the bow, don't lose the tail, watch where your clan mates are, check for possible obstacles, plan retreat route just in case, make dinner plans, shoot the arrow, miss, pursue while reloading, hop over a fallen tree and wham! right in the thing you were hunting. Good. Now take it back to camp with you 10 miles somewhere in that general direction while the sun is setting down. Don't forget wood for the fire and a flower for the missus on your way. Alright, now you can play Starcraft and win some games for once! Now, ask a women to play WoW and talk to you at the same time. She will be glad to gossip and recount her whole day while organizing a raid and crafting things and watching auctions, etc. She may even be able to do all that while playing Starcraft, but then don't be surprised when she loses.


I just can't believe that whatever biological factor there may be won't be washed away through practice. If you find someone who won't run away from a Kespa BW slave house and will diligently practice each day for years, this training will make the brain do whatever it needs to do for Starcraft.

There will of course be a difference between players in the end, but my gut feeling is, the percentage of impressive players would be comparable between genders. That gut feeling comes from... in discussing science stuff in work groups at university, I occasionally find someone that makes me think, "crap... what he/she just now said was genius... I need to make sure to not miss anything of his/her ideas in the future." I don't see a significant difference between men and women in finding someone to latch onto for inspiration at work. Looking at a persons character is most important, imho.

Imagine if the thread title would instead be "Discussing the lack of top black starcraft gamers". What would you write then? What would be your explanation?


What do blacks have to do with the topic at hand? That's a pretty inflammatory remark if you ask me.

Anyway, you do realize that human females do not have a Y chromosome right? That's pretty biological. Nothing I saw in any research shows that this changes things much in the higher cerebral functions, but the whole hormonal balance is different in males vs. females and this is bound to have pretty drastic consequences in the way the lower-brain functions develop and react to external and even internal stimuli. Research supports the fact that some behavioral differences are biological. To what extent these differences can be suppressed by education is still debated today, but I would think most of it would be pretty firm without some neural remodeling (especially things like adrenaline response to fear/pressure). Again this does not apply to everything, like language for example: even though men and women use language differently their ability to learn/use it does not differ as far as we know. These differences can also be more or less pronounced depending on the individual, hence why you see many more homosexual women in the army than heterosexual women: they simply have a different hormonal balance than heterosexual women and thus their brain develop differently.

Trying to overlook the obvious in your quest to be politically correct (that's how it looks, especially since you seem to want to equate sex - or "gender"? - with "race") seems to me like intellectual hypocrisy at worst and ideological blindness at best.
Jaedong
Ropid
Profile Joined March 2009
Germany3557 Posts
November 20 2010 18:51 GMT
#349
On November 21 2010 02:43 Bidouleroux wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 21 2010 00:33 Ropid wrote:
On November 20 2010 23:50 Bidouleroux wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

The Polgar sisters are a great example of why more women don't do well in competitive games. Of course one of the reason is that women don't have the same competitive "spirit" as men, but that simply means there are less potential women gamers, not that there can't be. In the case of the Polgar sisters, their father decided to develop a way to bring up genius, quite literally. His approach to teaching Chess was based on pattern recognition (recognizing "good" and "bad" positions on parts of the board of various sizes) instead of series of sequential moves and general strategies. Of course, you need to know opening moves and endgame sequences, but these are more rote memory and experience, areas in which women are not inferior to men. But in pattern recognition, women are actually better in general. So the Polgar sisters did great. The oldest though maybe lacked the competitive spirit of the youngest and as such she stopped competing after being the first female to achieve the title of grandmaster.

Now, one may look at this and think, if women can do great in Chess with the right education, why not in other games? Let's take Go for example. Go is also heavily dependent on pattern recognition, but is much more complex than Chess. Opening sequences cannot be memorized as easily and the end game is pure mathematical heuristics (i.e. lots of calculation). Maybe, if someone could devise for Go a teaching system like Lazlo Polgar did for Chess (not going to happen anytime soon by the way), some women could get really strong at Go ; but I doubt it considering the end game that is pure calculation, for women are generally weaker than men in this regard as much as they are better at pattern recognition.

So this takes us to Starcraft. What are the defining characteristics of RTS games that make them different than Chess and Go? First, like the name says they take place in real time. Second, you do not have perfect information. Third, you need to manage both a static base and a moving army (divide time between macro and micro if you like). Base management should be no problem for women and with TossGirl we see that if it's not Flash like at least it isn't a problem. Micro shouldn't be a problem either on it's own. Women are known to be great at detailed work. After all, they've had thousands of years of experience sewing us men clothes. But we will see later how juggling the two can be very bad for women gamers.

