|
The Armchair Athleticism critical series is an opinion-base article series regarding the issues and sociocultural deficiencies of the E-Sports and StarCraft scene. All articles are perceptive-base and revolving around my own experiences and understanding of the subculture. + Show Spoiler [summary introduction] +The Solo Trail – Unbeaten - Posted on October 20th, 2012Short version of credentials: - Manager of 5 progaming teams (50+ professional players)
- Writer for 9 E-sports websites (5 team sites + 4 organizations: 150+ docs/articles)
- Organizer or Contributor of 11 community events (74,000 viewers/attendants)
- Some video-editing for one or two organizations, nothing big, just twitch.tv highlight-editing, presentational writing, etc.
Why are you starting your own space? I was listening to the suggestions of several friends and I finally started this space after I hit a dead-end in my endeavours in E-Sports. I’m at a point where I am not really affiliated with anyone and now’s a better time than ever to do some opinion topics. Doing my own content meant I would be alone and would work around my own initiative, drive and interest. However, it also meant that I may do something that requires more work than I thought and I would be on my own. It meant that the community reception can be more direct and harsh towards me personally and my views as I would not be backed by some credible organization as when I was writer for some. In the end, this series that took me about a month of writing, editing, verification and re-writing will really be everything I’ve learned, observed and felt throughout my time. I started out with three pieces and ended up going to ten. All of them delve into inspecting the five perspectives of the scene: teams, tournaments, players, spectators and contributors. Ultimately, it aims to really take a strong look into the many issues that inhibit the StarCraft community and E-Sports culture.
The Other Gaming Gender - Posted on November 18th, 2012
As previously stated, with the amount of professional gamers out there streaming, coaching and [under]achieving, how do females fit into the whole scene? Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. The game doesn’t distinguish males from females, yet some organizations like to sell females just playing video-games more so than exposing them as a different gender with the same amount of determination and deserved respect. Within this piece, we will examine weights of a narrowly-exposed group of players and how the wrong community view(s) can ultimately tear down an aspect of E-Sports that could need the most growth.
Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices:
- “Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements”
- “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
(It’s a vicious circle: Female gets on a team without any achievements, female remains on the team but never sent to any events or actively used in team leagues. Never exposed, she never achieves anything or is a part of any team achievements).
promote themselves through their gender. While several solutions have been tried to remedy the absence of achievements like female-only tournaments, they have not been aggressively put into use and advertised appropriately. Counter-Strike is the only exception to this and female teams have gained recognition for their achievements when playing in women’s leagues. The bottom line is, however, that community misperception is the detriment of female progaming divisions across the competitions. It is because we compare men to female that we hinder the growth of one that is quite dissimilar to the other.
Community mis-perceptions such as comparing males to females quantify two differencing genders. When we compare, we look at how much each gender has succeeded, with more progaming males, a higher rate of success whereas females are on the other end of the spectrum (less females, lower rate of success). Problem is, we criticize females for their lack achievements while ignoring the amount of failures (losses) males have accrued more of. When we disapprove of females, it is often due to our knowledge of male capabilities and chances to succeed with the omission of the overall numbers. Women-only tournaments are not about the separation from men but rather the desire to create its own female heroes.
Females should be praised for their own separate achievements; different standards and expectations for different types of people. Aren’t we then setting a lower standard for females over males? No, that is a comparison; we are actually just setting a system or scale for female E-sports. Females should have female tournaments and the reason for these events is that you want to expose all sectors of an E-Sport. As one user said on the topic of female-only tournaments:
“I just want to say chess has a female-only World championship. Women are allowed to play in normal tournaments–in fact, Polgar, the strongest female player perhaps ever, never competed in the female World championships–but they also have one that is exclusive to them.
It’s not emphasizing a disparity so much as a difference. Tournaments only for a country isn’t racist; tournaments only for women aren’t sexist. In any area where one group dominates in both numbers and skill, it’s okay to have separate systems to encourage other groups to join.
Especially since, and let’s be completely honest, e-sports/dota is pretty much male-dominated, we should do everything to encourage new players.” [[Reddit user Christoper on /r/Dota2]
This falls into place with my: “regional tournaments to promote regional champions” from my last article (Passionate Progamers). Gender/Sex has parallels with geographic location, except its biological. The argument of having regional tournaments for American and European players is the same for males and females; champions within their socio-cultural reach. While it may seem like we want to increase the number of champions in a given year, we are, in fact, asking for the term to be widened in diversity. Right now, females in StarCraft II are used for more marketing purposes and pushed less to achieve, especially when the opportunity to succeed is about once a year.
Right now, there are a wide variety of females who obtain little to no credit for their recent accomplishments: such as the IESF female winners. We need to praise those who achieve and value others who try. In the case of females, it is a lot easier to distinguish those who participate in tournaments and others who play the game for more entertainment purposes. While entertainers are found throughout the scene, a heavy favoritism should be put towards those who seek to extend the potential ability of the female gender rather than take advantage of it. In CounterStrike, female leagues and teams are still in growth (ESWC and ESL), however, they are much more ahead of the RTS scene who has had only two recent major events for females (Zowie Divina and IESF).
15-year South African, Gabriella Issacs takes second place at IESF Female. — Photo courtesy from ThisIsGame
Nonetheless, in the end, it comes down to one’s own opinion about the importance of female players. I don’t think there is a real objective answer that would soothe all mind and souls about this predicament. Females sit uncomfortably on a double-edged sword where they cannot be proud of their gender without being indiscriminately bashed nor can they earn the recognition of being who they are. Should gender matter in a fair and equal world? Nope. Should women be accepted as different and a minority? Yes, acceptance is the key here and with openness comes the push to improve.
|
This informed series of written pieces could not have been achieved without the help and opinions of my peers and friends. Below are the people I wish to thank for their insight, accuracy/consistency check or expert opinion on the numerous topics: thank you
- Brad Carney (Lefty)
- Chris Chan (Founder of ChanManV's Production)
- Eric Grady (Cyber-Sports Network's Director of Events - Usurp)
- Flo Yao (Quantic Gaming’s Progamer - Flo)
- Jacqueline Geller (eSports Network Coordinator of Blizzard)
- John Clark (Cyber-Sports Network Executive Director of Operations)
- Josh Dentrinos (FXOpen’s Director - Boss)
- Marc McEntegart (Team Liquid Writer - SirJolt)
- Matt Weber (Team Liquid Administrator - Heyoka)
- Payam Toghyan (ROOT Gaming Progamer - TT1)
- Shawn Simon (Team Liquid Progamer - Sheth)
- Steven Bonnell II (Progamer/Entertainer - Destiny)
- Thomas Shifrer (ESFI World Senior Journalist)
If you'd like more information about the series (more pieces about different aspects of the scene will be released periodically), to contact me privately or to generously give me some siteviews on my website, you can follow the following link:
You can also follow me on Twitter where I tweet public news and information about the scene including roster changes, controversy and/or overall E-Sports news: @TorteDeLini
Thank you very much and I appreciate all feedback or corrections.
|
Good article Torte. I definately agree we need to see more investment and development in the women's gaming scene. I think the community also needs to address the pervasive misogyny in the male fanbase by setting a standard of zero tolerance for sexism and harassment.
|
|
|
Looking forward to going through all of this. I don't see Scarlett listed! Would be really interesting to hear her take on it (not to diminish the input of the others involved).
|
The only, only problem I have with the discussion is the idea that female-only tournaments aren't sexist, while male only tournaments would be.
This is mostly a moot point, at least until a female wins a tournament populated with both sexes.
I don't like the way society is going about this kind of thing in general. Yes, women have it hard in a lot of ways, and I'm not trying to slight that. But men have it hard in a lot of other ways, and this isn't really brought to light ever. As a man who likes to think he's respectful and neutral regarding sex as possible, the rights that I don't have regarding my children, or a failed marriage, or any number of other issues caused by men in the past is pretty frustrating as it is. We have a huge issue of equality, where women have different rights from men everywhere and that's the bigger issue. Allowing tournaments limited to only one sex, be it male or female, while a great idea in theory, can only be a stepping stone in my opinion.
Great write-up once again, torte, and thanks for the discussion point!
|
Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. I don't agree with that sentence. We don't see male Diamond(?) players getting into a top Korean team or males joining pro teams as a player while having barely touched Sc2 the last months... It's much easier to get noticed (and get opportunities) as a girl in a male dominated scene and I openly admit that I sometimes prefer the stream of a random female player with a webcam over a Progamer.
Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement).
|
On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: The only, only problem I have with the discussion is the idea that female-only tournaments aren't sexist, while male only tournaments would be.
That's like saying affirmative action is racist.
On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: I don't like the way society is going about this kind of thing in general. Yes, women have it hard in a lot of ways, and I'm not trying to slight that. But men have it hard in a lot of other ways, and this isn't really brought to light ever. As a man who likes to think he's respectful and neutral regarding sex as possible, the rights that I don't have regarding my children, or a failed marriage, or any number of other issues caused by men in the past is pretty frustrating as it is. We have a huge issue of equality, where women have different rights from men everywhere and that's the bigger issue. Allowing tournaments limited to only one sex, be it male or female, while a great idea in theory, can only be a stepping stone in my opinion.
This is ridiculous, one problem society does not have is males being discriminated against. Just look at this community, where maybe some female players get preferential treatment in some ways, but mostly they have to put up with incredible amounts of hostility from the community for their gender. They can't ever achieve anything without constant discussion about it, Scarlett for instance still has to put up with a multitude of trolls on reddit making disgusting comments every time she's mentioned - although her case is slightly different of course.
On November 20 2012 04:22 Uncreative_Troll wrote:Show nested quote +Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. I don't agree with that sentence. We don't see male Diamond(?) players getting into a top Korean team or males joining pro teams as a player while having barely touched Sc2 the last months... It's much easier to get noticed (and get opportunities) as a girl in a male dominated scene and I openly admit that I sometimes prefer the stream of a random female player with a webcam over a Progamer. Show nested quote +Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement). Djokovic and Sharapova are both big tennis stars, yet Sharapova would lose without winning any games if they faced off. Stephano is the hero of the foreigner community, yet there are many Korean players that would be highly favored against him, even though he makes more money and has more fame. The WCS celebrated local tournament winners, they received a prize, were spotlighted, interviewed etc. Yet a lot of these players won't go far in a 'legit' tournament.
At one point or another you have to realize that when you have divisions in the scene, with separate audiences etc. that then each scene can have its own stars. I honestly think that the best thing for female gaming would be to have more female leagues and more females playing the game.
|
On November 20 2012 04:34 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: The only, only problem I have with the discussion is the idea that female-only tournaments aren't sexist, while male only tournaments would be.
That's like saying affirmative action is racist.
And as an irish american who's family never owned slaves and had to deal with quite a lot of crap themselves, I would say that it is, in fact, racist.
EDIT: this isn't to say it's not a worthwhile endeavor, it is, however, favoring races over other races, which is racist.
|
I'm sitting in Sociology 101 all over again.
|
Well I am sure gaming devs would share a lot of what of what you have said, they have been trying desperately for so long to get females more interested in video gaming, obviously only to increase their market and sales.
From a gamer point of view and an old school one at that I do not really care if more females are playing or not. No prejudice but I am indifferent to the subject and I am sure most other gamers feel somewhat the same way.
Maybe there could be a little more focus on female pro gaming, as in separate leagues and a little more effort to encourage females into the scene, would not hurt I suppose but should not feel too forced neither.
|
|
I don't know why so many angry nerds get so heated up over the idea of a woman's league. To me it's just like New Zealander's having a NZ league or Fijians having a Fijian league- it;s not about excluding men or being sexist it's about giving a certain scene a chance to grow and develop. I would like to watch something like that if it had good production values.
|
Grumbels Netherlands. November 20 2012 04:34. Posts 2502 ... Show nested quote + Uncreative_Troll November 20 2012 04:22. Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. I don't agree with that sentence. We don't see male Diamond(?) players getting into a top Korean team or males joining pro teams as a player while having barely touched Sc2 the last months... It's much easier to get noticed (and get opportunities) as a girl in a male dominated scene and I openly admit that I sometimes prefer the stream of a random female player with a webcam over a Progamer. Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement). Djokovic and Sharapova are both big tennis stars, yet Sharapova would lose without winning any games if they faced off. Stephano is the hero of the foreigner community, yet there are many Korean players that would be highly favored against him, even though he makes more money and has more fame. The WCS celebrated local tournament winners, they received a prize, were spotlighted, interviewed etc. Yet a lot of these players won't go far in a 'legit' tournament. At one point or another you have to realize that when you have divisions in the scene, with separate audiences etc. that then each scene can have its own stars. I honestly think that the best thing for female gaming would be to have more female leagues and more females playing the game.
Why do you quote me when you don't respond to anything I said at all? You only write about something which I neither argumented for or against...
|
The stereotype is just caused by the lack of an good venues for exposure. If the gaming scene was mature enough like every other sport in the world they would realize that women and men competed on different terms due to their different skill sets and have done so legitimately for the last centuries. It's just as stupid to penalize a woman for not confirming to male stereotypes and standards as it is to force a male Olympic gymnast to perform female designated stunts and moves. Many people even prefer watching female only competition over male, especially in some Asian countries in regards to say volleyball / table tennis, even though that doesn't undermine the male portion of the sport - as it should be. And indeed, mixed sets and categories exist where males pair up with females for specific sports categories and they are graded on a separate metric, why isn't this taken for granted when it comes to gaming?
The common misunderstanding is that since gaming seems to be devoid of aspects which are usually used to separate male / female metrics such as physical tenacity, endurance, etc, that it would be fair to grade them on the same metric. Forgetting of course that in any professional sport the minutest of universalized differences add up drastically, especially when there is social stigma attached to it. The top tier athletes are often competing for the 0.01% top percentile where such differences add up, even though the results may seem to encapsulate a wide range. I would refer to when the baseball / basketball leagues in America did not admit blacks to play until the 20th century based purely on social stigma which perpetuated the fact that black people could not gain access to professional equipment or training opportunities and that it wasn't seen as legitimate competition, yet now it's completely 180'd itself.
|
On November 20 2012 05:05 Uncreative_Troll wrote:Show nested quote +Grumbels Netherlands. November 20 2012 04:34. Posts 2502 ... Uncreative_Troll November 20 2012 04:22. Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. I don't agree with that sentence. We don't see male Diamond(?) players getting into a top Korean team or males joining pro teams as a player while having barely touched Sc2 the last months... It's much easier to get noticed (and get opportunities) as a girl in a male dominated scene and I openly admit that I sometimes prefer the stream of a random female player with a webcam over a Progamer. Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement). Djokovic and Sharapova are both big tennis stars, yet Sharapova would lose without winning any games if they faced off. Stephano is the hero of the foreigner community, yet there are many Korean players that would be highly favored against him, even though he makes more money and has more fame. The WCS celebrated local tournament winners, they received a prize, were spotlighted, interviewed etc. Yet a lot of these players won't go far in a 'legit' tournament. At one point or another you have to realize that when you have divisions in the scene, with separate audiences etc. that then each scene can have its own stars. I honestly think that the best thing for female gaming would be to have more female leagues and more females playing the game. Why do you quote me when you don't respond to anything I said at all? You only write about something which I neither argumented for or against... Then why respond to my post which is then presumably not directed to you?
|
Then why respond to my post which is then presumably not directed to you?
Cause you added my quite long quote without addressing it in any way? I am curious why you did that. To me it looks like you either assumend that I have a certain oppinion and you thought that you addressed it or you forgot to answer.
|
On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice
|
I'd say, that female leagues are okay'ish, as long as there's no restriction or rule for the women to compete in just those, as it is in sports, where the sexes are divided. Being a woman in SC2 community can be a double-edged sword, often hurting the women in question, rather than accepting them as part of the community. If people didn't fuss each time a woman appeared on the scene, it'd be much easier. and that goes for both guys and women alike; both parties are qually guilty of that, as frankly, some women do love the extra attention and guys are sometimes very happy to give it to them.
Wish the community would be mature enough to have awesome moments competing in SC2 altogether, where the sex someone was born as wouldn't necessarily be something serving as a barrier between all of us.
|
On November 20 2012 05:20 dddoushio wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice
Lack of venues to expose themselves due to prejudice, it's self perpetuating. If I don't host any tournaments for basketball in Asian countries, then it becomes extremely difficult for Asians to show case their skill sets or develop as professionals. Same story in video games. Conversely if there aren't any table tennis or badminton leagues in the west it's also difficult to develop as a professional in that field there. Even though both demographics might do perfectly well competitively if there wasn't societal prejudice of one over the other. If there aren't enough female competitions, or that people don't pay enough attention / give credibility to them due to prejudice, then female gamers can't achieve anything.
|
On November 20 2012 05:23 Caihead wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 05:20 dddoushio wrote:On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice Lack of venues to expose themselves due to prejudice, it's self perpetuating. If I don't host any tournaments for basketball in Asian countries, then it becomes extremely difficult for Asians to show case their skill sets or develop as professionals. Same story in video games. Conversely if there aren't any table tennis or badminton leagues in the west it's also difficult to develop as a professional in that field there. Even though both demographics might do perfectly well competitively if there wasn't societal prejudice of one over the other. If there aren't enough female competitions, or that people don't pay enough attention / give credibility to them due to prejudice, then female gamers can't achieve anything.
Still, having diamond players hired by your team just because they're female won't help the scene grow at all
|
On November 20 2012 05:29 dddoushio wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 05:23 Caihead wrote:On November 20 2012 05:20 dddoushio wrote:On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice Lack of venues to expose themselves due to prejudice, it's self perpetuating. If I don't host any tournaments for basketball in Asian countries, then it becomes extremely difficult for Asians to show case their skill sets or develop as professionals. Same story in video games. Conversely if there aren't any table tennis or badminton leagues in the west it's also difficult to develop as a professional in that field there. Even though both demographics might do perfectly well competitively if there wasn't societal prejudice of one over the other. If there aren't enough female competitions, or that people don't pay enough attention / give credibility to them due to prejudice, then female gamers can't achieve anything. Still, having diamond players hired by your team just because they're female won't help the scene grow at all
Black people before being hired / getting exposure for basketball / baseball could only offer up very petty achievements or nothing at all too, to actually grow a demographic in sports you need serious commitment and often risky self sacrificing moves like some particular coaches / team managers in the 20th century did for black people in those sports. It's also risky because it's unclear -or people don't pay attention to it at all- if female gamers have a consistent marketing demographic that isn't exploitative.
|
On November 20 2012 04:51 tomatriedes wrote: I don't know why so many angry nerds get so heated up over the idea of a woman's league. To me it's just like New Zealander's having a NZ league or Fijians having a Fijian league- it;s not about excluding men or being sexist it's about giving a certain scene a chance to grow and develop. I would like to watch something like that if it had good production values.
I think I was the first person to really speak up against an idea in the OP, so I'd like to clarify.
I don't mind that there are all-women leagues or tournaments or whatever. In the case of eSports I would agree that these are worth-while undertakings. I'd love to see better-produced Zowie Divina cups, and more of them highlighting the great female players in the scene. I'd love to see more leagues keep their continental qualifiers regulated to those who reside in that continent. I'd love to see more CSL, and semi-pro leagues with MLG's backing so they could really give us a great show.
I do, however, mind the double-standards, and the idea that these aren't racist or sexist ideas. The words have such an evil connotation to them because of what they've meant in the past, but they don't need to. To exclude anyone for any reason is discrimination, and while it may be discrimination for a good cause, it's simply that.
I like it when females beat males, I think it proves a lot and I always hope that the next female break-out star sticks with the scene and gets more females into the sport. I love watching Scarlett play, I think Flo has a great chance to do well if she keeps it up, I'm disappointed that I don't see Aphrodite play in more high-end tournaments.
|
On November 20 2012 05:37 Noobity wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 04:51 tomatriedes wrote: I don't know why so many angry nerds get so heated up over the idea of a woman's league. To me it's just like New Zealander's having a NZ league or Fijians having a Fijian league- it;s not about excluding men or being sexist it's about giving a certain scene a chance to grow and develop. I would like to watch something like that if it had good production values. I like it when females beat males, I think it proves a lot and I always hope that the next female break-out star sticks with the scene and gets more females into the sport. I love watching Scarlett play, I think Flo has a great chance to do well if she keeps it up, I'm disappointed that I don't see Aphrodite play in more high-end tournaments.
But on what terms? On a previously established rule set that's made for males? Are you taking this for granted? It might not be immediately obvious to see a noticeable difference in a game of SC2 if you need to craft separate metrics for measuring achievement across genders. But it is obvious given every other field of competition that you do need separate metrics for competition unless you can render it fair enough to a degree between the demographics. I'm not arguing for or against having different metrics in SC2 in particular because there isn't any research to support either argument, hell maybe women have the potential to be better at SC2 because of their specific skill sets like multitasking or mental arithmetic etc.
If the sport was fair then it shouldn't be the fact that a woman beats a male that proves alot, it should be the fact that player X who is an underdog beats player Y regardless of gender.
|
|
On November 20 2012 05:23 Caihead wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 05:20 dddoushio wrote:On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice Lack of venues to expose themselves due to prejudice, it's self perpetuating. If I don't host any tournaments for basketball in Asian countries, then it becomes extremely difficult for Asians to show case their skill sets or develop as professionals. Same story in video games. Conversely if there aren't any table tennis or badminton leagues in the west it's also difficult to develop as a professional in that field there. Even though both demographics might do perfectly well competitively if there wasn't societal prejudice of one over the other. If there aren't enough female competitions, or that people don't pay enough attention / give credibility to them due to prejudice, then female gamers can't achieve anything.
I don't understand this. Males and females don't live in different countrys. There is nothing stopping a woman from entering a tournament. Frankly I don't understand what specific disadvantages females have in the esports scene.
|
Caihead Canada. November 20 2012 05:23. Posts 3599 Lack of venues to expose themselves due to prejudice, it's self perpetuating. ... [don't] give credibility to them due to prejudice ...
About which prejudices do you talk about?
|
On November 20 2012 06:06 Uncreative_Troll wrote:Show nested quote +Caihead Canada. November 20 2012 05:23. Posts 3599 Lack of venues to expose themselves due to prejudice, it's self perpetuating. ... [don't] give credibility to them due to prejudice ...
About which prejudices do you talk about?
Did you read the article?
|
Women are disadvantaged due to continual harassment from males in the community as well as socially constructed gender expectations which often prevent them from having equal exposure to gaming, and which places unfair burdens on them.
|
On November 20 2012 06:02 Shorty90 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 05:23 Caihead wrote:On November 20 2012 05:20 dddoushio wrote:On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice Lack of venues to expose themselves due to prejudice, it's self perpetuating. If I don't host any tournaments for basketball in Asian countries, then it becomes extremely difficult for Asians to show case their skill sets or develop as professionals. Same story in video games. Conversely if there aren't any table tennis or badminton leagues in the west it's also difficult to develop as a professional in that field there. Even though both demographics might do perfectly well competitively if there wasn't societal prejudice of one over the other. If there aren't enough female competitions, or that people don't pay enough attention / give credibility to them due to prejudice, then female gamers can't achieve anything. I don't understand this. Males and females don't live in different countrys. There is nothing stopping a woman from entering a tournament. Frankly I don't understand what specific disadvantages females have in the esports scene.
Sigh. If there isn't any support for you to enter a tournament, if it isn't seen as a legitimate thing for a female to pursuit when compared to a male, if there isn't societal support for a female gamer in the same way as a male, then no it isn't fair. Being a professional anything with out financial and societal support is extremely difficult. If no one takes your achievements seriously (I can't even name female gamers off the top of my head myself because their leagues recieve next to no exposure) then you can't enter professional teams and gain the training environment you need. Or you could read the article.
In Asia in particular, there is already prejudice in some respects towards gamers in general, but also that competitive gaming is seen as a male hobby dominated by male figure heads not only in the competitive scene but also in the professional scene, be it in games development, journalism, financing, media exposure, what ever category. Try finding an Asian parent who would support their female children going into gaming.
|
There are so many reasons why female only leagues are a bad idea.
There are no reasons why females cannot be as good at Starcraft as men. They should not have it easy or have more opportunities. Whats the difference between say a master league male gamer and a master league female gamer. Nothing except gender. Incontrol gets lots of shit from trolls about being a big guy, do we therefore make tournaments for Starcraft players with a high body mass because they could potentially get less opportunities ?
Female players have as much chance / potential as men. Female only tournaments are sexist straight up. Im sure if a female gamer put the time, dedication and determination into the game that the top male stars do, they would be just as successful.
Oh wait they are female right ? Lets panda to them instead.
As a man, I respect talent, regardless of gender.
|
On November 20 2012 06:15 Ssoulle wrote: Lets panda to them instead.
Let's all panda instead of thinking then I guess. I like Pandas.
|
My only objection with the article is that you say that the IeSF female "winners" deserve more attention. Only two girls showed up, they didn't really "win" anything. If you read the interviews, it wasn't even a close match, either. Focusing on Iron Lady (which, iirc, was Scarlett/Aphrodite for 1st/2nd) might have made a better point, since it got less attention and was a better event (though online).
|
On November 20 2012 06:13 Fission wrote: Women are disadvantaged due to continual harassment from males on the community as well as socially constructed gender expectations which often prevent them from having equal exposure to gaming, and which places unfair burdens on them. Agreeing with this. A lot of women are sadly too bound by the societal gender constructs and will not engage in activities, which could harm them in the eyes of their friends, family, significant others. That's how a lot of them were raised and subconsciously, often without realizing it, they will simply not walk the path, which is socially not seen as "standard" or worse in some countries, as fun for lazy, dirty, stupid people.
Also, there's a skill gap between men and women, of course, for exactly this reason, women being hesitant in investing a lot of their lives into their passions, if they don't happen to be mainstream for their gender. It's getting better tho, women start to play, talents start to rise - just compare it to a year back, how many Master lvl women were there? You could count them probably on fingers of your one hand. There are more women reaching that level, and before you oppose me, that Master level is still not a pro level, yes, I agree - but the gaps are getting smaller each passing year. Give it another year and it won't be that uncommon to see strong women players emerging out of nowhere. There is Flo, who works really hard, Scarlett, who came completelly out of nowhere. So, I have no doubt the situation will get better, even without people engaging in it directly, it'll just take time, as guys have been playing games & RTS for much longer than the general woman populace. So, that gap has to be apparent somewhere.
|
The game doesn't discriminate. So just keep playing and if you're good, you'll win.
|
I don't see why people say that women don't get a chance. The only time that women don't get a fair chance do to exposure is when a tournament is purely invitational. But when a tournament is invitational, it also excludes other male players who do not have much exposure also. Women are given a fair chance to qualify to most big tournaments and even smaller ones. The only reason why there are not many females in the scene is because it is not socially normal for women to play video games so many don't for that reason.
|
On November 20 2012 06:14 Caihead wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 06:02 Shorty90 wrote:On November 20 2012 05:23 Caihead wrote:On November 20 2012 05:20 dddoushio wrote:On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice Lack of venues to expose themselves due to prejudice, it's self perpetuating. If I don't host any tournaments for basketball in Asian countries, then it becomes extremely difficult for Asians to show case their skill sets or develop as professionals. Same story in video games. Conversely if there aren't any table tennis or badminton leagues in the west it's also difficult to develop as a professional in that field there. Even though both demographics might do perfectly well competitively if there wasn't societal prejudice of one over the other. If there aren't enough female competitions, or that people don't pay enough attention / give credibility to them due to prejudice, then female gamers can't achieve anything. I don't understand this. Males and females don't live in different countrys. There is nothing stopping a woman from entering a tournament. Frankly I don't understand what specific disadvantages females have in the esports scene. Sigh. If there isn't any support for you to enter a tournament, if it isn't seen as a legitimate thing for a female to pursuit when compared to a male, if there isn't societal support for a female gamer in the same way as a male, then no it isn't fair. Being a professional anything with out financial and societal support is extremely difficult. If no one takes your achievements seriously (I can't even name female gamers off the top of my head myself because their leagues recieve next to no exposure) then you can't enter professional teams and gain the training environment you need. Or you could read the article. In Asia in particular, there is already prejudice in some respects towards gamers in general, but also that competitive gaming is seen as a male hobby dominated by male figure heads not only in the competitive scene but also in the professional scene, be it in games development, journalism, financing, media exposure, what ever category. Try finding an Asian parent who would support their female children going into gaming.
I don't think being a professional gamer is looked down upon by society only if you are female. Most male professional gamers have to fight for respect, too. In fact I believe that an achieving female gamer would get a lot more esteem from the inside of esports than if she where male. Also the typical male progamer gets picked up by teams after he gets achievements in tournaments. There is nothing stopping a female from doing the same.
Edit: I think the big difference in males to females in esports can be attributed to females on average just not being very interested in it.
|
They don't like esports videogames. It's not about not having female gamers but I think the pool of skilled female gamer is really small compared to its male counterpart. The solution is : do not buy SIMS 13 to your daughter & learn her to truely geek. Their games are more about simulating social interactions than pure skill.
|
i know and seen alot of female players at very high level's, there isnt much or any predujice in the gaming comunity then there is in day to day life, the reasons i think we dont see many pro female players is because, a. the pro gamer girls/ladies don't want to part take in the gaming past beging top of causals (alot of my female freinds are like this, cba basically). b. care too much about what other people say, (not an issue really but more personal that effects males too). c. out numberd naturally by males.
but saying there must be female only ladders etc is sexist, i would though agree it may open the more passve good players to have ago, in the precursor they can compete vs none teenager males, who don't understand how to communcate in a proper fashion (common), this wont stop males pretending to be females untill lan's are arranged.
|
On November 20 2012 05:44 Caihead wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 05:37 Noobity wrote:On November 20 2012 04:51 tomatriedes wrote: I don't know why so many angry nerds get so heated up over the idea of a woman's league. To me it's just like New Zealander's having a NZ league or Fijians having a Fijian league- it;s not about excluding men or being sexist it's about giving a certain scene a chance to grow and develop. I would like to watch something like that if it had good production values. I like it when females beat males, I think it proves a lot and I always hope that the next female break-out star sticks with the scene and gets more females into the sport. I love watching Scarlett play, I think Flo has a great chance to do well if she keeps it up, I'm disappointed that I don't see Aphrodite play in more high-end tournaments. But on what terms? On a previously established rule set that's made for males? Are you taking this for granted? It might not be immediately obvious to see a noticeable difference in a game of SC2 if you need to craft separate metrics for measuring achievement across genders. But it is obvious given every other field of competition that you do need separate metrics for competition unless you can render it fair enough to a degree between the demographics. I'm not arguing for or against having different metrics in SC2 in particular because there isn't any research to support either argument, hell maybe women have the potential to be better at SC2 because of their specific skill sets like multitasking or mental arithmetic etc. If the sport was fair then it shouldn't be the fact that a woman beats a male that proves alot, it should be the fact that player X who is an underdog beats player Y regardless of gender.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by rule sets being made for males. The rule sets are made for the game, no? I like it because it helps to show that they can do this stuff too, that they can work past the stereotypes and drama and beat the odds.
Same reason I like it when Foreigners beat Koreans. I don't understand what you're getting at I guess.
Anyone who doesn't see that there's some hard shit for females to go through before they get their chance isn't looking hard enough. Similarly, when foreigners do well in the GSL, they're going through a ton of difficult shit to get and stay there. It's simply what I like to see. All about the underdogs.
|
Caihead Canada. November 20 2012 06:12. Posts 3600 Did you read the article?
I did. He notes 2 prejudices:
“Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements” “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I quote myself here:
Show nested quote +Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement).
“Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements” No one wants that a new player has won a MLG or Dreamhack before he joins a team but they are satiesfied when that player is actually a good player and is GM/High Masters. I don't exspect any additional bad Feedback than normally (there are always trolls/hater) when a GM/High Master girl joins a team. The required skill for females isn't any higher as for males. Those "prejudices" doesn't make it harder for them to become a Progamer in any way.
I also doubt that female Progamer Lack of venues to expose themselves due to prejudice . Girls seem to get more attention than males with equal skills, just look at stream views. Those "prejudices" don't seem to influence it.
I don't think that those 2 points are the reason why there aren't more female-only tournaments/player. They are advantaged in that way, that more people watch those kind of tournaments than "male" tournaments with the same league distribution. Why don't we actually see more female tournamets? Is it really more than the lack of (good) player?
|
On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: - “Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements”
- “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
(It’s a vicious circle: Female gets on a team without any achievements, female remains on the team but never sent to any events or actively used in team leagues. Never exposed, she never achieves anything or is a part of any team achievements).promote themselves through their gender. .
Just pointing out, you missed a few words here. Haven't had time to read through it yet, but it looks interesting.
|
I think that sc2 just doesn't generate enough viewership/money to create sustainable scene for any minority. I have nothing against female gamers but I don't belive you could find more than few hundred/thousand people willing to follow such league, let alone support it financially.
|
Really interesting read. I think the most salient point for me was the comparison between female-only tournaments importance of regional championships.
One thing I might have liked to see addressed more is why the situation is such that females are drastically outnumbered by males in the e-sports scene. Unlike regional championships, it seems as though if the numbers were roughly equal, there wouldn't be such a discrepancy in visible achievements, and there might not even be a need to differentiate. Of course we can put this discrepancy down to the culture of gaming being one that appeals more to/is more accessible to men than women, but I'd be curious to know how you think female-only tournaments might influence this dynamic.
|
Girls don't like to compete, girls don't like war games, girls don't like to be isolated in male communities. I'm pretty certain that way more female players in WoW do high level raiding than do high level arena, for instance. One is cooperative, the other is classic competitive gladiator combat.
|
Torte please have my babies
|
On November 20 2012 07:23 Grumbels wrote: Girls don't like to compete, girls don't like war games, girls don't like to be isolated in male communities. I'm pretty certain that way more female players in WoW do high level raiding than do high level arena, for instance. One is cooperative, the other is classic competitive gladiator combat.
This is fucking disgusting. Do you seriously believe this?
|
On November 20 2012 07:36 Fission wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 07:23 Grumbels wrote: Girls don't like to compete, girls don't like war games, girls don't like to be isolated in male communities. I'm pretty certain that way more female players in WoW do high level raiding than do high level arena, for instance. One is cooperative, the other is classic competitive gladiator combat. This is fucking disgusting. Do you seriously believe this? Sure, why not?
|
I'm pretty sure that the people don't want to watch girls play SC2 or video games because female gamers are never the best. I don't want to watch people who aren't top-tier. Isn't that why people watch SC2/GSL? Also, female-only leagues seem sort of silly to me since there are such few female pro gamers.
Anyone who wants to watch girls because they are girls is an idiot. Sry2say.
*Edited to correct a couple things.
|
Where does Scarlett fit in all of this? I mean is she allowed to compete in tournaments like Gabriella Issaacs or does she have an unfair advantage in these tournaments? I mean the olympics wouldn't allow transgenders (M2F) to compete in the womens olympics because they would have such a distinctive advantage. Just curious to where transgender competitors stand in these sort of tournaments.
|
On November 20 2012 08:03 KentHenry wrote: Where does Scarlett fit in all of this? I mean is she allowed to compete in tournaments like Gabriella Issaacs or does she have an unfair advantage in these tournaments? I mean the olympics wouldn't allow transgenders (M2F) to compete in the womens olympics because they would have such a distinctive advantage. Just curious to where transgender competitors stand in these sort of tournaments. I imagine that the reason there are more good transgender female players (Puck, Scarlett) than regular female players is because they have been raised as male and so have more male-gendered cultural imprinting such as enjoying competition. There is no actual evidence that they would have an innate advantage in games due to some biological factor.
|
On November 20 2012 07:36 Fission wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 07:23 Grumbels wrote: Girls don't like to compete, girls don't like war games, girls don't like to be isolated in male communities. I'm pretty certain that way more female players in WoW do high level raiding than do high level arena, for instance. One is cooperative, the other is classic competitive gladiator combat. This is fucking disgusting. Do you seriously believe this?
What he says seems to hold true though. I have many female friends who play League of Legends or WoW with me. But as soon as they see how much effort you need to put into starcraft, they lose interest. Girls around here prefer Mario, Sims, League. Games that are super easy to access. Maybe it's different in other parts of the world, but where I live, and friends I talk to online live, that is the case.
|
On November 20 2012 08:16 RagequitBM wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 07:36 Fission wrote:On November 20 2012 07:23 Grumbels wrote: Girls don't like to compete, girls don't like war games, girls don't like to be isolated in male communities. I'm pretty certain that way more female players in WoW do high level raiding than do high level arena, for instance. One is cooperative, the other is classic competitive gladiator combat. This is fucking disgusting. Do you seriously believe this? What he says seems to hold true though. I have many female friends who play League of Legends or WoW with me. But as soon as they see how much effort you need to put into starcraft, they lose interest. Girls around here prefer Mario, Sims, League. Games that are super easy to access. Maybe it's different in other parts of the world, but where I live, and friends I talk to online live, that is the case. Yeah, I didn't mean it like: "girls are x, because", just that generally speaking that's how our culture works. Casual vs hardcore, cooperative games vs competitive games, fantasy games vs violent games, role playing games vs strategy games, social games vs competitive games. And so on, in each of those different categories you'd have a lot more girls interested in one vs the other.
|
Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices:
“Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements” “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” Neither of these are prejudices. Signing a girl to your team for no other reason than that she's a girl who isn't absolutely terrible is something that invites criticism, which is actually more often directed at the organization rather than whoever the player in question is. It reeks of publicity stunt rather than a sincere attempt to improve the team. As for point number two, the only reason that you see female gamers catch (seemingly) more heat for accomplishing nothing is because they're more high profile due to their rarity, and due to the fact that their teams make threads announcing that they've acquired them. The huge pool of male players out there who accomplish nothing don't catch the same kind of heat because they're just random dudes on SC2 teams. Nobody made a thread to get the word out or otherwise attempted to promote them. How can you get criticized if hardly anyone even knows who you are?
Females should be praised for their own separate achievements; different standards and expectations for different types of people. Aren’t we then setting a lower standard for females over males? No, that is a comparison; we are actually just setting a system or scale for female E-sports. Actually, the answer is yes. There's nothing wrong with having female-only tournaments, but why would they deserve praise when we know the competition is a farce compared to the other tournaments where the actual best players are playing? Some female player could win ten straight of these hypothetical tournaments, but if she never competed outside them or accomplished anything outside of them, you'd always have to attach "for a girl" to whatever kind of praise you gave her. What is that if not setting a lower standard?
If there's a conversation to be had here, it's to question why there's comparatively so little female interest in the game, and whether or not we should attempt to try to raise that interest, and by what means we would do so. Claiming that there's some kind of systematic bias preventing females from succeeding doesn't ring true because everyone has access to the same ladder and the same battle.net. With a bit of talent enough dedication, anyone can become a good enough player to begin competing in minor tournaments and trying to catch the eye of a pro team. The impression I get from your post is that rather than simply expect them to put in the work necessary to become top players, we should coddle them and overvalue anything they manage to accomplish in the interest of promoting females in esports. That's something I'm not interested in getting behind.
|
The prejudices listed in that article aren't prejudice at all. The beginning of your article is just wrong. Eve wasn't on SlayerS due to her skills. If she was a male she would have been incredibly lucky to be a b-teamer, much less sitting on the bench for GSTL and especially getting to play.
The fact that females are getting picked up because they are female is pretty much undeniable (Scarlett being the exception). I agree with you 100% that this isn't a bad thing however. Women are a completely untapped market and there are obvious economic benefits to both female tournaments and teams picking up female players over a more qualified male. To start off the article however by saying that women don't get a shot because of prejudice is wrong and offputting to the existing fanbase who just wants to see the highest quality games.
|
On November 20 2012 08:03 KentHenry wrote: Where does Scarlett fit in all of this? I mean is she allowed to compete in tournaments like Gabriella Issaacs or does she have an unfair advantage in these tournaments? I mean the olympics wouldn't allow transgenders (M2F) to compete in the womens olympics because they would have such a distinctive advantage. Just curious to where transgender competitors stand in these sort of tournaments. Because clearly Starcraft requires a muscular male physique and unfairly advantages anyone with a large amount of testosterone, right? And IIRC the Olympics would allow a trans woman to compete in women's events if they had been taking oestrogen long enough for said muscular male physique to have gone away.
|
Let's be honest, how many people actually care about any female league of any sport? There are many female sports with very talented players that dedicate their lives to the sports they love despite having a small fraction of the fanbase of the male counterpart even though they put in the same effort. We already know that there's not really any females (sex not gender, ie. transgenders don't count) that can compete against sc2 pro's based on skill, so how many female player put in similar training hours at least?
Women shouldn't be rewarded just for being women but they shouldn't be hindered either. If a female player is dedicating their life to the sport by practicing as much as any other pro does and has similar skill to some other team members then they deserve the opportunity as much as anyone else, but if they're just being recruited to be a pair of breasts or a pretty face that lacks any shred of talent or devotion then they are merely being objectivised and that is sexist.
The comparison of regionals not being racist vs female leagues not being sexist is quite asinine. Any race can live in any region so even if a region is dominated by a particular race, anyone can still move there and compete if they desire to. I'm no expert on the topic but I've never heard of any female sport league allowing transgenders to compete and they have varying rules on what constitutes a female when it comes to rare genetics (such as androgen insensitivity syndrome which is 50 times higher in Olympians than the normal population, or hermaphrodites). You can choose where to live but you can't choose your sex for the purpose of competition. Female leagues are sexist by definition, they exclude males, but it's generally seen as an okay form of sexism because of the huge genetic differences between sexes. Are there any genetic differences that really hinder females playing esports that warrants separate leagues?
|
On November 20 2012 09:22 Twilight Sparkle wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 08:03 KentHenry wrote: Where does Scarlett fit in all of this? I mean is she allowed to compete in tournaments like Gabriella Issaacs or does she have an unfair advantage in these tournaments? I mean the olympics wouldn't allow transgenders (M2F) to compete in the womens olympics because they would have such a distinctive advantage. Just curious to where transgender competitors stand in these sort of tournaments. Because clearly Starcraft requires a muscular male physique and unfairly advantages anyone with a large amount of testosterone, right? And IIRC the Olympics would allow a trans woman to compete in women's events if they had been taking oestrogen long enough for said muscular male physique to have gone away. I don't think there's a solid answer to that but this article highlights the evolution of Olympic gender testing: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/30/science/la-sci-olympics-gender-20120730 In the past they used metrics such as visual inspections or chromosome testing but the London games used testosterone levels although it is unclear whether that was the only metric used or what the future metrics will be.
|
|
The OP is laughable; that most people posting in this thread don't realize this is just depressing.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On January 04 2013 00:53 Empirimancer wrote: The OP is laughable; that most people posting in this thread don't realize this is just depressing.
Thanks for the insightful comment :/
If you disagree, the least you could do is say why instead of just a generic bitch about the article.
|
Thank you! As a community we should have more of these threads not just focusing on the game itself.
|
On January 04 2013 01:11 EnumaAvalon wrote: Thank you! As a community we should have more of these threads not just focusing on the game itself.
I think we get a lot of both. but thank you.
|
On November 20 2012 04:41 Mothra wrote: I'm sitting in Sociology 101 all over again.
You know what Torte's been studying in Uni right? O;
Uncreative have you actually seen their stream numbers? It's nothing to get enthusiastic about, but this goes for many other tournaments at the same time regardless of gender.
Grumbels it's funny that you mention war games because I just had my cousin visit over the new year and she was talking about skeet shooting as well as buying an air soft gun to shoot at fixed targets but when it came to shooting a small animal or when I mentioned the idea of her playing war games in fields with people she got skittish and couldn't bare the thought of doing it. Any who, I know many many women who play video games and from the one's I know they play more for leisure or for socializing. That doesn't mean they aren't competitive because I know plenty who hate to lose and then we have my DN peeps from online like Alice and Soo who are all about PvP and absolutely wreck house in the Arena. Don't mess with my girls. They kill you! :V
|
I think the larger issue here is the community itself, not the infrastructure being able, or willing, to support female gamers. Consider this hypothetical scenario:
So you have a young woman who likes to play Starcraft 2, and is capable of doing so at the Master/Grandmaster level. She decides she's interested by the prospect of going pro, and knows that the first step would be to start streaming and promoting herself so that people can recognize her by name. It's hard for her to attract viewers at first, because no one knows about her, and when people do join her channel they insist she uses a webcam and talks on stream because she's a girl. She does those things, and her viewership rises because lets face it, most gamers are female-deprived. Most of us are aware of the cesspool of Twitch.tv chat, but it gets 10x worse when a female is on stream, with derogatory comments whether she is attractive or not. As her viewership rises, she needs a diligent mod squad to keep the chat under control so that she can interact with her viewers, another requirement for having a successful stream. But even with good mods, she gets frequent tastes of how terrible the online community is, and their behavior towards women when they have the anonymity of a computer screen between them.
This is before she manages to get a team, get sponsored, and participate in LAN tournaments, in which case she has to put herself out into this community, which is much nicer in person but still intimidating to anyone of either gender. She is probably on a team of men, managed by men, and cheered on by a community made up almost entirely of men. Consider how out of place you would feel in that situation.
With all that said, I think it is this combination of factors that results in so few women being interested in Starcraft 2 eSports. People don't get into professional SC2 because they think they will make a lot of money (or if they do, they're an idiot), they do it because they are drawn to the scene and love playing the game. Would you be drawn to the scene if you were a woman?
|
It's really important to promote female gamers in this community, for a list of reasons- spreading the love of the game to women, growing the esport, public image, money, et cetera.
I do have an issue though. I think that if you have a female league and you cannot garner professional level competitors, then it should not be presented as a professional competition. If you want to target inexperienced players, then the perfect format is that of a social casual community.
It's a better way to gather newcomers than a professional tournament format, anyway- SC2 players aren't public idols. It's still a PC game, not an aspiration. I don't think creating a 'lower tier' says anything positive about women, and you'll have the same couple of real serious competitors winning the tournament every time they bother to enter, a la ToSsGirL back in the day.
There's a reason no one is giving people credit for accomplishments in IESF female. If you read the interview, it says the South African competitor who lost out to Aphrodite had only played the game for 5 months. So it was effectively a misappropriated casual event, not a professional level tournament.