So all right, before taking on the real-time aspects, let's get this information conundrum out the way first. This is where I think women really get the evolutionary short end of the proverbial stick. Who hunts food? Men. Who contends with dangerous situations day-to-day? Men. Who doesn't know when or where his next kill will to be or even if he'll come back in one piece? Men. Men have lots of experience with unknown situations and pressure situations. In general they will secrete lots of adrenaline at the dimmest hint of danger. They have evolved to cope with unknowns. This is why men can orient themselves better than women without a map. With a map, the playing field is leveled (as long as you know how to use it properly, which is a pitfall many women encounter simply because they never had an opportunity to learn). It is no wonder either that men are better at advanced math (real math, not simple equation solving which has more to do with pattern recognition). You could say the difference here is that women like to match known quantities together, whereas men extrapolate better (or simply more readily) based on incomplete information, while also having the added advantage that they aren't as uncomfortable with unknown situations as women are in general. Hence men take more risks. How many successful female VCs or traders have you seen lately? It's not like women are not trying to make a quick buck too. But like Virgil said, "fortune favors the bold".

Next, RTS games are real-time, another area where women must give the evolutionary edge to men, albeit not as much as with coping with imperfect information. Many mistakenly believe that real-time means multitasking, but that is false. What it means, in an RTS game, is task-switching (in fact, I am not sure you could design a competitive RTS game designed around multitasking playable only with mouse and keyboard. Maybe some form of management game like The Sims, but not an RTS and neither an FPS for that matter. No wonder both recreate situations of war). So, in RTS games in general and in Starcraft in particular you have to switch between macro mode and micro mode and do it fast. Men are good at that. For example, here's the daily routine of the primitive man : stalk the prey, get caught, now switch to run-for-your-life mode pronto ; and don't forget to yell and warn others on your way out! Or, switch to kill mode if you have the opportunity: load the bow, don't lose the tail, watch where your clan mates are, check for possible obstacles, plan retreat route just in case, make dinner plans, shoot the arrow, miss, pursue while reloading, hop over a fallen tree and wham! right in the thing you were hunting. Good. Now take it back to camp with you 10 miles somewhere in that general direction while the sun is setting down. Don't forget wood for the fire and a flower for the missus on your way. Alright, now you can play Starcraft and win some games for once! Now, ask a women to play WoW and talk to you at the same time. She will be glad to gossip and recount her whole day while organizing a raid and crafting things and watching auctions, etc. She may even be able to do all that while playing Starcraft, but then don't be surprised when she loses.


I just can't believe that whatever biological factor there may be won't be washed away through practice. If you find someone who won't run away from a Kespa BW slave house and will diligently practice each day for years, this training will make the brain do whatever it needs to do for Starcraft.

There will of course be a difference between players in the end, but my gut feeling is, the percentage of impressive players would be comparable between genders. That gut feeling comes from... in discussing science stuff in work groups at university, I occasionally find someone that makes me think, "crap... what he/she just now said was genius... I need to make sure to not miss anything of his/her ideas in the future." I don't see a significant difference between men and women in finding someone to latch onto for inspiration at work. Looking at a persons character is most important, imho.

Imagine if the thread title would instead be "Discussing the lack of top black starcraft gamers". What would you write then? What would be your explanation?


What do blacks have to do with the topic at hand? That's a pretty inflammatory remark if you ask me.

Anyway, you do realize that human females do not have a Y chromosome right? That's pretty biological. Nothing I saw in any research shows that this changes things much in the higher cerebral functions, but the whole hormonal balance is different in males vs. females and this is bound to have pretty drastic consequences in the way the lower-brain functions develop and react to external and even internal stimuli. Research supports the fact that some behavioral differences are biological. To what extent these differences can be suppressed by education is still debated today, but I would think most of it would be pretty firm without some neural remodeling (especially things like adrenaline response to fear/pressure). Again this does not apply to everything, like language for example: even though men and women use language differently their ability to learn/use it does not differ as far as we know. These differences can also be more or less pronounced depending on the individual, hence why you see many more homosexual women in the army than heterosexual women: they simply have a different hormonal balance than heterosexual women and thus their brain develop differently.

Trying to overlook the obvious in your quest to be politically correct (that's how it looks, especially since you seem to want to equate sex - or "gender"? - with "race") seems to me like intellectual hypocrisy at worst and ideological blindness at best.


I tried thinking about if I'm only trying to be politically correct, and if I'm only being stupid and influenced by the media or what-have-you, and I seem to be able to convince myself, that this is not the case.

I'm a big fan of trying to mix people from as many different backgrounds as possible in the workplace (with the needed qualifications for the job of course). I find the work environment more interesting for me, and I have the feeling, the chance to find the best possible solution for a problem seems to be better, because the team comes up with a wider range of proposals. I'm afraid I'm missing out on some great revelations, if I approach people with prejudice and don't listen to what they are saying. I'm not trying to be a saint: the bastard part of me agrees because it smells profit.

Also, in my experience, if people don't believe that you respect them, they seem to be holding back with the best possible stuff they could bring to the table. And this is my opinion of what's happening. The best possible Starcraft player is probably not playing because of how society judges gaming. I believe there is a good enough chance that this player is female, and we will never know it.

+ Show Spoiler +
What you're saying about the Y chromosome: I don't feel confident in the biology stuff I remember from school, but does the Y chromosome even do anything? I only remember that females have an increased chance to not suffer from diseases stemming from some broken part in the X chromosome because they have a second different copy from their father. Also, from the last world championships with the doping tests of that South African runner, there were some pop-science articles in the papers about how there can be males with XX chromosomes and females with XY chromosome pairs, when there is something off with the hormonal balance.
"My goal is to replace my soul with coffee and become immortal."
ev8
Profile Joined October 2010
United States112 Posts
November 20 2010 18:53 GMT
#350
One word

Testosterone.
"where are my uni- what are you - how are you doing? what are you doing?"
Phant
Profile Joined August 2010
United States737 Posts
November 20 2010 18:56 GMT
#351
Of course men are more competitive, it's genetic (anyone who doesn't believe this is a fool).

In practically EVERY species (mammals at least). There are always males trying to be the dominant "alpha" male and females following whoever is in charge. Males are way more aggressive, females are way more passive, it's a fact of life that has evolved over millions of years. This has been true in humanity for THOUSANDS of years, it's just how it is. Granted now with more enlightened people there are tons of women who try to fight their natural tendencies and cross the lines (some with great success, the majority not so much).

That's just how it is, no sexism, just facts. Of course there are always exceptions to every rule, but for the majority this holds true. Not to mention that most girls do not like video games beyond farmville, the sims, and nintendogs, further skewing things.
FishFuzz99
Profile Joined February 2010
United States152 Posts
November 20 2010 19:11 GMT
#352
One thing that may deter women from gaming:
I don't know how many of you have played something like MW2 on Xbox Live, but if a female says anything into a mic, the amount of crap she will get back is unbelievable, which I would think would deter them from playing.
This does not mean they receive the same kind of treatment in a game like SC2, but in general, I think it has an impact.
Fa1nT
Profile Joined September 2010
United States3423 Posts
November 20 2010 19:15 GMT
#353
On November 21 2010 01:22 Snowfield wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 21 2010 01:20 Fa1nT wrote:
Why is this still open? Just on this last page alone is so many stupid arguments based on opinion...


I don't think several studies done on how men and girls are different and why they have different hobbies is an opinion.

Then what more is to discuss if you got this all figured out?
Bidouleroux
Profile Joined October 2009
Canada24 Posts
November 21 2010 04:43 GMT
#354
On November 21 2010 03:51 Ropid wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 21 2010 02:43 Bidouleroux wrote:
On November 21 2010 00:33 Ropid wrote:
On November 20 2010 23:50 Bidouleroux wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

The Polgar sisters are a great example of why more women don't do well in competitive games. Of course one of the reason is that women don't have the same competitive "spirit" as men, but that simply means there are less potential women gamers, not that there can't be. In the case of the Polgar sisters, their father decided to develop a way to bring up genius, quite literally. His approach to teaching Chess was based on pattern recognition (recognizing "good" and "bad" positions on parts of the board of various sizes) instead of series of sequential moves and general strategies. Of course, you need to know opening moves and endgame sequences, but these are more rote memory and experience, areas in which women are not inferior to men. But in pattern recognition, women are actually better in general. So the Polgar sisters did great. The oldest though maybe lacked the competitive spirit of the youngest and as such she stopped competing after being the first female to achieve the title of grandmaster.