If we can get a lot of women interested in the game, by opening and promoting casual competitive womens tournaments, you'll see more women winning professional tournaments. We've already had Scarlett gain notoriety for chewing through really good opponents and taking home the gold from WCS and others.
|
On January 04 2013 02:56 ZasZ. wrote: I think the larger issue here is the community itself, not the infrastructure being able, or willing, to support female gamers. Consider this hypothetical scenario:
So you have a young woman who likes to play Starcraft 2, and is capable of doing so at the Master/Grandmaster level. She decides she's interested by the prospect of going pro, and knows that the first step would be to start streaming and promoting herself so that people can recognize her by name. It's hard for her to attract viewers at first, because no one knows about her, and when people do join her channel they insist she uses a webcam and talks on stream because she's a girl. She does those things, and her viewership rises because lets face it, most gamers are female-deprived. Most of us are aware of the cesspool of Twitch.tv chat, but it gets 10x worse when a female is on stream, with derogatory comments whether she is attractive or not. As her viewership rises, she needs a diligent mod squad to keep the chat under control so that she can interact with her viewers, another requirement for having a successful stream. But even with good mods, she gets frequent tastes of how terrible the online community is, and their behavior towards women when they have the anonymity of a computer screen between them.
This is before she manages to get a team, get sponsored, and participate in LAN tournaments, in which case she has to put herself out into this community, which is much nicer in person but still intimidating to anyone of either gender. She is probably on a team of men, managed by men, and cheered on by a community made up almost entirely of men. Consider how out of place you would feel in that situation.
With all that said, I think it is this combination of factors that results in so few women being interested in Starcraft 2 eSports. People don't get into professional SC2 because they think they will make a lot of money (or if they do, they're an idiot), they do it because they are drawn to the scene and love playing the game. Would you be drawn to the scene if you were a woman?
This is true for any online community though and that's why some like to keep the fact they're female a secret because they don't want to get hounded. The great thing is it's not so much of a problem in some of the MMOs I play like the guild I've been with from the start in Dragon Nest. That really comes down how we recruit and weed players out at the same time. There are better ways to interact with your fans than using Twitch chat. I think there should be a way to be able to turn off the chat entirely if the user so desires or ignore it altogether because you will find idiots no matter where you go. Societal norms my man.
|
@Torte: there is a missing sentence in your OP,
Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: “Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements” “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” (It’s a vicious circle: Female gets on a team without any achievements, female remains on the team but never sent to any events or actively used in team leagues. Never exposed, she never achieves anything or is a part of any team achievements).
promote themselves through their gender. While several solutions (...) This last paragraph is missing something.
Also to add something to the discussion, I think female-only leagues are a good thing and should continue to get more exposure. Imagine if a female-specific GSL was held; we would probably see far better fermale players develop just to try and beat Scarlett for the price money.
|
On January 04 2013 03:14 Ender985 wrote:@Torte: there is a missing sentence in your OP, Show nested quote +Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: “Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements” “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” (It’s a vicious circle: Female gets on a team without any achievements, female remains on the team but never sent to any events or actively used in team leagues. Never exposed, she never achieves anything or is a part of any team achievements).
promote themselves through their gender. While several solutions (...) This last paragraph is missing something. Also to add something to the discussion, I think female-only leagues are a good thing and should continue to get more exposure. Imagine if a female-specific GSL was held; we would probably see far better fermale players develop just to try and beat Scarlett for the price money.
I'll definitely take a look, thanks!
|
Comme d'habitude Tort, I was pondering writing a blog on the matter myself. I think that in general there is a bit too much of "Chat Mentality," when it comes to streamers like Spyte, Flo, and Livinpink (unsure if Maddelisk streams but that is my short list of relatively well known female streamers). That is to say berating via chat, and generally discouraging or misogynistic jabs, this is followed by the lapdog who not so coyly, attempts to sway the female streamer's favor (I wish David Attenborough would read that aloud for me).
I like the idea of female leagues if only for the fact that it allows them to come out of the white noise and get some proper time on stream. Part of the problem with females on proteams is just that they are overshadowed by the ostensibly more popular male talent. If, when Quantic was around, I wanted to watch a Terran and I had to choose between Flo and theStC, I was going to choose StC 99.9% of the time. This is mostly a function of the fact that I will not likely be able to say, "did you see that Flo game last night."
A female league is a great first step in developing a framework where in female players can get even better as players, a network where they can work together, and showcasing the proverbial better half of the SC2 community. I think that the first tournament organization to grab onto this and do cash tournaments well, will be uniquely positioned for some sponsorship opportunities.
|
On January 04 2013 03:39 ThomasjServo wrote: Comme d'habitude Tort, I was pondering writing a blog on the matter myself. I think that in general there is a bit too much of "Chat Mentality," when it comes to streamers like Spyte, Flo, and Livinpink (unsure if Maddelisk streams but that is my short list of relatively well known female streamers). That is to say berating via chat, and generally discouraging or misogynistic jabs, this is followed by the lapdog who not so coyly, attempts to sway the female streamer's favor (I wish David Attenborough would read that aloud for me).
I like the idea of female leagues if only for the fact that it allows them to come out of the white noise and get some proper time on stream. Part of the problem with females on proteams is just that they are overshadowed by the ostensibly more popular male talent. If, when Quantic was around, I wanted to watch a Terran and I had to choose between Flo and theStC, I was going to choose StC 99.9% of the time. This is mostly a function of the fact that I will not likely be able to say, "did you see that Flo game last night."
A female league is a great first step in developing a framework where in female players can get even better as players, a network where they can work together, and showcasing the proverbial better half of the SC2 community. I think that the first tournament organization to grab onto this and do cash tournaments well, will be uniquely positioned for some sponsorship opportunities.
That would fall under my social category.
|
On November 20 2012 05:20 dddoushio wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice
LG-IM Fenix and LG-IM Horror haven't really achieved anything notable, yet those people aren't even mentioned (nobody even cares about who they are anymore really).
Prior to disbanding, name the "achievements" TSL Cyrano and TSL Ragnarok had. (Answer: A single Code A Ro48 season for Ragnarok, and GSL Ro64 in 2010 for Cyrano). Not exactly notable, or anything achieved, but nobody complains.
Likewise, Startale Pet, Son, and Tiger haven't even been in the GSL. Nobody even really knows who they are, or cares about what their results are.
Girls are singled out though, it's happened before. If they don't achieve (anybody who isn't scarlett), people have claimed they are just models/advertising.
|
In regards to female professionals, my viewpoint is that looks do help distinguish yourself from others (as do other traits or qualities), but it doesn't necessarily succeed your career or establish yourself. Those who try to cash in on their looks without truly improving their ability to do their job will ultimately fall out in the long-run.
But that's my opinion at least.
|
On January 04 2013 04:03 Torte de Lini wrote: In regards to female professionals, my viewpoint is that looks do help distinguish yourself from others (as do other traits or qualities), but it doesn't necessarily succeed your career or establish yourself. Those who try to cash in on their looks without truly improving their ability to do their job will ultimately fall out in the long-run.
But that's my opinion at least. In a nutshell: Looks does not a career make, but it can't hurt. I see this as a potential problem for Korean, professional gamers. Aprodite, Eve, and Tossgirl are all attractive. It may be rather niche, but that is another interesting facet to the female SC2 player conundrum.
|
On November 20 2012 04:34 Grumbels wrote: This is ridiculous, one problem society does not have is males being discriminated against. Just look at this community, where maybe some female players get preferential treatment in some ways, but mostly they have to put up with incredible amounts of hostility from the community for their gender. They can't ever achieve anything without constant discussion about it, Scarlett for instance still has to put up with a multitude of trolls on reddit making disgusting comments every time she's mentioned - although her case is slightly different of course.
Oh come on, this is just silly. Discrimination against men is very much real especially when it comes to custody questions and divorces. In fact in Skåne län, the southern-most Swedish state (state? county?), where the verdict was that a single parent should be given custody 76% of those cases were in favour of the mother as seen here. Unfortunately it's in swedish, of course. Basically in 804 verdicts between 2007 and 2009 422 verdicts gave custody to a single parent and only 100 of these (the 422 that is) granted custody to the father. The other verdicts resulted in some form of shared custody. In fact in Lund city 100% of the custody cases granted the mother full custody during these years. So to say that discrimination against men is not a problem is just, as I said, silly. It might not be as big of an issue as discrimination against women but it does exist.
Just thought I'd share even though the relevance to prejudice and discrimination within the e-Sports scene is quite small.
|
I thought the other gaming gender would be transgender or something (no joke)
|
On January 04 2013 04:07 ThomasjServo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 04:03 Torte de Lini wrote: In regards to female professionals, my viewpoint is that looks do help distinguish yourself from others (as do other traits or qualities), but it doesn't necessarily succeed your career or establish yourself. Those who try to cash in on their looks without truly improving their ability to do their job will ultimately fall out in the long-run.
But that's my opinion at least. In a nutshell: Looks does not a career make, but it can't hurt. I see this as a potential problem for Korean, professional gamers. Aprodite, Eve, and Tossgirl are all attractive. It may be rather niche, but that is another interesting facet to the female SC2 player conundrum.
I think when it comes to public jobs such as presenter and such, is it really that unexpected to see an attractive female presenting? If she does her job right, the employers are satisfied, naturally we'll see more of her for all the reasons, not just her looks.
Before Lauren, NASL hired someone else (I don't even remember her name lol), she didn't know StarCraft, wasn't too comfortable and overall, everyone didn't take her seriously.
Then they got Lauren and although she is hired primarily for her looks, she showed a willingness to improve as well as respect the profession.
|
On January 04 2013 03:55 Alryk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 05:20 dddoushio wrote:On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice LG-IM Fenix and LG-IM Horror haven't really achieved anything notable, yet those people aren't even mentioned (nobody even cares about who they are anymore really). Prior to disbanding, name the "achievements" TSL Cyrano and TSL Ragnarok had. (Answer: A single Code A Ro48 season for Ragnarok, and GSL Ro64 in 2010 for Cyrano). Not exactly notable, or anything achieved, but nobody complains. Likewise, Startale Pet, Son, and Tiger haven't even been in the GSL. Nobody even really knows who they are, or cares about what their results are. Girls are singled out though, it's happened before. If they don't achieve (anybody who isn't scarlett), people have claimed they are just models/advertising.
Um, teams have a lot of players and practice partners man and this goes back to how KeSPA does things. I think of Fenix more of a practice partner more than anything else and with all the different partnerships it's really hard to keep track of everything. Why do you think people are always on Liquid's and EG's balls? It's because of overexposure. We have this website which quite a few people use and then you have the endless plugs from EG and their sponsors. It's just generating more and more exposure. Then every once in a while you hear about some girl joining a pro gaming team and of course because it's the internet you're going to hear all sorts of ramble and players do get picked apart. I actually remember Fenix getting picked apart for him disappearing. You have to accept it for it is because it's never going to change and the best way to deal with it is to work in your own personal bubble and look to interact with your fans in other ways other than chat rooms and internet forums. I even mock the people who use twitter including my friends, but guess what? Some of them feel like they don't really have an option especially when they're in showbiz and trying to build a base.
On January 04 2013 04:12 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 04:07 ThomasjServo wrote:On January 04 2013 04:03 Torte de Lini wrote: In regards to female professionals, my viewpoint is that looks do help distinguish yourself from others (as do other traits or qualities), but it doesn't necessarily succeed your career or establish yourself. Those who try to cash in on their looks without truly improving their ability to do their job will ultimately fall out in the long-run.
But that's my opinion at least. In a nutshell: Looks does not a career make, but it can't hurt. I see this as a potential problem for Korean, professional gamers. Aprodite, Eve, and Tossgirl are all attractive. It may be rather niche, but that is another interesting facet to the female SC2 player conundrum. I think when it comes to public jobs such as presenter and such, is it really that unexpected to see an attractive female presenting? If she does her job right, the employers are satisfied, naturally we'll see more of her for all the reasons, not just her looks. Before Lauren, NASL hired someone else (I don't even remember her name lol), she didn't know StarCraft, wasn't too comfortable and overall, everyone didn't take her seriously. Then they got Lauren and although she is hired primarily for her looks, she showed a willingness to improve as well as respect the profession.
You guys ever hear the story about how the MBC manager decided to pick up Bisu?
|
On January 04 2013 03:14 Ender985 wrote:Also to add something to the discussion, I think female-only leagues are a good thing and should continue to get more exposure. Imagine if a female-specific GSL was held; we would probably see far better fermale players develop just to try and beat Scarlett for the price money.
You don't have to think female-only leagues are a good thing, you can pretty much know. I distinctly remember seeing Flo and Maddelisk both say that they got competitive because they played in some female-only tournament for fun and then got encouraged to become competitive when they realized how much fun it actually was (or something along those lines. I'm writing from memory). Considering the small number of public female SC2 gamers, we could already say that the female-only tournaments have done a considerable impact in drawing women to competitive SC2. Also, at the end of 2011, there were lots of female-only tournaments and at the same time, several teams added at least one woman to their rosters. I'm willing to think that the correlation is not random.
|
|
Teams get certain players on their team, because they bring in viewers. People like MaximusBlack, who is very, very, very far from being a tournament winning player gets on a team, because it brings in viewers and thus more sponsorship money. EG players are forced to stream for a certain amount of hours, obviously for the same reason, more attention. Quantic signed Destiny for the same reasons, he confirmed it on stream that time. Desrow got signed for the same reasons by FXO.NA, also confirmed by him on stream.
As long as no one gives a fuck about real, hard earned tournament results, but everything else around it just to get more pageviews, why should I even fool myself into thinking for one second, that results matter. Of course you'd sign a girl, because the chance that Gamergirl85 brings in more viewers than JohnBobby85 is far higher.
Note: I have of course nothing against the players I mentioned here, I rather enjoy them, but it's still sad to see hard-workerX, who just didn't win a tournament, but placed 2nd or 3rd or whatever have such a hard time, that the player has to decide constantly whether to fuck it all and do something else, because he cannot afford it, or eat the cheapest food available and live in moms basement to maybe do it in the future.
|
On January 04 2013 04:12 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 04:07 ThomasjServo wrote:On January 04 2013 04:03 Torte de Lini wrote: In regards to female professionals, my viewpoint is that looks do help distinguish yourself from others (as do other traits or qualities), but it doesn't necessarily succeed your career or establish yourself. Those who try to cash in on their looks without truly improving their ability to do their job will ultimately fall out in the long-run.
But that's my opinion at least. In a nutshell: Looks does not a career make, but it can't hurt. I see this as a potential problem for Korean, professional gamers. Aprodite, Eve, and Tossgirl are all attractive. It may be rather niche, but that is another interesting facet to the female SC2 player conundrum. I think when it comes to public jobs such as presenter and such, is it really that unexpected to see an attractive female presenting? If she does her job right, the employers are satisfied, naturally we'll see more of her for all the reasons, not just her looks. Before Lauren, NASL hired someone else (I don't even remember her name lol), she didn't know StarCraft, wasn't too comfortable and overall, everyone didn't take her seriously. Then they got Lauren and although she is hired primarily for her looks, she showed a willingness to improve as well as respect the profession. As far as Lauren and the NASL are concerned you are right. I have personally never watched the content she is responsible for (There was a dating thing, and she streams as well. There could be more), though I have seen her on stream and she does well enough at what she does.
My point was more that if one were a Korean female, it may be considered a prerequisite to be attractive to make it onto a Korean team. Jessica picked up Eve as a Diamond level Terran, albeit on the Korean server, but this was a case of a face meeting what I presume to have been a Korean marketing need. She was played once in a team league.
In a more fertile eSports market like Korea, there must be a similar need for players as there is for personalities like Lauren in the sense that both her and Eve aren't at the higest escelon of play. I wouldn't factor out cultural elements affecting the development of female players in Korean Starcraft, but I am less than knowledgeable about standards of beauty and the role they play in Korean society, or eSports.
|
On January 04 2013 03:55 Alryk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 05:20 dddoushio wrote:On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice LG-IM Fenix and LG-IM Horror haven't really achieved anything notable, yet those people aren't even mentioned (nobody even cares about who they are anymore really). Prior to disbanding, name the "achievements" TSL Cyrano and TSL Ragnarok had. (Answer: A single Code A Ro48 season for Ragnarok, and GSL Ro64 in 2010 for Cyrano). Not exactly notable, or anything achieved, but nobody complains. Likewise, Startale Pet, Son, and Tiger haven't even been in the GSL. Nobody even really knows who they are, or cares about what their results are. Girls are singled out though, it's happened before. If they don't achieve (anybody who isn't scarlett), people have claimed they are just models/advertising.
All of the players you mentioned have posted at least mediocre tournament results. I don't see a lot of complaints about women who join professional teams and place second in a preliminary GSL tournament. There are plenty of complains about diamond league women being promoted as professional SC2 players.
I also had to look all of those players up. No one ever talks about them, so how can anyone complain?
|
While there are a multitude of issues to look at while discussing girls and gaming, for what you've focused on I'm happy with how you presented it. But hey, you're a pretty amazing writer, so I wouldn't expect less than respect and thorough-thinking in any of your articles.
I appreciate the relation to chess rather than any other sport, not only in the similarities between games and how little your sex matters in terms of ability, but also the infrastructure that you (or rather, Christopher on Reddit) outlined. A women-only tournament, but also allowing women to participate in open tournaments is the best way to do things right now. Unfortunately, a lot of guys get their feathers puffed and say 'well if they get an 'only' tournament, we should too' or 'women-only is sexist', leading women into a defensive position that discourages well-meaning organizers, and hey, probably even sponsors.
Now, there is one problem I have that you touched upon in one way or another and I want to expand upon, given that I am female and I see a lot of these type of posts and opinions. As a female who is masters, it does anger me to see gold-diamond (purely casual and entertainment personalities, in other words) girls join teams and get coaching from pros. I'm with a lot of guys on that one, and I'm also not on the wagon of 'encouraging everything every woman does ever' in this scene. It's funny, because it's another one of those double-edged swords. Being a woman in the scene can get you stupid amounts of love for no reason other than a webcam and a pretty voice, and it can also get you a stupid amount of hate because of that love, which is what most people are aware of. The 'stupid amount of love' part can get a lot of girls positions that should have gone to determined masters+ that don't want to put on makeup everyday and set up a lighting studio in their bedroom.
I don't see hiring bronze-diamond (in specifically competitive and high-end casting roles - I have no problem hiring them as interviewers, hosts, etc) as helping women, but rather, I see it as just enforcing the view that there aren't that many competitive girls and these ladies are the only thing our side has to offer. I mean, true, it makes me so angry I practice 10x harder to prove everyone wrong, and maybe it's just jealousy, I dunno. But the female-only tournaments are the simple, obvious solution to this problem. More female-only tournaments, more masters showing they can be competitive, less bronze-diamond girls getting picked up because they're the only ones known to anyone, and the next time a woman is picked up by a B team (or even A team), more of the posts will say 'oh yeah she's decent'.
In sum, I agree with just about everything you said, and just want to give you a shiny medal or something for your conclusion: "In the case of females, it is a lot easier to distinguish those who participate in tournaments and others who play the game for more entertainment purposes. While entertainers are found throughout the scene, a heavy favoritism should be put towards those who seek to extend the potential ability of the female gender rather than take advantage of it." An eloquent way to sum up a lot of my thoughts on this matter. Also, kudos to you for tackling such an issue and actually focusing on what can be done to help.
|
On January 04 2013 04:32 ZombieGrub wrote: While there are a multitude of issues to look at while discussing girls and gaming, for what you've focused on I'm happy with how you presented it. But hey, you're a pretty amazing writer, so I wouldn't expect less than respect and thorough-thinking in any of your articles.
I appreciate the relation to chess rather than any other sport, not only in the similarities between games and how little your sex matters in terms of ability, but also the infrastructure that you (or rather, Christopher on Reddit) outlined. A women-only tournament, but also allowing women to participate in open tournaments is the best way to do things right now. Unfortunately, a lot of guys get their feathers puffed and say 'well if they get an 'only' tournament, we should too' or 'women-only is sexist', leading women into a defensive position that discourages well-meaning organizers, and hey, probably even sponsors.
Now, there is one problem I have that you touched upon in one way or another and I want to expand upon, given that I am female and I see a lot of these type of posts and opinions. As a female who is masters, it does anger me to see gold-diamond (purely casual and entertainment personalities, in other words) girls join teams and get coaching from pros. I'm with a lot of guys on that one, and I'm also not on the wagon of 'encouraging everything every woman does ever' in this scene. It's funny, because it's another one of those double-edged swords. Being a woman in the scene can get you stupid amounts of love for no reason other than a webcam and a pretty voice, and it can also get you a stupid amount of hate because of that love, which is what most people are aware of. The 'stupid amount of love' part can get a lot of girls positions that should have gone to determined masters+ that don't want to put on makeup everyday and set up a lighting studio in their bedroom.
I don't see hiring bronze-diamond (in specifically competitive and high-end casting roles - I have no problem hiring them as interviewers, hosts, etc) as helping women, but rather, I see it as just enforcing the view that there aren't that many competitive girls and these ladies are the only thing our side has to offer. I mean, true, it makes me so angry I practice 10x harder to prove everyone wrong, and maybe it's just jealousy, I dunno. But the female-only tournaments are the simple, obvious solution to this problem. More female-only tournaments, more masters showing they can be competitive, less bronze-diamond girls getting picked up because they're the only ones known to anyone, and the next time a woman is picked up by a B team (or even A team), more of the posts will say 'oh yeah she's decent'.
In sum, I agree with just about everything you said, and just want to give you a shiny medal or something for your conclusion: "In the case of females, it is a lot easier to distinguish those who participate in tournaments and others who play the game for more entertainment purposes. While entertainers are found throughout the scene, a heavy favoritism should be put towards those who seek to extend the potential ability of the female gender rather than take advantage of it." An eloquent way to sum up a lot of my thoughts on this matter. Also, kudos to you for tackling such an issue and actually focusing on what can be done to help.
Huge thanks! I really appreciate this (:
In my original unedited piece, I had warned people of the issues of women potentially taking advantage of their gender. I believed I removed it under the idea that there was no point of further separating females from one another as either entertainer or an aspiring competitor. Though I left some of it summarized as you pointed it out (:
I think Rachel also suffered from this problem as well when she was making her arguments. It's very hard to prove you're legitimately good at your job when there are a lot of other females who do similar, but are side-tracked emphasizing more of their sexuality or just their sex and diminish the general audience's perception.
I can imagine the thought being: "I'm glad females are getting places that I feel they deserve, but this one in particular does not necessarily help our cause". It's a tough sociological situation because women who don't exactly care about feminism or any sort of promotional movement, can still ultimately hurt their gender and everyone' s perception of it, while those trying to help, have to somehow prove above those who don't care, while also not blasting them to further create conflict (and diminish your numbers).
Very, very tough.
|
Now, if only someone could put this on Reddit ^^ Last time I tried, I got downvoted to oblivion hoho
|
Zombiegrub * Drops the mic *
In all seriousness excellent points, cannot stress enough the importance of meritocracy across the board but especially as far as a female league is concerned.
|
On January 04 2013 03:55 Alryk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 05:20 dddoushio wrote:On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice LG-IM Fenix and LG-IM Horror haven't really achieved anything notable, yet those people aren't even mentioned (nobody even cares about who they are anymore really). Prior to disbanding, name the "achievements" TSL Cyrano and TSL Ragnarok had. (Answer: A single Code A Ro48 season for Ragnarok, and GSL Ro64 in 2010 for Cyrano). Not exactly notable, or anything achieved, but nobody complains. Likewise, Startale Pet, Son, and Tiger haven't even been in the GSL. Nobody even really knows who they are, or cares about what their results are. Girls are singled out though, it's happened before. If they don't achieve (anybody who isn't scarlett), people have claimed they are just models/advertising. Fenix qualified for WCS finals and didn't even get last in his group (got 17th-24th place). Horror beat MarineKing among others in WCS qualifiers and got a spot in WCS Korea where he took a game of Rain.
Ragnarok was used in team leagues. Pet did great in KSL for ZeNEX. Etcetera, etcetera.
It's somewhat of a difference whether you can threaten the best Korean players out there or whether you are struggling to get into master league on NA.
Your examples are ridiculous. They're effective practice partners for any top player.
|
On January 04 2013 04:10 Grend wrote: I thought the other gaming gender would be transgender or something (no joke)
^^ I revised all titles to be more clear and less ambiguously creative. Unfortunately, I can't change thread titles.
|
On January 04 2013 04:41 Torte de Lini wrote: Now, if only someone could put this on Reddit ^^ Last time I tried, I got downvoted to oblivion hoho You ever post to /r/gaming as well Torte? Seems like there is a fair bit of overlap with your content.
|
On January 04 2013 04:58 ThomasjServo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 04:41 Torte de Lini wrote: Now, if only someone could put this on Reddit ^^ Last time I tried, I got downvoted to oblivion hoho You ever post to /r/gaming as well Torte? Seems like there is a fair bit of overlap with your content.
Nope, but I would really appreciate it if someone did on either StarCraft or r/Gaming.
|
Even incredibly popular sports (like the NBA) can't support women only leagues. While it would be nice for more females to be involved in gaming, I just don't think it's feasible in any sort of physical competition that is already dominated by men.
|
On January 04 2013 05:04 R3DT1D3 wrote: Even incredibly popular sports (like the NBA) can't support women only leagues. While it would be nice for more females to be involved in gaming, I just don't think it's feasible in any sort of physical competition that is already dominated by men. That's just wrong. Here in Germany we have a pretty successful women's football league. Most other European countries have one as well, there's a European Cup and all, too. Same goes for handball, even though it's less popular.
|
On January 04 2013 05:01 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 04:58 ThomasjServo wrote:On January 04 2013 04:41 Torte de Lini wrote: Now, if only someone could put this on Reddit ^^ Last time I tried, I got downvoted to oblivion hoho You ever post to /r/gaming as well Torte? Seems like there is a fair bit of overlap with your content. Nope, but I would really appreciate it if someone did on either StarCraft or r/Gaming. I got you on /r/gaming, I unsubscribed from /r/starcraft a long time ago.
|
On January 04 2013 05:08 ThomasjServo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 05:01 Torte de Lini wrote:On January 04 2013 04:58 ThomasjServo wrote:On January 04 2013 04:41 Torte de Lini wrote: Now, if only someone could put this on Reddit ^^ Last time I tried, I got downvoted to oblivion hoho You ever post to /r/gaming as well Torte? Seems like there is a fair bit of overlap with your content. Nope, but I would really appreciate it if someone did on either StarCraft or r/Gaming. I got you on /r/gaming, I unsubscribed from /r/starcraft a long time ago.
I still look out at /r/StarCraft sometimes, but they can be a bit too blunt for me.
|
Organizations need to stop treating women like unicorns. This is a game where your gender doesn't matter, and the only thing holding the ladies back in eSports is the community's tendency to treat them differently from the guys.
|
If the numbers were reversed for girl and guy players, we would probably be wondering wtf is wrong with guys. If you give girls an incentive to play, more will play/continue to play. The more girls playing games, the less they can be hating on guys playing games, too... I think everyone benefits.
Is Flo a randomly selected trophy girl to be on pro teams or is she the best girl gamer? I have no idea. I would be curious about the scene, though, and I would like to know who the best girl gamers actually are. It would be nice to know that there's a correlation between ranking within the girl scene and being a pro gamer. Sounds a lot more fair and gives them all an opportunity to show their skills.
Controversial... but what ever happened to just being gay? A lot of gay people are effeminate. If Stephano decides hey I want to get some extra cash and cash in on this lax pseudo definition of male/female, he could. What would you do to stop him? But, at the end of the day, whether he feels like a bear/lion/or w/e he dreams of being, he's a human and he has a penis. Keep him out of the girls tournament. It's common sense. It wouldn't be fair to them. If you disagree and you're straight, maybe ask a person out with a penis. You can only go so far before you have to admit... I should treat them as a guy, at least in certain things.
As long as there is an audience for a league and the league isn't excluding people based on feeling superior to others, then it seems like a fine thing to do to me. If the league isn't offending anyone, it can't be hurting anyone.
|
On January 04 2013 05:09 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 05:08 ThomasjServo wrote:On January 04 2013 05:01 Torte de Lini wrote:On January 04 2013 04:58 ThomasjServo wrote:On January 04 2013 04:41 Torte de Lini wrote: Now, if only someone could put this on Reddit ^^ Last time I tried, I got downvoted to oblivion hoho You ever post to /r/gaming as well Torte? Seems like there is a fair bit of overlap with your content. Nope, but I would really appreciate it if someone did on either StarCraft or r/Gaming. I got you on /r/gaming, I unsubscribed from /r/starcraft a long time ago. I still look out at /r/StarCraft sometimes, but they can be a bit too blunt for me. I prefer my hyperbole volume to be at a dull roar, rather than 11 as I feel Starcraft is. So many links to TL anyway, I cut out the middle man.
|
On January 04 2013 05:13 ThomasjServo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 05:09 Torte de Lini wrote:On January 04 2013 05:08 ThomasjServo wrote:On January 04 2013 05:01 Torte de Lini wrote:On January 04 2013 04:58 ThomasjServo wrote:On January 04 2013 04:41 Torte de Lini wrote: Now, if only someone could put this on Reddit ^^ Last time I tried, I got downvoted to oblivion hoho You ever post to /r/gaming as well Torte? Seems like there is a fair bit of overlap with your content. Nope, but I would really appreciate it if someone did on either StarCraft or r/Gaming. I got you on /r/gaming, I unsubscribed from /r/starcraft a long time ago. I still look out at /r/StarCraft sometimes, but they can be a bit too blunt for me. I prefer my hyperbole volume to be at a dull roar, rather than 11 as I feel Starcraft is. So many links to TL anyway, I cut out the middle man.
Not that it matters for me, but you get a lot more hits on Reddit towards your website than you do on TL.
|
Girls generally are not interested in competive games that's the only reason there are no good female pro-gamers. There is nothing stopping girls to get good at this game. Actually being a girl in e-sports today has many benefits like being able to join teams a guy with similar skills could never do.
Please stop making up sexism that doesn't exist it's infuriating to say the least.
|
I believe KESPA had an all female tournament before in BW, which tossgirl won every time but I'm not sure what happened to it now.
|
On January 04 2013 05:22 Killcani wrote: Girls generally are not interested in competive games that's the only reason there are no good female pro-gamers. There is nothing stopping girls to get good at this game. Actually being a girl in e-sports today has many benefits like being able to join teams a guy with similar skills could never do.
Please stop making up sexism that doesn't exist it's infuriating to say the least.
The notion that girls are not interested in competitive games is not a biological fact, it is a stereotype. The idea that your stereotype is the ONLY reason there no good female pro-gamers is a prejudice. I don't think people are proposing that there is a grand sexist machinery that is actively blocking women from participating. However, there is a long history of video games and competitive gaming being "male" activities, which could make it less inviting and more intimidating for women to get involved.
Analogues to this exist everywhere. The simplest parallel also involves gender. There is a stereotype that Reading and Writing are "women's topics" and Math and Science are "boy's topics". The numbers of women engineers and computer scientists are historically quite low. Therefore, there is a lot of effort to get women involved in science and technology. There's nothing genetic or inherent in women that stops them from getting involved in science and technology, but it turns out that historically the numbers of women involved are low. Because society desires to reverse that trend, many organizations, scholarships, and programs are created to entice more women to enter the fields.
It's not always institutionalized sexism or racism that is the problem. It can just be that statistics went lopsided in particular demographics and some group or society at large wants to counteract the issue by promoting behaviors in the underrepresented demographics.
|
On a side topic, does anyone know the proportion of active ladder female players in the world in relation to the total active ladder player base? Or at least some proxy of this number or something similar?
|
On January 04 2013 05:32 Takkara wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 05:22 Killcani wrote: Girls generally are not interested in competive games that's the only reason there are no good female pro-gamers. There is nothing stopping girls to get good at this game. Actually being a girl in e-sports today has many benefits like being able to join teams a guy with similar skills could never do.
Please stop making up sexism that doesn't exist it's infuriating to say the least. The notion that girls are not interested in competitive games is not a biological fact, it is a stereotype. The idea that your stereotype is the ONLY reason there no good female pro-gamers is a prejudice. I don't think people are proposing that there is a grand sexist machinery that is actively blocking women from participating. However, there is a long history of video games and competitive gaming being "male" activities, which could make it less inviting and more intimidating for women to get involved. Analogues to this exist everywhere. The simplest parallel also involves gender. There is a stereotype that Reading and Writing are "women's topics" and Math and Science are "boy's topics". The numbers of women engineers and computer scientists are historically quite low. Therefore, there is a lot of effort to get women involved in science and technology. There's nothing genetic or inherent in women that stops them from getting involved in science and technology, but it turns out that historically the numbers of women involved are low. Because society desires to reverse that trend, many organizations, scholarships, and programs are created to entice more women to enter the fields. It's not always institutionalized sexism or racism that is the problem. It can just be that statistics went lopsided in particular demographics and some group or society at large wants to counteract the issue by promoting behaviors in the underrepresented demographics. I started to think about how many girls I know that play games competitively, and I've been able to count two.
Both of them play black ops 2 PC on top American teams, but that's it. I don't know any girls IRL that play competitively, hell I know barely any that actually play games for anything other than being drunk and having fun.
|
If you have female only tournaments, than you should be able to have all male tournaments. Its not a physical sport there is no advantage.
|
On January 04 2013 05:42 skatblast wrote: If you have female only tournaments, than you should be able to have all male tournaments. Its not a physical sport there is no advantage.
You didn't read the text.
|
On January 04 2013 05:32 Takkara wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 05:22 Killcani wrote: Girls generally are not interested in competive games that's the only reason there are no good female pro-gamers. There is nothing stopping girls to get good at this game. Actually being a girl in e-sports today has many benefits like being able to join teams a guy with similar skills could never do.
Please stop making up sexism that doesn't exist it's infuriating to say the least. The notion that girls are not interested in competitive games is not a biological fact, it is a stereotype. The idea that your stereotype is the ONLY reason there no good female pro-gamers is a prejudice. I don't think people are proposing that there is a grand sexist machinery that is actively blocking women from participating. However, there is a long history of video games and competitive gaming being "male" activities, which could make it less inviting and more intimidating for women to get involved. Analogues to this exist everywhere. The simplest parallel also involves gender. There is a stereotype that Reading and Writing are "women's topics" and Math and Science are "boy's topics". The numbers of women engineers and computer scientists are historically quite low. Therefore, there is a lot of effort to get women involved in science and technology. There's nothing genetic or inherent in women that stops them from getting involved in science and technology, but it turns out that historically the numbers of women involved are low. Because society desires to reverse that trend, many organizations, scholarships, and programs are created to entice more women to enter the fields. It's not always institutionalized sexism or racism that is the problem. It can just be that statistics went lopsided in particular demographics and some group or society at large wants to counteract the issue by promoting behaviors in the underrepresented demographics.
I do know alot of people think like you do and go up in arms when they hear females and males are not 50/50 in everything everywhere. Oh the discrimination that we have more males interested in pursueing technical jobs like we have always had forever in every culture all over the world. Truely this must be because prejudices against women and must be fixed in our no gender society we have today.
Why is it so bad that males and females have different interests in lives? Is it so hard to think that maybe this isnt all because stereotypes and prejudices?
I personally think that women having an easier time to get into technical school and such than males is disgusting and is directly against equality.
|
On January 04 2013 05:42 skatblast wrote: If you have female only tournaments, than you should be able to have all male tournaments. Its not a physical sport there is no advantage.
It's not about advantages or disadvantages. It's just about the question of do you want there to be more girl gamers or not? I know a girl gamer. She likes playing tournaments. You feel kinda bad because you know she has 0 chance. It's just for "fun." But, if there actually were girl tournaments, she probably would have a legit shot of winning. The lack of tournaments for girls just hurts their drive to play. They already are an "endangered species," may as well try to protect them if you care about them at all. It could help remove some stigmas attached to girl and guy gamers. There are already guy pro gamers that are there because they are entertainers (thin line between entertainer and clown)... having a girl league would be far less of a joke to me.
|
On January 04 2013 05:32 Takkara wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 05:22 Killcani wrote: Girls generally are not interested in competive games that's the only reason there are no good female pro-gamers. There is nothing stopping girls to get good at this game. Actually being a girl in e-sports today has many benefits like being able to join teams a guy with similar skills could never do.
Please stop making up sexism that doesn't exist it's infuriating to say the least. The notion that girls are not interested in competitive games is not a biological fact, it is a stereotype. The idea that your stereotype is the ONLY reason there no good female pro-gamers is a prejudice. I don't think people are proposing that there is a grand sexist machinery that is actively blocking women from participating. However, there is a long history of video games and competitive gaming being "male" activities, which could make it less inviting and more intimidating for women to get involved. Analogues to this exist everywhere. The simplest parallel also involves gender. There is a stereotype that Reading and Writing are "women's topics" and Math and Science are "boy's topics". The numbers of women engineers and computer scientists are historically quite low. Therefore, there is a lot of effort to get women involved in science and technology. There's nothing genetic or inherent in women that stops them from getting involved in science and technology, but it turns out that historically the numbers of women involved are low. Because society desires to reverse that trend, many organizations, scholarships, and programs are created to entice more women to enter the fields. It's not always institutionalized sexism or racism that is the problem. It can just be that statistics went lopsided in particular demographics and some group or society at large wants to counteract the issue by promoting behaviors in the underrepresented demographics.
Ugh.
He didn't present it as a biological fact. He said "Girls generally are not interested in competive games", which implies that if you ask women if they like competitive games, they are less likely to say yes than men. Come on, that's probably true. Not due to biology! Just simply the current reality.
And you're freaking out that he's expressing a stereotype and a generalization, when the entire discussion speaks to a generalization about women. The generalization is that they are unsuccessful in Starcraft 2. You can't have someone announce a generalization and then get mad when everyone replies that other general facts contribute to the original generalization.
If we're getting auto-pissed at any and all generalizations, then the whole thread's an offensive sexist mess! You can't say women aren't represented in Starcraft! There are an entire handful of them! etc.
While we're at it, not ALLLLL Starcraft II players send sexual harassment over Twitch.tv chat, so no talking about how that could contribute to the numbers!
|
As people have stated before, I see utterly nothing wrong with either of these
Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: • “Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements”
• “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
Both of them hold true in my eyes. The rest of your post is wholly unconvincing of there being anything wrong with this mentality. From what I've seen, there are not many black progamers either. If EG signed a black gamer that was in diamond that had absolutely nothing on his resume, I'm sure there would be backlash too.
|
On January 04 2013 05:04 R3DT1D3 wrote: Even incredibly popular sports (like the NBA) can't support women only leagues. While it would be nice for more females to be involved in gaming, I just don't think it's feasible in any sort of physical competition that is already dominated by men.
uhhhhh
WNBA?
|
On January 04 2013 05:50 playa wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 05:42 skatblast wrote: If you have female only tournaments, than you should be able to have all male tournaments. Its not a physical sport there is no advantage. It's not about advantages or disadvantages. It's just about the question of do you want there to be more girl gamers or not? I know a girl gamer. She likes playing tournaments. You feel kinda bad because you know she has 0 chance. It's just for "fun." But, if there actually were girl tournaments, she probably would have a legit shot of winning. The lack of tournaments for girls just hurts their drive to play. They already are an "endangered species," may as well try to protect them if you care about them at all. It could help remove some stigmas attached to girl and guy gamers. There are already guy pro gamers that are there because they are entertainers (thin line between entertainer and clown)... having a girl league would be far less of a joke to me.
Your friend would be equally likely to beat a male GM as a female GM. If she's playing in tournaments, but being unrealistic (read: playing above her skill level) there is never hope for her to win - unisex competition or female only - it doesn't matter. Some people are destined for enjoy level, and I don't think a female only league would be any easier for female players to win against players of equal skill. What deters other girls from even entering that league would be the level of opposition. It's like creating a league for only... I dunno... ginger players. Yes, you get less people, because it's rare for someone to be ginger, making the gaps in skill levels between individual players MUCH MORE noticeable. While it makes it easier for the best player of that group to win, it actually makes it much harder for them to actually showcase their skill, due to the limitations of the competition as a whole. If eSports organizations genuinely feel like they're helping minority groups of any kind by having "niche tournaments" than so be it. I disagree strongly with it. Tournaments should be open to everyone who is eligible to compete.
|
On January 04 2013 06:00 dUTtrOACh wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 05:50 playa wrote:On January 04 2013 05:42 skatblast wrote: If you have female only tournaments, than you should be able to have all male tournaments. Its not a physical sport there is no advantage. It's not about advantages or disadvantages. It's just about the question of do you want there to be more girl gamers or not? I know a girl gamer. She likes playing tournaments. You feel kinda bad because you know she has 0 chance. It's just for "fun." But, if there actually were girl tournaments, she probably would have a legit shot of winning. The lack of tournaments for girls just hurts their drive to play. They already are an "endangered species," may as well try to protect them if you care about them at all. It could help remove some stigmas attached to girl and guy gamers. There are already guy pro gamers that are there because they are entertainers (thin line between entertainer and clown)... having a girl league would be far less of a joke to me. Your friend would be equally likely to beat a male GM as a female GM. If she's playing in tournaments, but being unrealistic (read: playing above her skill level) there is never hope for her to win - unisex competition or female only - it doesn't matter. Some people are destined for enjoy level, and I don't think a female only league would be any easier for female players to win against players of equal skill. What deters other girls from even entering that league would be the level of opposition. It's like creating a league for only... I dunno... ginger players. Yes, you get less people, because it's rare for someone to be ginger, making the gaps in skill levels between individual players MUCH MORE noticeable. While it makes it easier for the best player of that group to win, it actually makes it much harder for them to actually showcase their skill, due to the limitations of the competition as a whole. If eSports organizations genuinely feel like they're helping minority groups of any kind by having "niche tournaments" than so be it. I disagree strongly with it. Tournaments should be open to everyone who is eligible to compete.
Obviously, but that's not the reality of the skill level of the two genders. She's high diamond. I'm not aware of any girl players that are GM. There's probably not many that are masters, either. So for any girl gamer wanting a legit shot to compete, a girl only tournament would be huge. Even if you're silver league, it's a lot easier to advance to a competitive level within the girl scene than to beat the GM players entering other tournaments. The skill level will always be lower for girl leagues until there are just as many girls players as guys.
|
On January 04 2013 05:53 FabledIntegral wrote:As people have stated before, I see utterly nothing wrong with either of these Show nested quote +Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: • “Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements”
• “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
Both of them hold true in my eyes. The rest of your post is wholly unconvincing of there being anything wrong with this mentality. From what I've seen, there are not many black progamers either. If EG signed a black gamer that was in diamond that had absolutely nothing on his resume, I'm sure there would be backlash too.
Interesting to bring up something like affirmative action into the discussion. I imagine community demographics break down on extremely skewed lines, probably something to the effect of: White/Asian males as the majority, Misc. Ethnicity males (forgive the lack of specifics here there would be a lot), and in third you would have females as a group across ethnic lines.
The second supposition inherently implies that there is no other role that a team member might play regardless of showings in competition. A lot of rosters have players that fit that bill. The former idea, that females are being signed by virtue of their gender rather than merit definitely holds water in my opinion. I think the mentality is not necessarily incorrect, but more something which we should look to affect in a positive way.
Offering venues for competitive play so as to develop a resume for teams to show, and just offering a venue outside of team leagues and open brackets at major events.
|
On January 04 2013 06:10 playa wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 06:00 dUTtrOACh wrote:On January 04 2013 05:50 playa wrote:On January 04 2013 05:42 skatblast wrote: If you have female only tournaments, than you should be able to have all male tournaments. Its not a physical sport there is no advantage. It's not about advantages or disadvantages. It's just about the question of do you want there to be more girl gamers or not? I know a girl gamer. She likes playing tournaments. You feel kinda bad because you know she has 0 chance. It's just for "fun." But, if there actually were girl tournaments, she probably would have a legit shot of winning. The lack of tournaments for girls just hurts their drive to play. They already are an "endangered species," may as well try to protect them if you care about them at all. It could help remove some stigmas attached to girl and guy gamers. There are already guy pro gamers that are there because they are entertainers (thin line between entertainer and clown)... having a girl league would be far less of a joke to me. Your friend would be equally likely to beat a male GM as a female GM. If she's playing in tournaments, but being unrealistic (read: playing above her skill level) there is never hope for her to win - unisex competition or female only - it doesn't matter. Some people are destined for enjoy level, and I don't think a female only league would be any easier for female players to win against players of equal skill. What deters other girls from even entering that league would be the level of opposition. It's like creating a league for only... I dunno... ginger players. Yes, you get less people, because it's rare for someone to be ginger, making the gaps in skill levels between individual players MUCH MORE noticeable. While it makes it easier for the best player of that group to win, it actually makes it much harder for them to actually showcase their skill, due to the limitations of the competition as a whole. If eSports organizations genuinely feel like they're helping minority groups of any kind by having "niche tournaments" than so be it. I disagree strongly with it. Tournaments should be open to everyone who is eligible to compete. Obviously, but that's not the reality of the skill level of the two genders. She's high diamond. I'm not aware of any girl players that are GM. There's probably not many that are masters, either. So for any girl gamer wanting a legit shot to compete, a girl only tournament would be huge. Even if you're silver league, it's a lot easier to advance to a competitive level within the girl scene than to beat the GM players entering other tournaments. The skill level will always be lower for girl leagues until there are just as many girls players as guys.
The same can be said for any male diamond player and the vast majority of the player base but that aside. Why do you think there's a demand for girl only tournaments from girls?. Are they not content with just playing the ladder/ciustom games like 99.9% of everyone else?. I am not against female tournaments but I don't really think they would accomplish much.
The female player base of starcraft 2 is from my understanding really low. Sure you could create a tournament for the in my mind really low numbers of female players who want to compete. That's no big deal but its not a huge issue if there are no girl tournaments either.
|
Girl only tournaments are demanded to increase female participation. Doing so has 0 negative side-effects.
|
On January 04 2013 06:14 ThomasjServo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 05:53 FabledIntegral wrote:As people have stated before, I see utterly nothing wrong with either of these Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: • “Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements”
• “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
Both of them hold true in my eyes. The rest of your post is wholly unconvincing of there being anything wrong with this mentality. From what I've seen, there are not many black progamers either. If EG signed a black gamer that was in diamond that had absolutely nothing on his resume, I'm sure there would be backlash too. Interesting to bring up something like affirmative action into the discussion. I imagine community demographics break down on extremely skewed lines, probably something to the effect of: White/Asian males as the majority, Misc. Ethnicity males (forgive the lack of specifics here there would be a lot), and in third you would have females as a group across ethnic lines. The second supposition inherently implies that there is no other role that a team member might play regardless of showings in competition. A lot of rosters have players that fit that bill. The former idea, that females are being signed by virtue of their gender rather than merit definitely holds water in my opinion. I think the mentality is not necessarily incorrect, but more something which we should look to affect in a positive way. Offering venues for competitive play so as to develop a resume for teams to show, and just offering a venue outside of team leagues and open brackets at major events.