Now, one may look at this and think, if women can do great in Chess with the right education, why not in other games? Let's take Go for example. Go is also heavily dependent on pattern recognition, but is much more complex than Chess. Opening sequences cannot be memorized as easily and the end game is pure mathematical heuristics (i.e. lots of calculation). Maybe, if someone could devise for Go a teaching system like Lazlo Polgar did for Chess (not going to happen anytime soon by the way), some women could get really strong at Go ; but I doubt it considering the end game that is pure calculation, for women are generally weaker than men in this regard as much as they are better at pattern recognition.

So this takes us to Starcraft. What are the defining characteristics of RTS games that make them different than Chess and Go? First, like the name says they take place in real time. Second, you do not have perfect information. Third, you need to manage both a static base and a moving army (divide time between macro and micro if you like). Base management should be no problem for women and with TossGirl we see that if it's not Flash like at least it isn't a problem. Micro shouldn't be a problem either on it's own. Women are known to be great at detailed work. After all, they've had thousands of years of experience sewing us men clothes. But we will see later how juggling the two can be very bad for women gamers.

So all right, before taking on the real-time aspects, let's get this information conundrum out the way first. This is where I think women really get the evolutionary short end of the proverbial stick. Who hunts food? Men. Who contends with dangerous situations day-to-day? Men. Who doesn't know when or where his next kill will to be or even if he'll come back in one piece? Men. Men have lots of experience with unknown situations and pressure situations. In general they will secrete lots of adrenaline at the dimmest hint of danger. They have evolved to cope with unknowns. This is why men can orient themselves better than women without a map. With a map, the playing field is leveled (as long as you know how to use it properly, which is a pitfall many women encounter simply because they never had an opportunity to learn). It is no wonder either that men are better at advanced math (real math, not simple equation solving which has more to do with pattern recognition). You could say the difference here is that women like to match known quantities together, whereas men extrapolate better (or simply more readily) based on incomplete information, while also having the added advantage that they aren't as uncomfortable with unknown situations as women are in general. Hence men take more risks. How many successful female VCs or traders have you seen lately? It's not like women are not trying to make a quick buck too. But like Virgil said, "fortune favors the bold".

Next, RTS games are real-time, another area where women must give the evolutionary edge to men, albeit not as much as with coping with imperfect information. Many mistakenly believe that real-time means multitasking, but that is false. What it means, in an RTS game, is task-switching (in fact, I am not sure you could design a competitive RTS game designed around multitasking playable only with mouse and keyboard. Maybe some form of management game like The Sims, but not an RTS and neither an FPS for that matter. No wonder both recreate situations of war). So, in RTS games in general and in Starcraft in particular you have to switch between macro mode and micro mode and do it fast. Men are good at that. For example, here's the daily routine of the primitive man : stalk the prey, get caught, now switch to run-for-your-life mode pronto ; and don't forget to yell and warn others on your way out! Or, switch to kill mode if you have the opportunity: load the bow, don't lose the tail, watch where your clan mates are, check for possible obstacles, plan retreat route just in case, make dinner plans, shoot the arrow, miss, pursue while reloading, hop over a fallen tree and wham! right in the thing you were hunting. Good. Now take it back to camp with you 10 miles somewhere in that general direction while the sun is setting down. Don't forget wood for the fire and a flower for the missus on your way. Alright, now you can play Starcraft and win some games for once! Now, ask a women to play WoW and talk to you at the same time. She will be glad to gossip and recount her whole day while organizing a raid and crafting things and watching auctions, etc. She may even be able to do all that while playing Starcraft, but then don't be surprised when she loses.


I just can't believe that whatever biological factor there may be won't be washed away through practice. If you find someone who won't run away from a Kespa BW slave house and will diligently practice each day for years, this training will make the brain do whatever it needs to do for Starcraft.

There will of course be a difference between players in the end, but my gut feeling is, the percentage of impressive players would be comparable between genders. That gut feeling comes from... in discussing science stuff in work groups at university, I occasionally find someone that makes me think, "crap... what he/she just now said was genius... I need to make sure to not miss anything of his/her ideas in the future." I don't see a significant difference between men and women in finding someone to latch onto for inspiration at work. Looking at a persons character is most important, imho.

Imagine if the thread title would instead be "Discussing the lack of top black starcraft gamers". What would you write then? What would be your explanation?


What do blacks have to do with the topic at hand? That's a pretty inflammatory remark if you ask me.

Anyway, you do realize that human females do not have a Y chromosome right? That's pretty biological. Nothing I saw in any research shows that this changes things much in the higher cerebral functions, but the whole hormonal balance is different in males vs. females and this is bound to have pretty drastic consequences in the way the lower-brain functions develop and react to external and even internal stimuli. Research supports the fact that some behavioral differences are biological. To what extent these differences can be suppressed by education is still debated today, but I would think most of it would be pretty firm without some neural remodeling (especially things like adrenaline response to fear/pressure). Again this does not apply to everything, like language for example: even though men and women use language differently their ability to learn/use it does not differ as far as we know. These differences can also be more or less pronounced depending on the individual, hence why you see many more homosexual women in the army than heterosexual women: they simply have a different hormonal balance than heterosexual women and thus their brain develop differently.

Trying to overlook the obvious in your quest to be politically correct (that's how it looks, especially since you seem to want to equate sex - or "gender"? - with "race") seems to me like intellectual hypocrisy at worst and ideological blindness at best.


I tried thinking about if I'm only trying to be politically correct, and if I'm only being stupid and influenced by the media or what-have-you, and I seem to be able to convince myself, that this is not the case.

I'm a big fan of trying to mix people from as many different backgrounds as possible in the workplace (with the needed qualifications for the job of course). I find the work environment more interesting for me, and I have the feeling, the chance to find the best possible solution for a problem seems to be better, because the team comes up with a wider range of proposals. I'm afraid I'm missing out on some great revelations, if I approach people with prejudice and don't listen to what they are saying. I'm not trying to be a saint: the bastard part of me agrees because it smells profit.

Also, in my experience, if people don't believe that you respect them, they seem to be holding back with the best possible stuff they could bring to the table. And this is my opinion of what's happening. The best possible Starcraft player is probably not playing because of how society judges gaming. I believe there is a good enough chance that this player is female, and we will never know it.

+ Show Spoiler +
What you're saying about the Y chromosome: I don't feel confident in the biology stuff I remember from school, but does the Y chromosome even do anything? I only remember that females have an increased chance to not suffer from diseases stemming from some broken part in the X chromosome because they have a second different copy from their father. Also, from the last world championships with the doping tests of that South African runner, there were some pop-science articles in the papers about how there can be males with XX chromosomes and females with XY chromosome pairs, when there is something off with the hormonal balance.


Regarding the Y chromosome, yes it does something, but it does small, very specific things (in the grand scheme of all things chromosomal). It replaces one X chromosome and supersedes many functions related to men anatomy. But it also doesn't code for some important things, hence why it is shorter and takes the shape of a Y instead of an X. For example, the defective gene for color blindness in an affected X chromosome cannot be compensated by a healthy Y chromosome because the Y chromosome does not contain the genetic code for color vision: this is why men are affected more often by color blindness that women. There are cases of females with XY chromosomes and hermaphrodites, etc. with XXY and XXX and such, but they are fairly rare and the arithmetic of the sexual chromosomes are not fully understood yet so we can only look at the macro-somatic effects of XY vs XX, etc. in relation to the individual genes they contain and which genes they activate or deactivate in specific cases while trying to build a statistical, more general model of interactions/interferences (although when a Y chromosome is involved it almost always results in a male). Also, XX males are females with one X chromosome having accidentally copied the SRY (Sex-determining Region Y, makes your testis grow) gene from a Y chromosome during meiosis. It is an accident, not something intended to endure and be passed on (these "men" are infertile). In XY females, the SRY gene is damaged.

Anyway, what we are interested in are general tendencies, not individual cases. Also, I am discussing the possibilities of the average prototypical female being as good at RTS games than the average prototypical male, all social opportunities being otherwise equal. You might say this is a far-fetched premise. Of course it is. What I am proposing is a thought experiment, not a real-world case study. Also, what I am saying is that thinking like you do, that it is simply society that do not give everyone an equal chance to do what they want because of peer pressure, education, etc. is quite puerile, idealistic and utopian. It is based much more on your own prejudiced education (i.e. skewed towards the "gender" equality ideology) than on science and hard facts. I am male and therefore cannot have babies. On the other hand, my body is flowing with testosterone, giving me the ability to naturally put on muscle much more easily than 98% of females. To think that such broad differences have no repercussion in the brain is, again, puerile, idealistic and utopian, since it ignores many years of psychological and neurological research. Like I said earlier, we can debate how these differences influence the relative abilities of the two sexes in different types of games. What we cannot debate is the fact that there are differences.