This is why I'm saying it comes down to the organizations at the end of the day. Fans will gravitate toward what they like, so teams should feel free to experiment with different types of PR, but let's also not forget to distinguish that there can be a bit of a difference between a pro and an entertainer; sometimes, a player is both, and sometimes they're either one. As long as a team isn't sending their entertainers to serious tournaments, in the place of their deserving pros, to be used as sacrificial ratings lambs, I really don't have a problem with why they add new players to their roster. The integrity & success of eSports are measured by its ability to branch out to a larger audience, but without becoming a farce.
|
On January 04 2013 05:53 FabledIntegral wrote:As people have stated before, I see utterly nothing wrong with either of these Show nested quote +Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: • “Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements”
• “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
Both of them hold true in my eyes. The rest of your post is wholly unconvincing of there being anything wrong with this mentality. From what I've seen, there are not many black progamers either. If EG signed a black gamer that was in diamond that had absolutely nothing on his resume, I'm sure there would be backlash too. Yeah, pretty much this. There also are very few disabled SC2 players, and depending on the disability, they may have quite the disadvantage in game, but you wouldn't give a disabled guy a pro team jersey and parade him around on stage unless he was posting actual tournament results.
Just so we get away from the idea of minorities, think of it this way. If a professional coach had a 14 year old nephew in Gold league and he put him on the roster and had him promoted as a pro gamer, people would call him insane. The team would be discredited. The kid just isn't good at the game! Out of the Starcraft community's core values, technical skill holds by far the most importance, followed closely by integrity. This utterly breaks both. In the former case, those values are often broken for the sake of ad views. More people should come to understand why this creates a negative reaction.
|
On January 04 2013 06:10 playa wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 06:00 dUTtrOACh wrote:On January 04 2013 05:50 playa wrote:On January 04 2013 05:42 skatblast wrote: If you have female only tournaments, than you should be able to have all male tournaments. Its not a physical sport there is no advantage. It's not about advantages or disadvantages. It's just about the question of do you want there to be more girl gamers or not? I know a girl gamer. She likes playing tournaments. You feel kinda bad because you know she has 0 chance. It's just for "fun." But, if there actually were girl tournaments, she probably would have a legit shot of winning. The lack of tournaments for girls just hurts their drive to play. They already are an "endangered species," may as well try to protect them if you care about them at all. It could help remove some stigmas attached to girl and guy gamers. There are already guy pro gamers that are there because they are entertainers (thin line between entertainer and clown)... having a girl league would be far less of a joke to me. Your friend would be equally likely to beat a male GM as a female GM. If she's playing in tournaments, but being unrealistic (read: playing above her skill level) there is never hope for her to win - unisex competition or female only - it doesn't matter. Some people are destined for enjoy level, and I don't think a female only league would be any easier for female players to win against players of equal skill. What deters other girls from even entering that league would be the level of opposition. It's like creating a league for only... I dunno... ginger players. Yes, you get less people, because it's rare for someone to be ginger, making the gaps in skill levels between individual players MUCH MORE noticeable. While it makes it easier for the best player of that group to win, it actually makes it much harder for them to actually showcase their skill, due to the limitations of the competition as a whole. If eSports organizations genuinely feel like they're helping minority groups of any kind by having "niche tournaments" than so be it. I disagree strongly with it. Tournaments should be open to everyone who is eligible to compete. Obviously, but that's not the reality of the skill level of the two genders. She's high diamond. I'm not aware of any girl players that are GM. There's probably not many that are masters, either. So for any girl gamer wanting a legit shot to compete, a girl only tournament would be huge. Even if you're silver league, it's a lot easier to advance to a competitive level within the girl scene than to beat the GM players entering other tournaments. The skill level will always be lower for girl leagues until there are just as many girls players as guys.
I know that if I were to play her in a unisex tournament, I would get my ass whooped.
I'm convinced, however, that the skill level of female tournaments being lower is a result of the sample group being lower. Local and Online tournaments often will also have lower skill levels, because of this very reason. MC and Jaedong aren't going to show up at your local $5 entry fee LAN, but Joe Schmo the bronze Zerg might show up for the love of eSports and get destructed in the first round.
I'm not sure how I feel about a women only Proleague, or even women only tournaments. It just kinda comes out like segregation.
|
I'm convinced, however, that the skill level of female tournaments being lower is a result of the sample group being lower.
Bingo yes. That's why comparison between two genders is just wrong.
|
I really don't think females take the harshest criticism... I'm actually shocked how well the disproportionate amount of transgender females have been received.
I totally support female tournaments/players/hosts/casters/teams as long as they support themselves. If they are fiscally draining other SC2 resources then I have a problem with it. Frankly I think the "female" angle is a poor investment avenue for SC but if there is a niche that can support itself I'm all for it. What I don't want is a an "IPL 6 - ladies invitational" which drains stream time/player salary/caster salary but isn't paying for itself. If people prefer watching a clueless bimbo prance around on stage than some amazing host commentator; then frankly the girl is better qualified and deserves the job. NB: that's not a commentary on that twitter feud, the female actually handled herself very well in comparison to that idiot (outside of her comparing herself to an affirmative action beneficiary).
|
On November 20 2012 05:20 dddoushio wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:
[*] “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
I don't understand how this is prejudice
It's not, that's the whole crux of the issue IMO. Some people view this as something horrific like racism.
It's simply merit based promotion.
People have pretty much accepted Scarlett. There's the normal questions of is she good right now, etc. But I mean if another person came along with the same type of results, there might be some small minority of people who are vocal. But people like myself would accept her. I guess I have the conceit to think I might be in the majority on this.
|
On January 04 2013 07:14 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +I'm convinced, however, that the skill level of female tournaments being lower is a result of the sample group being lower. Bingo yes. That's why comparison between two genders is just wrong.
I can't say I agree with that. There are plenty of women Soccer/basketball/tennis players and the best players are always going to be men. On a more comparable level there are lots of women Poker/Pool/Golf/Chess players and the elite of the elite are still always men.
It's not about women being the BEST at something. The LPGA can support itself and is plenty entertaining but that doesn't mean women playing in the US open or its gonna be considered sexist. They're just not at the same level. (Looking at you Michelle Wie)
You too Manon Rheaume.
|
On January 04 2013 07:40 Dubsy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 07:14 Torte de Lini wrote:I'm convinced, however, that the skill level of female tournaments being lower is a result of the sample group being lower. Bingo yes. That's why comparison between two genders is just wrong. I can't say I agree with that. There are plenty of women Soccer/basketball/tennis players and the best players are always going to be men. On a more comparable level there are lots of women Poker/Pool/Golf/Chess players and the elite of the elite are still always men. It's not about women being the BEST at something. The LPGA can support itself and is plenty entertaining but that doesn't mean women playing in the US open or its gonna be considered sexist. They're just not at the same level. (Looking at you Michelle Wie) You too Manon Rheaume.
Maybe, but that doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't have women's leagues to not find out.
|
On January 04 2013 08:24 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 07:40 Dubsy wrote:On January 04 2013 07:14 Torte de Lini wrote:I'm convinced, however, that the skill level of female tournaments being lower is a result of the sample group being lower. Bingo yes. That's why comparison between two genders is just wrong. I can't say I agree with that. There are plenty of women Soccer/basketball/tennis players and the best players are always going to be men. On a more comparable level there are lots of women Poker/Pool/Golf/Chess players and the elite of the elite are still always men. It's not about women being the BEST at something. The LPGA can support itself and is plenty entertaining but that doesn't mean we need women playing in the US open or its gonna be considered sexist. They're just not at the same level. (Looking at you Michelle Wie) You too Manon Rheaume. Maybe, but that doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't have women's leagues to not find out.
Uhhh... Yeah that's why I said I'm in favor of them if they can support themselves financially. If they're just siphoning funds from the real money makers and burning it because it turns out female tourneys are unsustainable, then I do not support them at all.
|
On January 04 2013 08:33 Dubsy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 08:24 Torte de Lini wrote:On January 04 2013 07:40 Dubsy wrote:On January 04 2013 07:14 Torte de Lini wrote:I'm convinced, however, that the skill level of female tournaments being lower is a result of the sample group being lower. Bingo yes. That's why comparison between two genders is just wrong. I can't say I agree with that. There are plenty of women Soccer/basketball/tennis players and the best players are always going to be men. On a more comparable level there are lots of women Poker/Pool/Golf/Chess players and the elite of the elite are still always men. It's not about women being the BEST at something. The LPGA can support itself and is plenty entertaining but that doesn't mean we need women playing in the US open or its gonna be considered sexist. They're just not at the same level. (Looking at you Michelle Wie) You too Manon Rheaume. Maybe, but that doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't have women's leagues to not find out. Uhhh... Yeah that's why I said I'm in favor of them if they can support themselves financially. If they're just siphoning funds from the real money makers and burning it because it turns out female tourneys are unsustainable, then I do not support them at all.
So then E-Sports shouldn't have been started either then? I can see your point because it is logical, but at the same time, it has its flaws that I want to hear your view on.
|
On January 04 2013 07:40 Dubsy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 07:14 Torte de Lini wrote:I'm convinced, however, that the skill level of female tournaments being lower is a result of the sample group being lower. Bingo yes. That's why comparison between two genders is just wrong. I can't say I agree with that. There are plenty of women Soccer/basketball/tennis players and the best players are always going to be men. On a more comparable level there are lots of women Poker/Pool/Golf/Chess players and the elite of the elite are still always men. It's not about women being the BEST at something. The LPGA can support itself and is plenty entertaining but that doesn't mean women playing in the US open or its gonna be considered sexist. They're just not at the same level. (Looking at you Michelle Wie) You too Manon Rheaume.
Poker, Pool, Chess & Golf? These are pretty much sports where the elite being mostly male are directly a result of them being very 'masculine' activities. These games are also centuries old, with generations of clout. eSports is new & fresh compared to any of these, and shouldn't be held to the same standard. It's also tiny in comparison. You take something tiny and marginalize what could potentially be 50% (by virtue of approx. man to woman ratio) of the audience, and you keep it tiny forever. Maybe after centuries of male dominance in unisex eSports leagues can it be determined if men are actually better than women at a game, requiring a separate league. Starcraft 2 doesn't have centuries to make this case.
EDIT: And yet, already we have people who are convinced that women can't realistically compete vs men at a computer game? lol.
|
it's a moot point this entire thing.
Scarlett is the most recognized and respected player in the NA scene. She's done this off the back of amazing in-game performances something any male to be known in the scene as a professional has to do.
The glass ceiling is an illusion for anybody that doesn't have the drive or determination to break it, like she has.
|
I certainly wish there would be more Iron Lady tournaments. I had allot of fun competing (and losing) in one last year.
I also, of course, like to compete in the plat level tourny's on Z33k. But its more interesting to me as a female gamer to enter a girls only tournament just to mix it up a bit and meet other girl gamers. I think it's be awesome if Frag Dolls started playing sc2.
|
Yes, female leagues encourage participation
|
On January 04 2013 08:24 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 07:40 Dubsy wrote:On January 04 2013 07:14 Torte de Lini wrote:I'm convinced, however, that the skill level of female tournaments being lower is a result of the sample group being lower. Bingo yes. That's why comparison between two genders is just wrong. I can't say I agree with that. There are plenty of women Soccer/basketball/tennis players and the best players are always going to be men. On a more comparable level there are lots of women Poker/Pool/Golf/Chess players and the elite of the elite are still always men. It's not about women being the BEST at something. The LPGA can support itself and is plenty entertaining but that doesn't mean women playing in the US open or its gonna be considered sexist. They're just not at the same level. (Looking at you Michelle Wie) You too Manon Rheaume. Maybe, but that doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't have women's leagues to not find out.
You need actual interest. Right now there's too much shit as is. It goes back to what I said earlier about practically no viewers and this isn't gender specific. It applies to many smaller tournaments. Remember that regional you did Torte? What was it if I remember correctly when I was there I think it was 97 or 120 something for the WCS, oh wait I mean WCG I believe. It applies to many things. Right now CSL Utah versus George Mason is at 127 viewers as I'm writing this. It's fairly common.
|
On November 20 2012 04:34 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: The only, only problem I have with the discussion is the idea that female-only tournaments aren't sexist, while male only tournaments would be.
That's like saying affirmative action is racist. Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: I don't like the way society is going about this kind of thing in general. Yes, women have it hard in a lot of ways, and I'm not trying to slight that. But men have it hard in a lot of other ways, and this isn't really brought to light ever. As a man who likes to think he's respectful and neutral regarding sex as possible, the rights that I don't have regarding my children, or a failed marriage, or any number of other issues caused by men in the past is pretty frustrating as it is. We have a huge issue of equality, where women have different rights from men everywhere and that's the bigger issue. Allowing tournaments limited to only one sex, be it male or female, while a great idea in theory, can only be a stepping stone in my opinion.
This is ridiculous, one problem society does not have is males being discriminated against. Just look at this community, where maybe some female players get preferential treatment in some ways, but mostly they have to put up with incredible amounts of hostility from the community for their gender. They can't ever achieve anything without constant discussion about it, Scarlett for instance still has to put up with a multitude of trolls on reddit making disgusting comments every time she's mentioned - although her case is slightly different of course. Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 04:22 Uncreative_Troll wrote:Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. I don't agree with that sentence. We don't see male Diamond(?) players getting into a top Korean team or males joining pro teams as a player while having barely touched Sc2 the last months... It's much easier to get noticed (and get opportunities) as a girl in a male dominated scene and I openly admit that I sometimes prefer the stream of a random female player with a webcam over a Progamer. Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement). Djokovic and Sharapova are both big tennis stars, yet Sharapova would lose without winning any games if they faced off. Stephano is the hero of the foreigner community, yet there are many Korean players that would be highly favored against him, even though he makes more money and has more fame. The WCS celebrated local tournament winners, they received a prize, were spotlighted, interviewed etc. Yet a lot of these players won't go far in a 'legit' tournament. At one point or another you have to realize that when you have divisions in the scene, with separate audiences etc. that then each scene can have its own stars. I honestly think that the best thing for female gaming would be to have more female leagues and more females playing the game.
Affirmative Action is racist.....
|
On January 04 2013 11:59 Josh111 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 04:34 Grumbels wrote:On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: The only, only problem I have with the discussion is the idea that female-only tournaments aren't sexist, while male only tournaments would be.
That's like saying affirmative action is racist. On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: I don't like the way society is going about this kind of thing in general. Yes, women have it hard in a lot of ways, and I'm not trying to slight that. But men have it hard in a lot of other ways, and this isn't really brought to light ever. As a man who likes to think he's respectful and neutral regarding sex as possible, the rights that I don't have regarding my children, or a failed marriage, or any number of other issues caused by men in the past is pretty frustrating as it is. We have a huge issue of equality, where women have different rights from men everywhere and that's the bigger issue. Allowing tournaments limited to only one sex, be it male or female, while a great idea in theory, can only be a stepping stone in my opinion.
This is ridiculous, one problem society does not have is males being discriminated against. Just look at this community, where maybe some female players get preferential treatment in some ways, but mostly they have to put up with incredible amounts of hostility from the community for their gender. They can't ever achieve anything without constant discussion about it, Scarlett for instance still has to put up with a multitude of trolls on reddit making disgusting comments every time she's mentioned - although her case is slightly different of course. On November 20 2012 04:22 Uncreative_Troll wrote:Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. I don't agree with that sentence. We don't see male Diamond(?) players getting into a top Korean team or males joining pro teams as a player while having barely touched Sc2 the last months... It's much easier to get noticed (and get opportunities) as a girl in a male dominated scene and I openly admit that I sometimes prefer the stream of a random female player with a webcam over a Progamer. Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement). Djokovic and Sharapova are both big tennis stars, yet Sharapova would lose without winning any games if they faced off. Stephano is the hero of the foreigner community, yet there are many Korean players that would be highly favored against him, even though he makes more money and has more fame. The WCS celebrated local tournament winners, they received a prize, were spotlighted, interviewed etc. Yet a lot of these players won't go far in a 'legit' tournament. At one point or another you have to realize that when you have divisions in the scene, with separate audiences etc. that then each scene can have its own stars. I honestly think that the best thing for female gaming would be to have more female leagues and more females playing the game. Affirmative Action is racist.....
Heh and then you would have those people out there saying how they aren't legit because they aren't playing against the toughest competition and history repeats itself. There are women's leagues for practically everything. Heck, even MBC had a women's league for BW and once the ratings came in that was it. No more.
On January 04 2013 05:23 NotRandoMNamE wrote: I believe KESPA had an all female tournament before in BW, which tossgirl won every time but I'm not sure what happened to it now.
^
This guy alluded to it and everyone knew she was the heavy favorite. Anyway, it was only one time and the ratings were terrible.
|
On January 04 2013 12:09 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 11:59 Josh111 wrote:On November 20 2012 04:34 Grumbels wrote:On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: The only, only problem I have with the discussion is the idea that female-only tournaments aren't sexist, while male only tournaments would be.
That's like saying affirmative action is racist. On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: I don't like the way society is going about this kind of thing in general. Yes, women have it hard in a lot of ways, and I'm not trying to slight that. But men have it hard in a lot of other ways, and this isn't really brought to light ever. As a man who likes to think he's respectful and neutral regarding sex as possible, the rights that I don't have regarding my children, or a failed marriage, or any number of other issues caused by men in the past is pretty frustrating as it is. We have a huge issue of equality, where women have different rights from men everywhere and that's the bigger issue. Allowing tournaments limited to only one sex, be it male or female, while a great idea in theory, can only be a stepping stone in my opinion.
This is ridiculous, one problem society does not have is males being discriminated against. Just look at this community, where maybe some female players get preferential treatment in some ways, but mostly they have to put up with incredible amounts of hostility from the community for their gender. They can't ever achieve anything without constant discussion about it, Scarlett for instance still has to put up with a multitude of trolls on reddit making disgusting comments every time she's mentioned - although her case is slightly different of course. On November 20 2012 04:22 Uncreative_Troll wrote:Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. I don't agree with that sentence. We don't see male Diamond(?) players getting into a top Korean team or males joining pro teams as a player while having barely touched Sc2 the last months... It's much easier to get noticed (and get opportunities) as a girl in a male dominated scene and I openly admit that I sometimes prefer the stream of a random female player with a webcam over a Progamer. Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement). Djokovic and Sharapova are both big tennis stars, yet Sharapova would lose without winning any games if they faced off. Stephano is the hero of the foreigner community, yet there are many Korean players that would be highly favored against him, even though he makes more money and has more fame. The WCS celebrated local tournament winners, they received a prize, were spotlighted, interviewed etc. Yet a lot of these players won't go far in a 'legit' tournament. At one point or another you have to realize that when you have divisions in the scene, with separate audiences etc. that then each scene can have its own stars. I honestly think that the best thing for female gaming would be to have more female leagues and more females playing the game. Affirmative Action is racist..... Heh and then you would have those people out there saying how they aren't legit because they aren't playing against the toughest competition and history repeats itself. There are women's leagues for practically everything. Heck, even MBC had a women's league for BW and once the ratings came in that was it. No more. Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 05:23 NotRandoMNamE wrote: I believe KESPA had an all female tournament before in BW, which tossgirl won every time but I'm not sure what happened to it now. ^ This guy alluded to it and everyone knew she was the heavy favorite. Anyway, it was only one time and the ratings were terrible.
Never said anything about not having women's leagues or that women leagues are not legit or anything. Just someone said affirmative action wasn't racist and i was disagreeing.
I compete in rock climbing and women and men are separated because men and women have different body types and it wouldn't be fair for them to compete together.
I personally feel women leagues should exist for esports as its really important to foster talent that otherwise might not exist. Same reason why I feel there should be more NA only tournaments.
Doesn't change the fact that affirmative action is racist.
|
On January 04 2013 12:25 Josh111 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 12:09 StarStruck wrote:On January 04 2013 11:59 Josh111 wrote:On November 20 2012 04:34 Grumbels wrote:On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: The only, only problem I have with the discussion is the idea that female-only tournaments aren't sexist, while male only tournaments would be.
That's like saying affirmative action is racist. On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: I don't like the way society is going about this kind of thing in general. Yes, women have it hard in a lot of ways, and I'm not trying to slight that. But men have it hard in a lot of other ways, and this isn't really brought to light ever. As a man who likes to think he's respectful and neutral regarding sex as possible, the rights that I don't have regarding my children, or a failed marriage, or any number of other issues caused by men in the past is pretty frustrating as it is. We have a huge issue of equality, where women have different rights from men everywhere and that's the bigger issue. Allowing tournaments limited to only one sex, be it male or female, while a great idea in theory, can only be a stepping stone in my opinion.
This is ridiculous, one problem society does not have is males being discriminated against. Just look at this community, where maybe some female players get preferential treatment in some ways, but mostly they have to put up with incredible amounts of hostility from the community for their gender. They can't ever achieve anything without constant discussion about it, Scarlett for instance still has to put up with a multitude of trolls on reddit making disgusting comments every time she's mentioned - although her case is slightly different of course. On November 20 2012 04:22 Uncreative_Troll wrote:Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. I don't agree with that sentence. We don't see male Diamond(?) players getting into a top Korean team or males joining pro teams as a player while having barely touched Sc2 the last months... It's much easier to get noticed (and get opportunities) as a girl in a male dominated scene and I openly admit that I sometimes prefer the stream of a random female player with a webcam over a Progamer. Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement). Djokovic and Sharapova are both big tennis stars, yet Sharapova would lose without winning any games if they faced off. Stephano is the hero of the foreigner community, yet there are many Korean players that would be highly favored against him, even though he makes more money and has more fame. The WCS celebrated local tournament winners, they received a prize, were spotlighted, interviewed etc. Yet a lot of these players won't go far in a 'legit' tournament. At one point or another you have to realize that when you have divisions in the scene, with separate audiences etc. that then each scene can have its own stars. I honestly think that the best thing for female gaming would be to have more female leagues and more females playing the game. Affirmative Action is racist..... Heh and then you would have those people out there saying how they aren't legit because they aren't playing against the toughest competition and history repeats itself. There are women's leagues for practically everything. Heck, even MBC had a women's league for BW and once the ratings came in that was it. No more. On January 04 2013 05:23 NotRandoMNamE wrote: I believe KESPA had an all female tournament before in BW, which tossgirl won every time but I'm not sure what happened to it now. ^ This guy alluded to it and everyone knew she was the heavy favorite. Anyway, it was only one time and the ratings were terrible. Never said anything about not having women's leagues or that women leagues are not legit or anything. Just someone said affirmative action wasn't racist and i was disagreeing. I compete in rock climbing and women and men are separated because men and women have different body types and it wouldn't be fair for them to compete together. I personally feel women leagues should exist for esports as its really important to foster talent that otherwise might not exist. Same reason why I feel there should be more NA only tournaments. Doesn't change the fact that affirmative action is racist.
Ah, I was alluding to the other guys post and just continuing the conversation. It's funny that you mention rock climbing because I was just at a WRCC event. Anyway, I've already stated where I stand on more tournaments. I'm all for people having getting together to have lans but it's going to be awfully difficult trying to get more sponsors on board if you are trying to generate traffic. If it's for fun and games no problem, but if you're trying to make a business out of it? Good luck to them.
|
I personally feel women leagues should exist for esports as its really important to foster talent that otherwise might not exist. Same reason why I feel there should be more NA only tournaments.
Exactly how I feel!
|
On January 04 2013 12:09 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 11:59 Josh111 wrote:On November 20 2012 04:34 Grumbels wrote:On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: The only, only problem I have with the discussion is the idea that female-only tournaments aren't sexist, while male only tournaments would be.
That's like saying affirmative action is racist. On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: I don't like the way society is going about this kind of thing in general. Yes, women have it hard in a lot of ways, and I'm not trying to slight that. But men have it hard in a lot of other ways, and this isn't really brought to light ever. As a man who likes to think he's respectful and neutral regarding sex as possible, the rights that I don't have regarding my children, or a failed marriage, or any number of other issues caused by men in the past is pretty frustrating as it is. We have a huge issue of equality, where women have different rights from men everywhere and that's the bigger issue. Allowing tournaments limited to only one sex, be it male or female, while a great idea in theory, can only be a stepping stone in my opinion.
This is ridiculous, one problem society does not have is males being discriminated against. Just look at this community, where maybe some female players get preferential treatment in some ways, but mostly they have to put up with incredible amounts of hostility from the community for their gender. They can't ever achieve anything without constant discussion about it, Scarlett for instance still has to put up with a multitude of trolls on reddit making disgusting comments every time she's mentioned - although her case is slightly different of course. On November 20 2012 04:22 Uncreative_Troll wrote:Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. I don't agree with that sentence. We don't see male Diamond(?) players getting into a top Korean team or males joining pro teams as a player while having barely touched Sc2 the last months... It's much easier to get noticed (and get opportunities) as a girl in a male dominated scene and I openly admit that I sometimes prefer the stream of a random female player with a webcam over a Progamer. Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement). Djokovic and Sharapova are both big tennis stars, yet Sharapova would lose without winning any games if they faced off. Stephano is the hero of the foreigner community, yet there are many Korean players that would be highly favored against him, even though he makes more money and has more fame. The WCS celebrated local tournament winners, they received a prize, were spotlighted, interviewed etc. Yet a lot of these players won't go far in a 'legit' tournament. At one point or another you have to realize that when you have divisions in the scene, with separate audiences etc. that then each scene can have its own stars. I honestly think that the best thing for female gaming would be to have more female leagues and more females playing the game. Affirmative Action is racist..... Heh and then you would have those people out there saying how they aren't legit because they aren't playing against the toughest competition and history repeats itself. There are women's leagues for practically everything. Heck, even MBC had a women's league for BW and once the ratings came in that was it. No more. Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 05:23 NotRandoMNamE wrote: I believe KESPA had an all female tournament before in BW, which tossgirl won every time but I'm not sure what happened to it now. ^ This guy alluded to it and everyone knew she was the heavy favorite. Anyway, it was only one time and the ratings were terrible.
Actually, it ran for 4 iterations. And there may have been another set of female tournaments that ran for two iterations. I don't know if GameTV and GhemTV have been confused and are really the same tournament or not. (See Tossgirl). However, my point is that it was more than a one time thing. Although, admittedly, not much more than one time...
|
On January 04 2013 06:32 Torte de Lini wrote: Girl only tournaments are demanded to increase female participation. Doing so has 0 negative side-effects. Except the side effect of excluding a bunch of males solely for their sex? I don't see any reason why moving towards equality in terms of representation rather than opportunity has any remote sense of value. Why again is it better for the community to bring in 5 new female gamers as opposed to five new male gamers?
|
On January 04 2013 17:37 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 06:32 Torte de Lini wrote: Girl only tournaments are demanded to increase female participation. Doing so has 0 negative side-effects. Except the side effect of excluding a bunch of males solely for their sex? I don't see any reason why moving towards equality in terms of representation rather than opportunity has any remote sense of value. Why again is it better for the community to bring in 5 new female gamers as opposed to five new male gamers?
I can tell you didn't read the article.
|
On January 04 2013 17:28 iMAniaC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 12:09 StarStruck wrote:On January 04 2013 11:59 Josh111 wrote:On November 20 2012 04:34 Grumbels wrote:On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: The only, only problem I have with the discussion is the idea that female-only tournaments aren't sexist, while male only tournaments would be.
That's like saying affirmative action is racist. On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: I don't like the way society is going about this kind of thing in general. Yes, women have it hard in a lot of ways, and I'm not trying to slight that. But men have it hard in a lot of other ways, and this isn't really brought to light ever. As a man who likes to think he's respectful and neutral regarding sex as possible, the rights that I don't have regarding my children, or a failed marriage, or any number of other issues caused by men in the past is pretty frustrating as it is. We have a huge issue of equality, where women have different rights from men everywhere and that's the bigger issue. Allowing tournaments limited to only one sex, be it male or female, while a great idea in theory, can only be a stepping stone in my opinion.
This is ridiculous, one problem society does not have is males being discriminated against. Just look at this community, where maybe some female players get preferential treatment in some ways, but mostly they have to put up with incredible amounts of hostility from the community for their gender. They can't ever achieve anything without constant discussion about it, Scarlett for instance still has to put up with a multitude of trolls on reddit making disgusting comments every time she's mentioned - although her case is slightly different of course. On November 20 2012 04:22 Uncreative_Troll wrote:Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. I don't agree with that sentence. We don't see male Diamond(?) players getting into a top Korean team or males joining pro teams as a player while having barely touched Sc2 the last months... It's much easier to get noticed (and get opportunities) as a girl in a male dominated scene and I openly admit that I sometimes prefer the stream of a random female player with a webcam over a Progamer. Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement). Djokovic and Sharapova are both big tennis stars, yet Sharapova would lose without winning any games if they faced off. Stephano is the hero of the foreigner community, yet there are many Korean players that would be highly favored against him, even though he makes more money and has more fame. The WCS celebrated local tournament winners, they received a prize, were spotlighted, interviewed etc. Yet a lot of these players won't go far in a 'legit' tournament. At one point or another you have to realize that when you have divisions in the scene, with separate audiences etc. that then each scene can have its own stars. I honestly think that the best thing for female gaming would be to have more female leagues and more females playing the game. Affirmative Action is racist..... Heh and then you would have those people out there saying how they aren't legit because they aren't playing against the toughest competition and history repeats itself. There are women's leagues for practically everything. Heck, even MBC had a women's league for BW and once the ratings came in that was it. No more. On January 04 2013 05:23 NotRandoMNamE wrote: I believe KESPA had an all female tournament before in BW, which tossgirl won every time but I'm not sure what happened to it now. ^ This guy alluded to it and everyone knew she was the heavy favorite. Anyway, it was only one time and the ratings were terrible. Actually, it ran for 4 iterations. And there may have been another set of female tournaments that ran for two iterations. I don't know if GameTV and GhemTV have been confused and are really the same tournament or not. (See Tossgirl). However, my point is that it was more than a one time thing. Although, admittedly, not much more than one time...
I only remember the MBC one being televised.
|
Eh, we don't really need the tournaments televised. We just need active tournaments to increase participation.
|
On January 04 2013 08:37 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 08:33 Dubsy wrote:On January 04 2013 08:24 Torte de Lini wrote:On January 04 2013 07:40 Dubsy wrote:On January 04 2013 07:14 Torte de Lini wrote:I'm convinced, however, that the skill level of female tournaments being lower is a result of the sample group being lower. Bingo yes. That's why comparison between two genders is just wrong. I can't say I agree with that. There are plenty of women Soccer/basketball/tennis players and the best players are always going to be men. On a more comparable level there are lots of women Poker/Pool/Golf/Chess players and the elite of the elite are still always men. It's not about women being the BEST at something. The LPGA can support itself and is plenty entertaining but that doesn't mean we need women playing in the US open or its gonna be considered sexist. They're just not at the same level. (Looking at you Michelle Wie) You too Manon Rheaume. Maybe, but that doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't have women's leagues to not find out. Uhhh... Yeah that's why I said I'm in favor of them if they can support themselves financially. If they're just siphoning funds from the real money makers and burning it because it turns out female tourneys are unsustainable, then I do not support them at all. So then E-Sports shouldn't have been started either then? I can see your point because it is logical, but at the same time, it has its flaws that I want to hear your view on.
Can you please be more transparent in what I hold be responding to? You want to hear my views on some alleged flaws, but I'm not sure if you've pointed them out yet or not.
If you are saying that investing in Girls only tournaments is beneficial to SC2 (one guy even said there is no negative side effects, Hahahahah!) then I don't know if I agree. It absolutely is an enormous potential growth market, but we've been down that road already and it didn't catch on. Female only tourneys had few competitors, low interest from fans and boring competition. SC2 is in a super fragile state and this isn't the time to start putting the extremely limited available capital towards a project that has failed time and time again. Video games have been around for decades now and the demographic hasn't changed all that much.
And frankly there is absolutely zero barriers to entry for girls that haven't been bashed wide open already. They would almost certainly (ok 100% certainly) land on a pro team before an equally skilled male. It's a great time to be a girl gamer, there just aren't many good ones out there.
|
On January 04 2013 17:39 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 17:37 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 04 2013 06:32 Torte de Lini wrote: Girl only tournaments are demanded to increase female participation. Doing so has 0 negative side-effects. Except the side effect of excluding a bunch of males solely for their sex? I don't see any reason why moving towards equality in terms of representation rather than opportunity has any remote sense of value. Why again is it better for the community to bring in 5 new female gamers as opposed to five new male gamers? I can tell you didn't read the article.
Well, I read the first 25%, then skimmed the rest, didn't actually "skip" any actual portion, but it was quite a long article. Maybe it's because I went in with an unopened mindset? I read your points, I just didn't think there was any explanation for the value, but I'll read a little more in depth later tonight if you did address these issues with actual reasons >_<.
EDIT: Nope, reread instead of skimmed, you never addressed where the actual value is derived with having an additional woman involved instead of a man. I see zero value added.
This was the closest you got, from what I found.
Females should be praised for their own separate achievements; different standards and expectations for different types of people. Aren’t we then setting a lower standard for females over males? No, that is a comparison; we are actually just setting a system or scale for female E-sports. Females should have female tournaments and the reason for these events is that you want to expose all sectors of an E-Sport. As one user said on the topic of female-only tournaments:
You fail to make even a marginally convincing argument here really on why females should be praised for their own separate achievements.
|
On January 05 2013 06:23 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 17:39 Torte de Lini wrote:On January 04 2013 17:37 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 04 2013 06:32 Torte de Lini wrote: Girl only tournaments are demanded to increase female participation. Doing so has 0 negative side-effects. Except the side effect of excluding a bunch of males solely for their sex? I don't see any reason why moving towards equality in terms of representation rather than opportunity has any remote sense of value. Why again is it better for the community to bring in 5 new female gamers as opposed to five new male gamers? I can tell you didn't read the article. Well, I read the first 25%, then skimmed the rest, didn't actually "skip" any actual portion, but it was quite a long article. Maybe it's because I went in with an unopened mindset? I read your points, I just didn't think there was any explanation for the value, but I'll read a little more in depth later tonight if you did address these issues with actual reasons >_<. EDIT: Nope, reread instead of skimmed, you never addressed where the actual value is derived with having an additional woman involved instead of a man. I see zero value added. This was the closest you got, from what I found. Show nested quote +Females should be praised for their own separate achievements; different standards and expectations for different types of people. Aren’t we then setting a lower standard for females over males? No, that is a comparison; we are actually just setting a system or scale for female E-sports. Females should have female tournaments and the reason for these events is that you want to expose all sectors of an E-Sport. As one user said on the topic of female-only tournaments:
You fail to make even a marginally convincing argument here really on why females should be praised for their own separate achievements.
The ultimate problem with your original argument is the comparison. You compare two separate genders that are not opposing, but just different. Their differences within the E-Sports context are supported by different circumstances, they cannot be compared. But you try to anyway by stating that because there are more women-only events, men suffer. Which is false and in fact, there has never been a feeling or worry of that kind thus far (even in established women's leagues such as CS & ESL)
That's why I said you didn't read the article, because it directly contradicts your view. Because 5 new female gamers are brought in does not necessarily mean 5 men are hindered in coming in. It doesn't work that way for teams who are looking to acquire female progamers, it doesn't work that way for tournament organizers and their aimed marketability and it doesn't work that way for spectators (in part).
Women should be praised for their separate achievements similar to why champions of NA in WCS. Because it emphasizes context, adds value to what should be valued (just because you didn't beat a Code S player doesn't necessarily mean your success cannot be celebrated or highlighted - similar to if you didn't beat someone MLG, doesn't make your IPL achievement any less redeeming).
Context and circumstances are important, but you chose to ignore those to make a weak comparison. The value of adding women is to better shape an E-Sport for all sectors. There is no comparative value of having more women than men in that regard, there is value in bringing more sectors and areas of an E-Sport to further garner diverse interests.
|
On January 05 2013 03:18 Torte de Lini wrote: Eh, we don't really need the tournaments televised. We just need active tournaments to increase participation.
We were talking about a specific case Torte and I already commented on that idea a few posts ago so no need for me to talk about that further.
|
On January 05 2013 06:53 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 03:18 Torte de Lini wrote: Eh, we don't really need the tournaments televised. We just need active tournaments to increase participation.
We were talking about a specific case Torte and I already commented on that idea a few posts ago so no need for me to talk about that further.
my bad :B
|
On January 04 2013 04:15 iMAniaC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 03:14 Ender985 wrote:Also to add something to the discussion, I think female-only leagues are a good thing and should continue to get more exposure. Imagine if a female-specific GSL was held; we would probably see far better fermale players develop just to try and beat Scarlett for the price money. You don't have to think female-only leagues are a good thing, you can pretty much know. I distinctly remember seeing Flo and Maddelisk both say that they got competitive because they played in some female-only tournament for fun and then got encouraged to become competitive when they realized how much fun it actually was (or something along those lines. I'm writing from memory). Considering the small number of public female SC2 gamers, we could already say that the female-only tournaments have done a considerable impact in drawing women to competitive SC2. Also, at the end of 2011, there were lots of female-only tournaments and at the same time, several teams added at least one woman to their rosters. I'm willing to think that the correlation is not random.
This is an important point that I think addresses some of the concerns about female-only tournaments that other people have raised in this thread. Rather than think of them like this:
On January 04 2013 17:37 FabledIntegral wrote: excluding a bunch of males solely for their sex
we can look at it as a way to increase the participation in the scene of a currently underrepresented group (women). If the post I quoted earlier is accurate, then female-only tournaments would seem to be effective for this purpose.
The above concern also brings up a contrast between an ideal world in which all things are actually equal and none of this would be necessary and the messy, troublesome world we inhabit, in which we sometimes have to make accommodations to get ourselves closer to what we ultimately hope to see---in this case, greater and more widespread participation in the Starcraft II scene.
|
The above concern also brings up a contrast between an ideal world in which all things are actually equal and none of this would be necessary and the messy, troublesome world we inhabit, in which we sometimes have to make accommodations to get ourselves closer to what we ultimately hope to see---in this case, greater and more widespread participation in the Starcraft II scene.
bingo, great point :B
|
On November 20 2012 09:43 phuzi0n wrote: ... .... Are there any genetic differences that really hinder females playing esports that warrants separate leagues?
This is the first question. When that has been explored the discussion can continue in a informed and consious manner.
We cant (or rather shouldnt) take into account enviroment. I can illustrate this with the following: "I want a seperate league for those of us who didnt have access to internet at home till 2005 because we are at an disadvantage." It just doesnt work.
|
On January 05 2013 08:46 Mooneyes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 09:43 phuzi0n wrote: ... .... Are there any genetic differences that really hinder females playing esports that warrants separate leagues? This is the first question. When that has been explored the discussion can continue in a informed and consious manner. We cant (or rather shouldnt) take into account enviroment. I can illustrate this with the following: "I want a seperate league for those of us who didnt have access to internet at home till 2005 because we are at an disadvantage." It just doesnt work.
It's been explored and we stated that it isn't relevant.
There is no associated feeling with people who have no internet at home til 2005. That's a very bad comparison to gender. Yours is technology based, our's is cultural and biological base.
If you wanted a separate league for those who in North-America, then you have connections on society, cultural, skill level (arguably) and language.
|
On January 05 2013 08:52 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 08:46 Mooneyes wrote:On November 20 2012 09:43 phuzi0n wrote: ... .... Are there any genetic differences that really hinder females playing esports that warrants separate leagues? This is the first question. When that has been explored the discussion can continue in a informed and consious manner. We cant (or rather shouldnt) take into account enviroment. I can illustrate this with the following: "I want a seperate league for those of us who didnt have access to internet at home till 2005 because we are at an disadvantage." It just doesnt work. It's been explored and we stated that it isn't relevant. There is no associated feeling with people who have no internet at home til 2005. That's a very bad comparison to gender. Yours is technology based, our's is cultural and biological base. If you wanted a separate league for those who in North-America, then you have connections on society, cultural, skill level (arguably) and language.
Im not saying we shouldnt have women only tournaments im saying that we should properly explore the issue wich includes any genetic disadvantage. If your saying genetics doesnt matter i really dont see the diffrence beetween Women and other groups that could be considered minorities. As any genetic disadvantage would be factual if they exist i really do think that should be the first thing to explore.
|
On January 05 2013 09:06 Mooneyes wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 08:52 Torte de Lini wrote:On January 05 2013 08:46 Mooneyes wrote:On November 20 2012 09:43 phuzi0n wrote: ... .... Are there any genetic differences that really hinder females playing esports that warrants separate leagues? This is the first question. When that has been explored the discussion can continue in a informed and consious manner. We cant (or rather shouldnt) take into account enviroment. I can illustrate this with the following: "I want a seperate league for those of us who didnt have access to internet at home till 2005 because we are at an disadvantage." It just doesnt work. It's been explored and we stated that it isn't relevant. There is no associated feeling with people who have no internet at home til 2005. That's a very bad comparison to gender. Yours is technology based, our's is cultural and biological base. If you wanted a separate league for those who in North-America, then you have connections on society, cultural, skill level (arguably) and language. Im not saying we shouldnt have women only tournaments im saying that we should properly explore the issue wich includes any genetic disadvantage. If your saying genetics doesnt matter i really dont see the diffrence beetween Women and other groups that could be considered minorities. As any genetic disadvantage would be factual if they exist i really do think that should be the first thing to explore.
There are no genetic disadvantages. This isn't about offering genetic disadvantages, but rather promoting smaller, less popular groups to further generate interest from all facets of cultural and ethnic groups.
|
On January 05 2013 06:52 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:23 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 04 2013 17:39 Torte de Lini wrote:On January 04 2013 17:37 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 04 2013 06:32 Torte de Lini wrote: Girl only tournaments are demanded to increase female participation. Doing so has 0 negative side-effects. Except the side effect of excluding a bunch of males solely for their sex? I don't see any reason why moving towards equality in terms of representation rather than opportunity has any remote sense of value. Why again is it better for the community to bring in 5 new female gamers as opposed to five new male gamers? I can tell you didn't read the article. Well, I read the first 25%, then skimmed the rest, didn't actually "skip" any actual portion, but it was quite a long article. Maybe it's because I went in with an unopened mindset? I read your points, I just didn't think there was any explanation for the value, but I'll read a little more in depth later tonight if you did address these issues with actual reasons >_<. EDIT: Nope, reread instead of skimmed, you never addressed where the actual value is derived with having an additional woman involved instead of a man. I see zero value added. This was the closest you got, from what I found. Females should be praised for their own separate achievements; different standards and expectations for different types of people. Aren’t we then setting a lower standard for females over males? No, that is a comparison; we are actually just setting a system or scale for female E-sports. Females should have female tournaments and the reason for these events is that you want to expose all sectors of an E-Sport. As one user said on the topic of female-only tournaments:
You fail to make even a marginally convincing argument here really on why females should be praised for their own separate achievements. The ultimate problem with your original argument is the comparison. You compare two separate genders that are not opposing, but just different. Their differences within the E-Sports context are supported by different circumstances, they cannot be compared. But you try to anyway by stating that because there are more women-only events, men suffer. Which is false and in fact, there has never been a feeling or worry of that kind thus far (even in established women's leagues such as CS & ESL) That's why I said you didn't read the article, because it directly contradicts your view. Because 5 new female gamers are brought in does not necessarily mean 5 men are hindered in coming in. It doesn't work that way for teams who are looking to acquire female progamers, it doesn't work that way for tournament organizers and their aimed marketability and it doesn't work that way for spectators (in part). Women should be praised for their separate achievements similar to why champions of NA in WCS. Because it emphasizes context, adds value to what should be valued (just because you didn't beat a Code S player doesn't necessarily mean your success cannot be celebrated or highlighted - similar to if you didn't beat someone MLG, doesn't make your IPL achievement any less redeeming). Context and circumstances are important, but you chose to ignore those to make a weak comparison. The value of adding women is to better shape an E-Sport for all sectors. There is no comparative value of having more women than men in that regard, there is value in bringing more sectors and areas of an E-Sport to further garner diverse interests.
The point is rather that the difference in gender is highly irrelevant. There is no benefit to be gained from actively devoting resources to reducing the disparity.
Also, my point wasn't rather that if 5 new female gamers are introduced, 5 male gamers are hindered from coming in. Rather, it meant, we should just grow the scene regardless by attempting to attract 5 people to the scene, regardless of gender. We should not actively attempt to target 5 female gamers (or 5 male gamers for that matter), but rather work on getting an additional 5 gamers to the scene in general (of course, 5 being a completely arbitrary number). The article fails to mention the benefit of targeting females in particular - why 5 more female gamers is superior to simply 5 more gamers.
I think it takes more resources to target female gamers than male gamers, which is completely unnecessary. I have zero interest in actively bringing female gamers to the scene, as I see zero benefit or value from doing so. I only see value in bringing people in general to the scene, which I think is easier to do so with males.
Honestly speaking, the only value I see in adding females to the scene is so that every time I go to an event, it isn't a sausage fest. But the value I see there is no longer related to the game, but rather sex appeal, which is entirely what we are trying to avoid - the presence of women in the community for the reason of sex appeal, right?
On January 05 2013 09:51 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 09:06 Mooneyes wrote:On January 05 2013 08:52 Torte de Lini wrote:On January 05 2013 08:46 Mooneyes wrote:On November 20 2012 09:43 phuzi0n wrote: ... .... Are there any genetic differences that really hinder females playing esports that warrants separate leagues? This is the first question. When that has been explored the discussion can continue in a informed and consious manner. We cant (or rather shouldnt) take into account enviroment. I can illustrate this with the following: "I want a seperate league for those of us who didnt have access to internet at home till 2005 because we are at an disadvantage." It just doesnt work. It's been explored and we stated that it isn't relevant. There is no associated feeling with people who have no internet at home til 2005. That's a very bad comparison to gender. Yours is technology based, our's is cultural and biological base. If you wanted a separate league for those who in North-America, then you have connections on society, cultural, skill level (arguably) and language. Im not saying we shouldn't have women only tournaments im saying that we should properly explore the issue wich includes any genetic disadvantage. If your saying genetics doesnt matter i really dont see the diffrence beetween Women and other groups that could be considered minorities. As any genetic disadvantage would be factual if they exist i really do think that should be the first thing to explore. There are no genetic disadvantages. This isn't about offering genetic disadvantages, but rather promoting smaller, less popular groups to further generate interest from all facets of cultural and ethnic groups.