But of course, if you want to be puerile, idealistic and utopian - and stay that way - well, good for you I guess.
Jaedong
denzelz
Profile Blog Joined November 2009
United States604 Posts
November 21 2010 04:53 GMT
#355
Guys are d-bags when it comes to competitive games. Many people, including myself, are completely turned off by the online banter (shit-talking) that happens.

Saying that girls are just not good enough, that games are not "socially accepted" for females is completely ignoring how we, the guys, behave in game.

No fucking wonder why The Sims or Farmville are so popular with women. They are not zero-sum games. There's no chat feature, no "fuck you noob"s.
denzelz
Profile Blog Joined November 2009
United States604 Posts
November 21 2010 05:02 GMT
#356
On November 21 2010 03:56 phant wrote:
Of course men are more competitive, it's genetic (anyone who doesn't believe this is a fool).

In practically EVERY species (mammals at least). There are always males trying to be the dominant "alpha" male and females following whoever is in charge. Males are way more aggressive, females are way more passive, it's a fact of life that has evolved over millions of years. This has been true in humanity for THOUSANDS of years, it's just how it is. Granted now with more enlightened people there are tons of women who try to fight their natural tendencies and cross the lines (some with great success, the majority not so much).

That's just how it is, no sexism, just facts. Of course there are always exceptions to every rule, but for the majority this holds true. Not to mention that most girls do not like video games beyond farmville, the sims, and nintendogs, further skewing things.


This is absolutely ridiculous. The typical "alpha males" I see are those I see who date rape and roofie women at college parties.

Going along with your logic, if I was a guy and I wasn't competitive, does that mean I'm not a "real man". That's fucking stupid. Stop using evolution as a way to justify modern social behavior. If you've taken any real discussion courses, you would know that these arguments are just stupid. We are not cavemen.

There is no gender binary. Men are not all competitive. Women don't just follow whoever is in charge because it's in their biological. Get a grip.
Eminent Rising
Profile Joined October 2010
United States174 Posts
November 21 2010 05:17 GMT
#357
On November 21 2010 14:02 denzelz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 21 2010 03:56 phant wrote:
Of course men are more competitive, it's genetic (anyone who doesn't believe this is a fool).

In practically EVERY species (mammals at least). There are always males trying to be the dominant "alpha" male and females following whoever is in charge. Males are way more aggressive, females are way more passive, it's a fact of life that has evolved over millions of years. This has been true in humanity for THOUSANDS of years, it's just how it is. Granted now with more enlightened people there are tons of women who try to fight their natural tendencies and cross the lines (some with great success, the majority not so much).

That's just how it is, no sexism, just facts. Of course there are always exceptions to every rule, but for the majority this holds true. Not to mention that most girls do not like video games beyond farmville, the sims, and nintendogs, further skewing things.


This is absolutely ridiculous. The typical "alpha males" I see are those I see who date rape and roofie women at college parties.

Going along with your logic, if I was a guy and I wasn't competitive, does that mean I'm not a "real man". That's fucking stupid. Stop using evolution as a way to justify modern social behavior. If you've taken any real discussion courses, you would know that these arguments are just stupid. We are not cavemen.

There is no gender binary. Men are not all competitive. Women don't just follow whoever is in charge because it's in their biological. Get a grip.

perfectly said. i honestly hate how people try and use biology and social darwinism to try and shoehorn humans and human behavior into black or white. life is full of greys there is very little universal truths that apply cross culturally across all human societies. some people need to open their eyes and see that life is pretty confusing and there is no real answer other then that people are truly capable of doing ANYTHING that they put their mind to regardless of sex, gender, and race.

and btw sexuality and human behaviors within society are social constructs meaning that they are created by people for people. there is no natural law or god that dictates this to us. we have created our own laws, acceptable behaviors, sexuality, etc.
Momento Mori
Tonyoh
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
France218 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-21 05:32:13
November 21 2010 05:25 GMT
#358
Best way to explain that :

Girls DONT play RTS because their female friends DONT play them.
Even if there is a girl who plays it because she has male friend that play SC2, she won't play it AS MUCH, and takes it AS SERIOUS, because it's a GAME.