This is what I'm struggling with. There is no reason to promote smaller, less popular groups. A similar argument (and please spare me the "it's a strawman" argument that plagues TL.net) is how an Asian male is less likely to be accepted to a UC in California for the sole reason he is Asian. Somehow, because of the external environment, he is individually being selected against despite his qualifications, which is ridiculous. A Black person is seen to hold some sort of higher value to the University due to the color of his skin, regardless of the actual (arbitrary) value he has.
Of course, the difference is where you're focusing your resources in acquiring new members of the community as opposed to admitting a limited amount of people to an institution. Regardless of the difference, it does not invalidate the argument (because, according to TL.net, minor differences in arguments means the entire point is invalidated, which is utter absurdity).
|
The point is rather that the difference in gender is highly irrelevant. There is no benefit to be gained from actively devoting resources to reducing the disparity.
Also, my point wasn't rather that if 5 new female gamers are introduced, 5 male gamers are hindered from coming in. Rather, it meant, we should just grow the scene regardless by attempting to attract 5 people to the scene, regardless of gender. We should not actively attempt to target 5 female gamers (or 5 male gamers for that matter), but rather work on getting an additional 5 gamers to the scene in general (of course, 5 being a completely arbitrary number). The article fails to mention the benefit of targeting females in particular - why 5 more female gamers is superior to simply 5 more gamers.
I think it takes more resources to target female gamers than male gamers, which is completely unnecessary. I have zero interest in actively bringing female gamers to the scene, as I see zero benefit or value from doing so. I only see value in bringing people in general to the scene, which I think is easier to do so with males.
Honestly speaking, the only value I see in adding females to the scene is so that every time I go to an event, it isn't a sausage fest. But the value I see there is no longer related to the game, but rather sex appeal, which is entirely what we are trying to avoid - the presence of women in the community for the reason of sex appeal, right?
Gender isn't irrelevant, it just depends in what regard are we focusing on. If you're looking to grow a subculture, it needs to involve as many facets of people as possible for it to propel to popularity. This is why certain music thrives and others don't (along with other factors, some scientific).
What resources are we devoting here necessarily and what is the end-goal? You might be overlapping with someone who said they were fine with female-only leagues, so long as it doesn't require much finances, resources and doesn't gain any return (in which case, most of E-Sports in general should have fallen a long time ago).
"The article fails to mention the benefit of targeting females in particular - why 5 more female gamers is superior to simply 5 more gamers." There is no failure because the article accounts for the idea that we can do both. Since there is no loss or hindrance of gamers in general finding opportunities in E-Sports, we can also center in on specific ethnics or genders to better shape the industry. It's not one pipe of opportunity selectively choosing which flavor of water we will feed the scene with, it's multiple pipes targeting specific types of flavours to better blend and sell a subculture. It's not one or the other, it's both. This is why nationalized leagues are a completely acceptable idea because we have leagues like the GSL (mainly for Koreans) and DreamHack (mainly for Europeans), both are providing opportunities with necessarily hurting the other.
This is what I'm struggling with. There is no reason to promote smaller, less popular groups. A similar argument (and please spare me the "it's a strawman" argument that plagues TL.net) is how an Asian male is less likely to be accepted to a UC in California for the sole reason he is Asian. Somehow, because of the external environment, he is individually being selected against despite his qualifications, which is ridiculous. A Black person is seen to hold some sort of higher value to the University due to the color of his skin, regardless of the actual (arbitrary) value he has.
Of course, the difference is where you're focusing your resources in acquiring new members of the community as opposed to admitting a limited amount of people to an institution. Regardless of the difference, it does not invalidate the argument (because, according to TL.net, minor differences in arguments means the entire point is invalidated, which is utter absurdity).
Round 2:
You're doing it again, you're looking at it with a black and white vision instead of the understanding that all growth can continue without infringing on the other.
Yes, details that fault an argument ultimately discredit you, this is why I back all my articles up with credible and knowledgeable insiders of the scene.
|
I'd like to state that these past few pages have been 100% thrilling to talk and discuss (: Very exciting for me, I get so giddy.
|
On January 05 2013 10:21 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +The point is rather that the difference in gender is highly irrelevant. There is no benefit to be gained from actively devoting resources to reducing the disparity.
Also, my point wasn't rather that if 5 new female gamers are introduced, 5 male gamers are hindered from coming in. Rather, it meant, we should just grow the scene regardless by attempting to attract 5 people to the scene, regardless of gender. We should not actively attempt to target 5 female gamers (or 5 male gamers for that matter), but rather work on getting an additional 5 gamers to the scene in general (of course, 5 being a completely arbitrary number). The article fails to mention the benefit of targeting females in particular - why 5 more female gamers is superior to simply 5 more gamers.
I think it takes more resources to target female gamers than male gamers, which is completely unnecessary. I have zero interest in actively bringing female gamers to the scene, as I see zero benefit or value from doing so. I only see value in bringing people in general to the scene, which I think is easier to do so with males.
Honestly speaking, the only value I see in adding females to the scene is so that every time I go to an event, it isn't a sausage fest. But the value I see there is no longer related to the game, but rather sex appeal, which is entirely what we are trying to avoid - the presence of women in the community for the reason of sex appeal, right?
Gender isn't irrelevant, it just depends in what regard are we focusing on. If you're looking to grow a subculture, it needs to involve as many facets of people as possible for it to propel to popularity. This is why certain music thrives and others don't (along with other factors, some scientific). What resources are we devoting here necessarily and what is the end-goal? You might be overlapping with someone who said they were fine with female-only leagues, so long as it doesn't require much finances, resources and doesn't gain any return (in which case, most of E-Sports in general should have fallen a long time ago). " The article fails to mention the benefit of targeting females in particular - why 5 more female gamers is superior to simply 5 more gamers." There is no failure because the article accounts for the idea that we can do both. Since there is no loss or hindrance of gamers in general finding opportunities in E-Sports, we can also center in on specific ethnics or genders to better shape the industry. It's not one pipe of opportunity selectively choosing which flavor of water we will feed the scene with, it's multiple pipes targeting specific types of flavours to better blend and sell a subculture. It's not one or the other, it's both. This is why nationalized leagues are a completely acceptable idea because we have leagues like the GSL (mainly for Koreans) and DreamHack (mainly for Europeans), both are providing opportunities with necessarily hurting the other. Show nested quote +This is what I'm struggling with. There is no reason to promote smaller, less popular groups. A similar argument (and please spare me the "it's a strawman" argument that plagues TL.net) is how an Asian male is less likely to be accepted to a UC in California for the sole reason he is Asian. Somehow, because of the external environment, he is individually being selected against despite his qualifications, which is ridiculous. A Black person is seen to hold some sort of higher value to the University due to the color of his skin, regardless of the actual (arbitrary) value he has.
Of course, the difference is where you're focusing your resources in acquiring new members of the community as opposed to admitting a limited amount of people to an institution. Regardless of the difference, it does not invalidate the argument (because, according to TL.net, minor differences in arguments means the entire point is invalidated, which is utter absurdity). Round 2: You're doing it again, you're looking at it with a black and white vision instead of the understanding that all growth can continue without infringing on the other. Yes, details that fault an argument ultimately discredit you, this is why I back all my articles up with credible and knowledgeable insiders of the scene.
Why grow a subculture? My point is that you still aren't portraying why there is more value in specifically targeting female gamers in particular.
Whatever time, effort, and resources are devoted to developing and supporting a women's league is just that - time, effort, and resources. It's fairly self-explanatory. If someone finds particular value in doing it, I guess it's indeed their prerogative to do so. However, I may have misinterpreted the point of the article, which I was under the assumption of trying to convince the community that we need to develop and nurture a female community because of the value it will bring in the first place. What I'm saying is that you failed to produce an argument which shows why value is added and thus have provided no incentive for us to hop on a bandwagon and support a women's league. At the same time, I'm not necessarily going to expend effort to [/i]stop[/i] someone from doing one, even if I think it's completely and utterly stupid.
All you've insinuated is that women should be prioritized because they have the potential to offer a culture that the current community lacks. What I'm stating is that there is no inherent value in the diversity you are arguing for. "Promoting diversity" is little more than a sugar coated term for promoting discrimination.
You're stating that catering to one group doesn't necessarily infringe upon the other groups, but that's intrinsically untrue. Of course it does. If you're giving select privileges or advantages to a specific group, it is directly preventing others from capitalizing on those privileges or advantages. If you do a $500 tournament for women only, you are directly denying all men in the community an opportunity to win $500 in prize money by default. It is far, far more black and white than you suggest.
And no, when concerning analogies, the minor details that fault it do not discredit the user, which is such a silly and stupid thing that plagues these forums. Analogies are meant to get a point across using similarities, not identical scenarios, with the same underlying fundamental point set about by different scenarios. The affirmative action analogy is incredibly valid despite clear differences, as the underlying point is that it is promoting discrimination.
|
On January 05 2013 09:55 FabledIntegral wrote:
This is what I'm struggling with. There is no reason to promote smaller, less popular groups. A similar argument (and please spare me the "it's a strawman" argument that plagues TL.net) is how an Asian male is less likely to be accepted to a UC in California for the sole reason he is Asian. Somehow, because of the external environment, he is individually being selected against despite his qualifications, which is ridiculous. A Black person is seen to hold some sort of higher value to the University due to the color of his skin, regardless of the actual (arbitrary) value he has.
Of course, the difference is where you're focusing your resources in acquiring new members of the community as opposed to admitting a limited amount of people to an institution. Regardless of the difference, it does not invalidate the argument (because, according to TL.net, minor differences in arguments means the entire point is invalidated, which is utter absurdity).
It isn't a question of valuing one over the other, although that's a common misunderstanding. In both the case of SC2/esports and the case of university acceptance, what's going on is an attempt to correct a problematic situation. To elaborate:
In SC2/esports, there is a clear deficit of female players. No one is arguing this point. Many people want to correct this deficit. To achieve this, many have suggested female-only tournaments, and many female gamers testify that these tournaments have deepened their interest in the scene and encouraged them to improve. Thus we see that the problem (a deficit in female players) is at least partly corrected by female-only tournaments.
In the case of college admissions, many would argue that certain groups are statistically underrepresented at the college level. This problem, perhaps unlike the SC2/esports issue I've just discussed, tends to be self-perpetuating---getting to college is, for various social, economic, and cultural reasons, more difficult for young people whose parents did not attend college. Thus to help correct this problem---the under-representation of certain groups at the college level---people from those groups are in some cases given priority.
Note that in both cases, the institution that is being criticized is there to correct a problem that statistics and testimonies show actually exist. Also note that concepts of "valuing" one group over another are irrelevant.
Now, one might say that "valuing" one group over another is an unintended consequence of these institutions. While I can't just disprove that right here, consider that the groups that benefit from these institutions are already at some sort of disadvantage (hence the presence of the institution in the first place). These institutions are to restore the balance, not to disrupt it. Furthermore, I doubt that too many male SC2 pros would feel undervalued by the presence of female-only tournaments. Meanwhile we have evidence that female-only tournaments help to expand the scene, which is again what our original aim in all of this was.
|
On January 05 2013 11:01 RuiBarbO wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 09:55 FabledIntegral wrote:
This is what I'm struggling with. There is no reason to promote smaller, less popular groups. A similar argument (and please spare me the "it's a strawman" argument that plagues TL.net) is how an Asian male is less likely to be accepted to a UC in California for the sole reason he is Asian. Somehow, because of the external environment, he is individually being selected against despite his qualifications, which is ridiculous. A Black person is seen to hold some sort of higher value to the University due to the color of his skin, regardless of the actual (arbitrary) value he has.
Of course, the difference is where you're focusing your resources in acquiring new members of the community as opposed to admitting a limited amount of people to an institution. Regardless of the difference, it does not invalidate the argument (because, according to TL.net, minor differences in arguments means the entire point is invalidated, which is utter absurdity). It isn't a question of valuing one over the other, although that's a common misunderstanding. In both the case of SC2/esports and the case of university acceptance, what's going on is an attempt to correct a problematic situation. To elaborate: In SC2/esports, there is a clear deficit of female players. No one is arguing this point. Many people want to correct this deficit. To achieve this, many have suggested female-only tournaments, and many female gamers testify that these tournaments have deepened their interest in the scene and encouraged them to improve. Thus we see that the problem (a deficit in female players) is at least partly corrected by female-only tournaments. In the case of college admissions, many would argue that certain groups are statistically underrepresented at the college level. This problem, perhaps unlike the SC2/esports issue I've just discussed, tends to be self-perpetuating---getting to college is, for various social, economic, and cultural reasons, more difficult for young people whose parents did not attend college. Thus to help correct this problem---the under-representation of certain groups at the college level---people from those groups are in some cases given priority. Note that in both cases, the institution that is being criticized is there to correct a problem that statistics and testimonies show actually exist. Also note that concepts of "valuing" one group over another are irrelevant. Now, one might say that "valuing" one group over another is an unintended consequence of these institutions. While I can't just disprove that right here, consider that the groups that benefit from these institutions are already at some sort of disadvantage (hence the presence of the institution in the first place). These institutions are to restore the balance, not to disrupt it. Furthermore, I doubt that too many male SC2 pros would feel undervalued by the presence of female-only tournaments. Meanwhile we have evidence that female-only tournaments help to expand the scene, which is again what our original aim in all of this was.
The point I'm making (and clearly I'm not the only one) is that there is no problem with a female deficit, and thus there needs to be no expended amount of effort to fix this problem. I do not view it any different than if there were a "black only" tournament, a "homosexual only" tournament, or some other arbitrary facet that does not pertain to Starcraft itself.
It becomes an entirely different matter when the issue of under representation stems from barriers to entry, economic reasons, etc. which is the argument generally made concerning college. The difference here is that these variables are not independent of likelihood to attend college, as you have suggested. In there, the criteria for selection becomes based on extremely relevant factors, rather than something entirely arbitrary and wholly irrelevant.
Accepting a black student because he is black is stupid - he might come from an extremely wealthy background and had an amazing upbringing, while you just denied a Caucasian that grew up in poverty and had to fight against the odds. That is silly, because the skin color is not a relevant factor in ability to get into college all else equal. If the premise is that black people are under represented because an overwhelming amount come from poverty - then you give preference to the relevant factor of poverty. In this way, the poor black people still receive an advantage, but it is not because they are black, it is because they've lived in poverty. Consequently, you increase the number of blacks indirectly, not because of skin color, but because of relevant environmental/socioeconomic factors.
tl;dr Overall, it is stupid to categorize people into groups (gender, race, etc.). You need to look at the individual, that is what is relevant. Your "group" being under represented in anything anywhere should not play any role in giving preference to anything, really.
|
Why grow a subculture? My point is that you still aren't portraying why there is more value in specifically targeting female gamers in particular.
Whatever time, effort, and resources are devoted to developing and supporting a women's league is just that - time, effort, and resources. It's fairly self-explanatory. If someone finds particular value in doing it, I guess it's indeed their prerogative to do so. However, I may have misinterpreted the point of the article, which I was under the assumption of trying to convince the community that we need to develop and nurture a female community because of the value it will bring in the first place. What I'm saying is that you failed to produce an argument which shows why value is added and thus have provided no incentive for us to hop on a bandwagon and support a women's league. At the same time, I'm not necessarily going to expend effort to stop someone from doing one, even if I think it's completely and utterly stupid.
All you've insinuated is that women should be prioritized because they have the potential to offer a culture that the current community lacks. What I'm stating is that there is no inherent value in the diversity you are arguing for. "Promoting diversity" is little more than a sugar coated term for promoting discrimination.
You're stating that catering to one group doesn't necessarily infringe upon the other groups, but that's intrinsically untrue. Of course it does. If you're giving select privileges or advantages to a specific group, it is directly preventing others from capitalizing on those privileges or advantages. If you do a $500 tournament for women only, you are directly denying all men in the community an opportunity to win $500 in prize money by default. It is far, far more black and white than you suggest.
And no, when concerning analogies, the minor details that fault it do not discredit the user, which is such a silly and stupid thing that plagues these forums. Analogies are meant to get a point across using similarities, not identical scenarios, with the same underlying fundamental point set about by different scenarios. The affirmative action analogy is incredibly valid despite clear differences, as the underlying point is that it is promoting discrimination. [/i][/i]
What is the point of growing the E-Sports subculture, or better yet; what is the point of creating further appeal and interest for women and women competitors? Are we really going down this line of basic marketing, sales and importance to appeal to many and larger varied crowds?
We want women's leagues because more competitors and more diversification in types of competitors, areas of a scene and growth of variety is good. Is expending resources worth it? That's up for interpretation and obviously not everyone makes it a priority. Though, I can slap that statement on E-Sports and game developers and you'd see a mirror image of what I'm pushing here.
If you're giving select privileges or advantages to a specific group, it is directly preventing others from capitalizing on those privileges or advantages. If you do a $500 tournament for women only, you are directly denying all men in the community an opportunity to win $500 in prize money by default. It is far, far more black and white than you suggest.
This is wrong and I told you why comparing and attaching the two together is wrong. Zowie Divinia did a 500$ tournament for a Women's only tournament. The money was specifically for that tournament and not an arbitrary prize of 500$ allocated to it through decision. You're assuming that we have a bank full of money and thus decide what options we want to spend it on which is untrue. It's actually more: Which areas do we want to promote and further development in: Women leagues, okay, how much money do we want to put towards it? 500$.
If they didn't do Zowie Divinia, that doesn't mean they'd put that 500$ in a different tournament or idea. That's how decisions, resources and companies work necessarily. I think that's a huge misinterpretation.
It is much less black and white than you suggest.
And no, when concerning analogies, the minor details that fault it do not discredit the user, which is such a silly and stupid thing that plagues these forums
If you say so, but I heavily feel like I'm less at fault than you right now.
|
I'll add to this thread:
In a competitive industry of sport, people should be rewarded for their merits and achievements. Skill earns rewards.
As for casters, hosts, analyists, etc: An intimate knowledge of the sport is needed. Is the individual properly qualified to speak to the sport in question?
I strongly feeel that players should be signed to teams based on their skill and abilities, NOT their looks or gender. As for media talent, qualification first, sex appeal after.
Ladies: If you want equality, stop playing the female gende card. If you don't want equality, then by all means - play the female card all you want but expect people to point out the lack of merit when something is given but not deserved.
Work hard, get results, get rewards. Sex n legs should have nothing to do with it. Pardon the pun, but using legs to get the foot in the door might seem minor - but for an applicant for the same position with 10 times the experience or ability, its just rude and inexcusable.
|
Thanks for that, I don't agree with it, but it's alright I guess.
|
So, does anyone actually know the proportion of active ladder female players in the world in relation to the total active ladder player base (or something close)? If this number is low enough, the whole discussion on the number of female players may be moot.
|
On January 05 2013 16:47 Grimmyman123 wrote: I'll add to this thread:
In a competitive industry of sport, people should be rewarded for their merits and achievements. Skill earns rewards.
As for casters, hosts, analyists, etc: An intimate knowledge of the sport is needed. Is the individual properly qualified to speak to the sport in question?
I strongly feeel that players should be signed to teams based on their skill and abilities, NOT their looks or gender. As for media talent, qualification first, sex appeal after.
Ladies: If you want equality, stop playing the female gende card. If you don't want equality, then by all means - play the female card all you want but expect people to point out the lack of merit when something is given but not deserved.
Work hard, get results, get rewards. Sex n legs should have nothing to do with it. Pardon the pun, but using legs to get the foot in the door might seem minor - but for an applicant for the same position with 10 times the experience or ability, its just rude and inexcusable.
I don't think wanting a merit-based system for pro-teams and casters is incompatible with having female-only tournaments. Maybe with signing females to pro-teams before they show their merit, but with a better female-only tournament infrastructure there might be less guesswork when signing female players, for a number of reasons. I also don't think female-only tournaments could exist in a world where we don't value merit and progress.
|
On January 06 2013 00:54 Sbrubbles wrote: So, does anyone actually know the proportion of active ladder female players in the world in relation to the total active ladder player base (or something close)? If this number is low enough, the whole discussion on the number of female players may be moot.
No one knows per se.
|
I think we actually have to take a step back here and realize that most sports actually aren't mature whatsoever. Seriously, they really aren't. Take football (american) for example. Powder puff is looked favorably upon for highschool and some college, but outside of that powder puff players who show excellence in the sport akin to that of a pro-football players get ridiculed for being too manly to be women. Women's basketball is a sideshow for mens, and the new bikini league is there to show that. The only sport that is enormously main stream, besides from extreme-sports which tend to be well integrated (consider snowboarding for example), that has great integration is Football (non-american); however, even football lacks equality in female production with female leagues being significantly less important than male in every sense of the word. The only sports where females really have equality are A) extreme sports that rely on media other than the simple body and B) sports that are not so mainstream that they are aired regularly. If you think about the sports that people see females do the best in, they are sports where finesse and control are on par with actual physical brute force. Sports like gymnastics show this, men and women's gymnastics are equal in importance and in some countries women's is more important. E-sports has the chance to become that, but in order to, we as a community need to stop thinking of ourselves as mainstream male sports and more as lesser mainstream open sports that require different skills to succeed.
|
On January 06 2013 00:56 RuiBarbO wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 16:47 Grimmyman123 wrote: I'll add to this thread:
In a competitive industry of sport, people should be rewarded for their merits and achievements. Skill earns rewards.
As for casters, hosts, analyists, etc: An intimate knowledge of the sport is needed. Is the individual properly qualified to speak to the sport in question?
I strongly feeel that players should be signed to teams based on their skill and abilities, NOT their looks or gender. As for media talent, qualification first, sex appeal after.
Ladies: If you want equality, stop playing the female gende card. If you don't want equality, then by all means - play the female card all you want but expect people to point out the lack of merit when something is given but not deserved.
Work hard, get results, get rewards. Sex n legs should have nothing to do with it. Pardon the pun, but using legs to get the foot in the door might seem minor - but for an applicant for the same position with 10 times the experience or ability, its just rude and inexcusable. I don't think wanting a merit-based system for pro-teams and casters is incompatible with having female-only tournaments. Maybe with signing females to pro-teams before they show their merit, but with a better female-only tournament infrastructure there might be less guesswork when signing female players, for a number of reasons. I also don't think female-only tournaments could exist in a world where we don't value merit and progress.
I see your point, but a femail only tournament only serves to depreciate a female players ability - the tournament is such a small slice of the player pool, it is not an accurate gauge of ability. Now, a female to place well in a normal tournament, amongst her make peers and fellow players? That is a true gauge of ability and is a mark to a resume worth attaining.
Women's only leagues should only apply to where it matters - physical contests, where males have an advantage. Video gaming, etc, is all hand eye, decision making, and coordination - where being female or male has no advantage or disadvantage.
|
On January 06 2013 02:04 Grimmyman123 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 00:56 RuiBarbO wrote:On January 05 2013 16:47 Grimmyman123 wrote: I'll add to this thread:
In a competitive industry of sport, people should be rewarded for their merits and achievements. Skill earns rewards.