Jenny - "Hey Sarah ! I've managed to get first of my division playing non stop starcraft 2 for 20 weeks ! During that time, I did no cleaning, and not a lot of cooking, eating a lot of pizza, or always in the same plate I don't wash"
Sarah - "are you retarded Jenny?"

As some of you said : few girl gamers, extremely rare hardcore gamers, and insanely rare skilled hardcore gamers.

Now, there are some really skilled guys, like blur, who are not that famous, and who are still less skilled than the GSL players. Even if a girl could reach that level, she would still not appear in the GSL or win a Major tournament. she will be like the top 0,001% best player, but you have to be the 0,000001% best player to be really famous at starcraft.

So it would take a miracle to have a girl that (by order) :
1) Plays RTS
2) Bought Starcraft 1 or frozen throne
3) Played hardcore on it, wanting to improve
4) bought starcraft 2
5) played hardcore on it, wanting to improve
6) succeed becoming very skilled
7) succeed becoming a "class A" player
8) succeed becoming a "class S" player.

% by order to illustrate (of course false, but supposed stats) :
1) 0,1% ?
2) half of them : 0,05%
3) 1% of them : 0,0005%
4) 80% of them : 0,0004%
5) 50% of them : 0,0002%
6) 0,1% of them : 0,0000002%
7) 1% of them : 0,0000002% -> 2 for 100 billions girls (so 1 for 100 billions people, as there is one guy for 1 girl)
8) 1% of them : 1 for 1000 billions human born.

For male gamers it would be more like :
1) 25%
2) 80% of them : 20%
3) 50% of them : 10%
4) 80% of them : 8%
5) 80% of them : 6,4%
6) 0,16% of them : 1%
7) 1% of them : 0,01%
8) 1% of them : 0,001%

of course it's not that, we would have much more class A players, but the idea is here ^^

Now you have the answer. "Not enough pool".
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Liquid-Jinro/174837579208018?ref=ts
eggs
Profile Joined August 2010
1011 Posts
November 21 2010 05:28 GMT
#359
On November 21 2010 14:25 Tonyoh wrote:
Best way to explain that :

Girls DONT play RTS because their female friends DONT play them.
Even if there is a girl who plays it because she has male friend that play SC2, she won't play it AS MUCH, and takes it AS SERIOUS, because it's a GAME.

Now you have the answer. Not enough pool.


umm, my female relatives living in korea and their friends were all better than me at SC:BW.
your argument doesn't explain why even the korean females who got progamer contracts couldn't compete with the male progamers.
Tonyoh
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
France218 Posts
November 21 2010 05:34 GMT
#360
On November 21 2010 14:28 eggs wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 21 2010 14:25 Tonyoh wrote:
Best way to explain that :

Girls DONT play RTS because their female friends DONT play them.
Even if there is a girl who plays it because she has male friend that play SC2, she won't play it AS MUCH, and takes it AS SERIOUS, because it's a GAME.

Now you have the answer. Not enough pool.


umm, my female relatives living in korea and their friends were all better than me at SC:BW.
your argument doesn't explain why even the korean females who got progamer contracts couldn't compete with the male progamers.

Much more korean girls who play starcraft (in % of Korea) that americanwomen (in% of America)
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Liquid-Jinro/174837579208018?ref=ts
Prev 1 16 17 18 19 20 32 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 1h 46m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft: Brood War
Sea 5077
Zeus 1288
Soma 478
Larva 329
sorry 162
TY 42
Noble 9
PianO 0
League of Legends
JimRising 540
Counter-Strike
summit1g8533
Stewie2K1245
Super Smash Bros
Westballz20
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor174
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick932
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 10 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Upcoming Events
SOOP
1h 46m
SHIN vs ByuN
HomeStory Cup
3h 46m
sOs vs uThermal
Lambo vs ShoWTimE
Zoun vs HeRoMaRinE
Ryung vs Babymarine
BSL: ProLeague
10h 46m
Replay Cast
1d 16h
Replay Cast
2 days
WardiTV European League
2 days
The PondCast
3 days
RSL Revival
4 days
WardiTV European League
4 days
RSL Revival
5 days
[ Show More ]
Korean StarCraft League
5 days
CranKy Ducklings
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Rose Open S1
2025 GSL S2
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
HSC XXVII
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.