As for casters, hosts, analyists, etc: An intimate knowledge of the sport is needed. Is the individual properly qualified to speak to the sport in question?
I strongly feeel that players should be signed to teams based on their skill and abilities, NOT their looks or gender. As for media talent, qualification first, sex appeal after.
Ladies: If you want equality, stop playing the female gende card. If you don't want equality, then by all means - play the female card all you want but expect people to point out the lack of merit when something is given but not deserved.
Work hard, get results, get rewards. Sex n legs should have nothing to do with it. Pardon the pun, but using legs to get the foot in the door might seem minor - but for an applicant for the same position with 10 times the experience or ability, its just rude and inexcusable. I don't think wanting a merit-based system for pro-teams and casters is incompatible with having female-only tournaments. Maybe with signing females to pro-teams before they show their merit, but with a better female-only tournament infrastructure there might be less guesswork when signing female players, for a number of reasons. I also don't think female-only tournaments could exist in a world where we don't value merit and progress. I see your point, but a femail only tournament only serves to depreciate a female players ability - the tournament is such a small slice of the player pool, it is not an accurate gauge of ability. Now, a female to place well in a normal tournament, amongst her make peers and fellow players? That is a true gauge of ability and is a mark to a resume worth attaining. Women's only leagues should only apply to where it matters - physical contests, where males have an advantage. Video gaming, etc, is all hand eye, decision making, and coordination - where being female or male has no advantage or disadvantage.
That isn't the point of female leagues at all. Please read the article.
|
|
Here is the relevant comparisons to your OP, which I address: "different standards and expectations for different types of people. " "just setting a system or scale for female E-sports" "When we compare, we look at how much each gender has succeeded,"
" Right now, females in StarCraft II are used for more marketing purposes and pushed less to achieve, especially when the opportunity to succeed is about once a year." PROOF REQUIRED, with references. " wide variety of females who obtain little to no credit for their recent accomplishments" Evidence required other than your referense to IESF? Does Scarlett and Lieya apply to your theory as they both have great results and are female?
The fact is - if a female wins a female only tournament,it counts for nothing, because they are not recognised by the majority. The scaling of talent is not there. Few females have succeeded in incorporating female tournement wins into their resume - see Scarlett.
But, if a female does well, even marginally, at a major tournament, amongst her peers, then that actually counts for something, and it shows.
When we reward players for being female, we get results like Julia on stage at an MLG getting ROFL stomped publicly, badly. It wasn't even a contest, and it was clear that she had no business being on that stage. Clearly, her talent and experience in female tournaments did not prepare her.
|
On January 05 2013 16:04 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote + Why grow a subculture? My point is that you still aren't portraying why there is more value in specifically targeting female gamers in particular.
Whatever time, effort, and resources are devoted to developing and supporting a women's league is just that - time, effort, and resources. It's fairly self-explanatory. If someone finds particular value in doing it, I guess it's indeed their prerogative to do so. However, I may have misinterpreted the point of the article, which I was under the assumption of trying to convince the community that we need to develop and nurture a female community because of the value it will bring in the first place. What I'm saying is that you failed to produce an argument which shows why value is added and thus have provided no incentive for us to hop on a bandwagon and support a women's league. At the same time, I'm not necessarily going to expend effort to stop someone from doing one, even if I think it's completely and utterly stupid.
All you've insinuated is that women should be prioritized because they have the potential to offer a culture that the current community lacks. What I'm stating is that there is no inherent value in the diversity you are arguing for. "Promoting diversity" is little more than a sugar coated term for promoting discrimination.
You're stating that catering to one group doesn't necessarily infringe upon the other groups, but that's intrinsically untrue. Of course it does. If you're giving select privileges or advantages to a specific group, it is directly preventing others from capitalizing on those privileges or advantages. If you do a $500 tournament for women only, you are directly denying all men in the community an opportunity to win $500 in prize money by default. It is far, far more black and white than you suggest.
And no, when concerning analogies, the minor details that fault it do not discredit the user, which is such a silly and stupid thing that plagues these forums. Analogies are meant to get a point across using similarities, not identical scenarios, with the same underlying fundamental point set about by different scenarios. The affirmative action analogy is incredibly valid despite clear differences, as the underlying point is that it is promoting discrimination.
What is the point of growing the E-Sports subculture, or better yet; what is the point of creating further appeal and interest for women and women competitors? Are we really going down this line of basic marketing, sales and importance to appeal to many and larger varied crowds? We want women's leagues because more competitors and more diversification in types of competitors, areas of a scene and growth of variety is good. Is expending resources worth it? That's up for interpretation and obviously not everyone makes it a priority. Though, I can slap that statement on E-Sports and game developers and you'd see a mirror image of what I'm pushing here. Show nested quote +If you're giving select privileges or advantages to a specific group, it is directly preventing others from capitalizing on those privileges or advantages. If you do a $500 tournament for women only, you are directly denying all men in the community an opportunity to win $500 in prize money by default. It is far, far more black and white than you suggest. This is wrong and I told you why comparing and attaching the two together is wrong. Zowie Divinia did a 500$ tournament for a Women's only tournament. The money was specifically for that tournament and not an arbitrary prize of 500$ allocated to it through decision. You're assuming that we have a bank full of money and thus decide what options we want to spend it on which is untrue. It's actually more: Which areas do we want to promote and further development in: Women leagues, okay, how much money do we want to put towards it? 500$. If they didn't do Zowie Divinia, that doesn't mean they'd put that 500$ in a different tournament or idea. That's how decisions, resources and companies work necessarily. I think that's a huge misinterpretation. It is much less black and white than you suggest. Show nested quote + And no, when concerning analogies, the minor details that fault it do not discredit the user, which is such a silly and stupid thing that plagues these forums
If you say so, but I heavily feel like I'm less at fault than you right now. [/i][/i]
Yes. We are going down that line, no question. And you're talking to someone with a BA in Business Economics, specializing in International Economics and Concepts. You're not selling whatsoever on the value here, nor is it intuitive when it comes to the video game industry. More competitors is good, yes. However, achieving more male competitors is substantially easier than achieving more female competitors. At best you have a niche sponsor argument, but even that is ridiculous, considering that if anything what the scene needs is an absolute growth in viewers overall. Which, as mentioned, is easier to achieve on the male side.
You didn't say anything remotely on why it's wrong. You continually just post stupid things like "I addressed this earlier" or "it was in the article" when your points in the article are even good ones. You do little more than say things like "some people think along this mentality, but it's a bad mentality, you need to think of it differently and have a good mentality." It's getting old.
And it's still blatant discrimination. If I'm a white supremacist that wants to open a restaurant for whites only, should I be able to do it? I wouldn't open a restaurant otherwise, because I think Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Middle-Eastern (lumped), etc. are all scum. So at the very least, I'm adding value by providing services to Whites, right? That's better than no value being added at all?
Regardless of what would have been done otherwise, the point is that as soon as the restaurants open, it is actively denying service to minorities. If you have the female $500 tournament, that's a tournament relating to a particular skillset that men possess, but are being denied entry for the sole reason they have a penis. Ridiculous.
Your article has absolutely no substantive points in it, yet you continually reference it. Beyond annoying.
|
On January 06 2013 02:32 FabledIntegral wrote:And it's still blatant discrimination. If I'm a white supremacist that wants to open a restaurant for whites only, should I be able to do it? I wouldn't open a restaurant otherwise, because I think Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Middle-Eastern (lumped), etc. are all scum. So at the very least, I'm adding value by providing services to Whites, right? That's better than no value being added at all? You must REALLY hate living in the USA with that mindset because positive discrimination is the norm there.
|
On January 06 2013 02:42 Otolia wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 02:32 FabledIntegral wrote:And it's still blatant discrimination. If I'm a white supremacist that wants to open a restaurant for whites only, should I be able to do it? I wouldn't open a restaurant otherwise, because I think Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Middle-Eastern (lumped), etc. are all scum. So at the very least, I'm adding value by providing services to Whites, right? That's better than no value being added at all? You must REALLY hate living in the USA with that mindset because positive discrimination is the norm there.
To clarify if there was any confusion, I was being critical of that mentality.
Positive discrimination is also a stupid mindset, but can easily be overcome by having the mindset you need to surpass your peers. Of course, this mindset only works for an individual to have for himself, I'm not advocating that the government should adopt it or promote it. Doesn't matter if my competition gets a slight advantage for an irrelevant factor if I'm substantially better than him/her in abilities.
|
On January 06 2013 02:23 Grimmyman123 wrote: Here is the relevant comparisons to your OP, which I address: "different standards and expectations for different types of people. " "just setting a system or scale for female E-sports" "When we compare, we look at how much each gender has succeeded,"
" Right now, females in StarCraft II are used for more marketing purposes and pushed less to achieve, especially when the opportunity to succeed is about once a year." PROOF REQUIRED, with references. " wide variety of females who obtain little to no credit for their recent accomplishments" Evidence required other than your referense to IESF? Does Scarlett and Lieya apply to your theory as they both have great results and are female?
The fact is - if a female wins a female only tournament,it counts for nothing, because they are not recognised by the majority. The scaling of talent is not there. Few females have succeeded in incorporating female tournement wins into their resume - see Scarlett.
But, if a female does well, even marginally, at a major tournament, amongst her peers, then that actually counts for something, and it shows.
When we reward players for being female, we get results like Julia on stage at an MLG getting ROFL stomped publicly, badly. It wasn't even a contest, and it was clear that she had no business being on that stage. Clearly, her talent and experience in female tournaments did not prepare her.
The proof is both my history with managing teams and female players as well as the credibility listed from experts from the secondary post.
Leiya has little to no results, if anything, you're playing into my hand by stating so.
The fact is - if a female wins a female only tournament,it counts for nothing, because they are not recognised by the majority. The scaling of talent is not there. Few females have succeeded in incorporating female tournement wins into their resume - see Scarlett.
reread the article again
|
On January 06 2013 02:32 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 16:04 Torte de Lini wrote: Why grow a subculture? My point is that you still aren't portraying why there is more value in specifically targeting female gamers in particular.
Whatever time, effort, and resources are devoted to developing and supporting a women's league is just that - time, effort, and resources. It's fairly self-explanatory. If someone finds particular value in doing it, I guess it's indeed their prerogative to do so. However, I may have misinterpreted the point of the article, which I was under the assumption of trying to convince the community that we need to develop and nurture a female community because of the value it will bring in the first place. What I'm saying is that you failed to produce an argument which shows why value is added and thus have provided no incentive for us to hop on a bandwagon and support a women's league. At the same time, I'm not necessarily going to expend effort to stop someone from doing one, even if I think it's completely and utterly stupid.
All you've insinuated is that women should be prioritized because they have the potential to offer a culture that the current community lacks. What I'm stating is that there is no inherent value in the diversity you are arguing for. "Promoting diversity" is little more than a sugar coated term for promoting discrimination.
You're stating that catering to one group doesn't necessarily infringe upon the other groups, but that's intrinsically untrue. Of course it does. If you're giving select privileges or advantages to a specific group, it is directly preventing others from capitalizing on those privileges or advantages. If you do a $500 tournament for women only, you are directly denying all men in the community an opportunity to win $500 in prize money by default. It is far, far more black and white than you suggest.
And no, when concerning analogies, the minor details that fault it do not discredit the user, which is such a silly and stupid thing that plagues these forums. Analogies are meant to get a point across using similarities, not identical scenarios, with the same underlying fundamental point set about by different scenarios. The affirmative action analogy is incredibly valid despite clear differences, as the underlying point is that it is promoting discrimination.
What is the point of growing the E-Sports subculture, or better yet; what is the point of creating further appeal and interest for women and women competitors? Are we really going down this line of basic marketing, sales and importance to appeal to many and larger varied crowds? We want women's leagues because more competitors and more diversification in types of competitors, areas of a scene and growth of variety is good. Is expending resources worth it? That's up for interpretation and obviously not everyone makes it a priority. Though, I can slap that statement on E-Sports and game developers and you'd see a mirror image of what I'm pushing here. If you're giving select privileges or advantages to a specific group, it is directly preventing others from capitalizing on those privileges or advantages. If you do a $500 tournament for women only, you are directly denying all men in the community an opportunity to win $500 in prize money by default. It is far, far more black and white than you suggest. This is wrong and I told you why comparing and attaching the two together is wrong. Zowie Divinia did a 500$ tournament for a Women's only tournament. The money was specifically for that tournament and not an arbitrary prize of 500$ allocated to it through decision. You're assuming that we have a bank full of money and thus decide what options we want to spend it on which is untrue. It's actually more: Which areas do we want to promote and further development in: Women leagues, okay, how much money do we want to put towards it? 500$. If they didn't do Zowie Divinia, that doesn't mean they'd put that 500$ in a different tournament or idea. That's how decisions, resources and companies work necessarily. I think that's a huge misinterpretation. It is much less black and white than you suggest. And no, when concerning analogies, the minor details that fault it do not discredit the user, which is such a silly and stupid thing that plagues these forums
If you say so, but I heavily feel like I'm less at fault than you right now. Yes. We are going down that line, no question. And you're talking to someone with a BA in Business Economics, specializing in International Economics and Concepts. You're not selling whatsoever on the value here, nor is it intuitive when it comes to the video game industry. More competitors is good, yes. However, achieving more male competitors is substantially easier than achieving more female competitors. At best you have a niche sponsor argument, but even that is ridiculous, considering that if anything what the scene needs is an absolute growth in viewers overall. Which, as mentioned, is easier to achieve on the male side. You didn't say anything remotely on why it's wrong. You continually just post stupid things like "I addressed this earlier" or "it was in the article" when your points in the article are even good ones. You do little more than say things like "some people think along this mentality, but it's a bad mentality, you need to think of it differently and have a good mentality." It's getting old. And it's still blatant discrimination. If I'm a white supremacist that wants to open a restaurant for whites only, should I be able to do it? I wouldn't open a restaurant otherwise, because I think Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Middle-Eastern (lumped), etc. are all scum. So at the very least, I'm adding value by providing services to Whites, right? That's better than no value being added at all? Regardless of what would have been done otherwise, the point is that as soon as the restaurants open, it is actively denying service to minorities. If you have the female $500 tournament, that's a tournament relating to a particular skillset that men possess, but are being denied entry for the sole reason they have a penis. Ridiculous. Your article has absolutely no substantive points in it, yet you continually reference it. Beyond annoying. [/i][/i]
I really thought I vanquished you with that last point, but let's go again!
You don't have to cite your degree lol, we all have university degrees (at least I do as well).
More competitors is good, having your game appeal to a better variety is also just as good. If I can get a huge appeal towards men, that's great. If I can get women interested as well as men, then I don't see why you would disagree as you do now.
And it's still blatant discrimination. If I'm a white supremacist that wants to open a restaurant for whites only, should I be able to do it? I wouldn't open a restaurant otherwise, because I think Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Middle-Eastern (lumped), etc. are all scum. So at the very least, I'm adding value by providing services to Whites, right? That's better than no value being added at all?
This sounds a bit desperate of a comparison. Your goals for your restaurant are both detrimental to your business as well as local reputation. It doesn't make sense on any level besides irrationality to open a white-only restaurant. How is this similar to female-leagues that help bolster a product and niche scene to a larger, more diverse audience? Does your discriminated restaurant do that?
The tournament is for beneficial purposes, how is a white-only restaurant beneficial for tourism? We know why female leagues are beneficial for StarCraft.
|
Yesterday was good conversation, but I really think you're scraping the barrel with arguments. You said not to use the Strawman argument, but honestly, you're really pushing your luck.
For Grimmyman123, I'm not sure if you understand the concept of promoting female-leagues nor the detriment of comparing.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: The only, only problem I have with the discussion is the idea that female-only tournaments aren't sexist, while male only tournaments would be.
This is mostly a moot point, at least until a female wins a tournament populated with both sexes.
I don't like the way society is going about this kind of thing in general. Yes, women have it hard in a lot of ways, and I'm not trying to slight that. But men have it hard in a lot of other ways, and this isn't really brought to light ever. As a man who likes to think he's respectful and neutral regarding sex as possible, the rights that I don't have regarding my children, or a failed marriage, or any number of other issues caused by men in the past is pretty frustrating as it is. We have a huge issue of equality, where women have different rights from men everywhere and that's the bigger issue. Allowing tournaments limited to only one sex, be it male or female, while a great idea in theory, can only be a stepping stone in my opinion.
Great write-up once again, torte, and thanks for the discussion point!
I agree with this statement, last night in an SC2 chat channel we had an hour long discussion over things like this.
For now however, female only tournaments aren't a problem but if women start winning tournaments we would have to scrap them for sure.
|
On January 06 2013 02:47 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 02:23 Grimmyman123 wrote: Here is the relevant comparisons to your OP, which I address: "different standards and expectations for different types of people. " "just setting a system or scale for female E-sports" "When we compare, we look at how much each gender has succeeded,"
" Right now, females in StarCraft II are used for more marketing purposes and pushed less to achieve, especially when the opportunity to succeed is about once a year." PROOF REQUIRED, with references. " wide variety of females who obtain little to no credit for their recent accomplishments" Evidence required other than your referense to IESF? Does Scarlett and Lieya apply to your theory as they both have great results and are female?
The fact is - if a female wins a female only tournament,it counts for nothing, because they are not recognised by the majority. The scaling of talent is not there. Few females have succeeded in incorporating female tournement wins into their resume - see Scarlett.
But, if a female does well, even marginally, at a major tournament, amongst her peers, then that actually counts for something, and it shows.
When we reward players for being female, we get results like Julia on stage at an MLG getting ROFL stomped publicly, badly. It wasn't even a contest, and it was clear that she had no business being on that stage. Clearly, her talent and experience in female tournaments did not prepare her. The proof is both my history with managing teams and female players as well as the credibility listed from experts from the secondary post. Leiya has little to no results, if anything, you're playing into my hand by stating so. Show nested quote +The fact is - if a female wins a female only tournament,it counts for nothing, because they are not recognised by the majority. The scaling of talent is not there. Few females have succeeded in incorporating female tournement wins into their resume - see Scarlett.
reread the article again
You'll need more than your opinion and personal experience to back up your ideas. Examples, even if real world, are required. Otherwise your post has no substance. One can learn this during their post secondary education.
Leiya - repeated top master and Grand master leaguer. Results. http://sc2ranks.com/us/3937454/ROOTLeiYa#alltime
I am not playing into your hand, this is not a game, unless you intend this to be a game? Myself, and many others are far more educated than you might think, yet you continue on your tangent about re-reading your original post.
Maybe you do not get it. Your original post and its logic is FLAWED.
|
On January 06 2013 02:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yesterday was good conversation, but I really think you're scraping the barrel with arguments. You said not to use the Strawman argument, but honestly, you're really pushing your luck.
For Grimmyman123, I'm not sure if you understand the concept of promoting female-leagues nor the detriment of comparing.
I understand the concept - the concept is flawed.
Just because you have 25k+ post doesnt mean your opinion is better than someone elses... that is easily acheived by posting 30 times a day.
|
On January 06 2013 04:36 Grimmyman123 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 02:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yesterday was good conversation, but I really think you're scraping the barrel with arguments. You said not to use the Strawman argument, but honestly, you're really pushing your luck.
For Grimmyman123, I'm not sure if you understand the concept of promoting female-leagues nor the detriment of comparing. I understand the concept - the concept is flawed.
The concept isn't flawed, in fact, it's often used in qualifiers for major tournaments to add proportional promotion and value in all other regions.
What's flawed is your understanding that you think women's leagues are to establish equal achievements to that of major leagues when in reality, it is a league to help display and promote female players and aspiring female progamers.
That's why your current and original statements are wrong and silly, because I clearly state the purpose of female leagues to bolster and promote minor leagues and areas, similar to other regions that are not as prominent as, say, Korean.
This is my last response to you because it's clear that when it comes to reading, you're selective.
On January 06 2013 04:36 Grimmyman123 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 02:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yesterday was good conversation, but I really think you're scraping the barrel with arguments. You said not to use the Strawman argument, but honestly, you're really pushing your luck.
For Grimmyman123, I'm not sure if you understand the concept of promoting female-leagues nor the detriment of comparing. I understand the concept - the concept is flawed. Just because you have 25k+ post doesnt mean your opinion is better than someone elses... that is easily acheived by posting 30 times a day.
relevance? No one is making that claim. Personal attacks only hinder your credibility.
|
On January 06 2013 04:39 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 04:36 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 06 2013 02:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yesterday was good conversation, but I really think you're scraping the barrel with arguments. You said not to use the Strawman argument, but honestly, you're really pushing your luck.
For Grimmyman123, I'm not sure if you understand the concept of promoting female-leagues nor the detriment of comparing. I understand the concept - the concept is flawed. The concept isn't flawed, in fact, it's often used in qualifiers for major tournaments to add proportional promotion and value in all other regions. What's flawed is your understanding that you think women's leagues are to establish equal achievements to that of major leagues when in reality, it is a league to help display and promote female players and aspiring female progamers. That's why your current and original statements are wrong and silly, because I clearly state the purpose of female leagues to bolster and promote minor leagues and areas, similar to other regions that are not as prominent as, say, Korean. This is my last response to you because it's clear that when it comes to reading, you're selective.
And now I know you are not reading nor understanding my post in their entirety. Let me make it easier for you.
I at no time think that womens leagues are to establish equal achievement.
It is a falicy to think they do so.
This is what womens leagues are attempting to do. Promote themselves, and using an artificial gauge to show their performance.
It is a failed system because the gauge is not level.
So, the result is players who have good resumes and exposure but have poor knowledge of the game they profess to be an expert of.
I'm done with you in this thread. It is obvious that you lack the comprehension of what people are telling you, and you cannot grasp the complex theories therein contained.
Good luck with your next thread, maybe it will be founded on fact.
|
On January 06 2013 04:39 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 04:36 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 06 2013 02:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yesterday was good conversation, but I really think you're scraping the barrel with arguments. You said not to use the Strawman argument, but honestly, you're really pushing your luck.
For Grimmyman123, I'm not sure if you understand the concept of promoting female-leagues nor the detriment of comparing. I understand the concept - the concept is flawed. The concept isn't flawed, in fact, it's often used in qualifiers for major tournaments to add proportional promotion and value in all other regions. What's flawed is your understanding that you think women's leagues are to establish equal achievements to that of major leagues when in reality, it is a league to help display and promote female players and aspiring female progamers. That's why your current and original statements are wrong and silly, because I clearly state the purpose of female leagues to bolster and promote minor leagues and areas, similar to other regions that are not as prominent as, say, Korean. This is my last response to you because it's clear that when it comes to reading, you're selective. Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 04:36 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 06 2013 02:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yesterday was good conversation, but I really think you're scraping the barrel with arguments. You said not to use the Strawman argument, but honestly, you're really pushing your luck.
For Grimmyman123, I'm not sure if you understand the concept of promoting female-leagues nor the detriment of comparing. I understand the concept - the concept is flawed. Just because you have 25k+ post doesnt mean your opinion is better than someone elses... that is easily acheived by posting 30 times a day. relevance? No one is making that claim. Personal attacks only hinder your credibility.
What personal attack? however, you calling me silly is a personal attack.
Im done here. you can have the last word, but it will be the last word to a brick wall.
|
This is what womens leagues are attempting to do. Promote themselves, and using an artificial gauge to show their performance.
Which ones? Because the ones I know, don't do that and as far as I know, no one ever made that claim.
What personal attack? however, you calling me silly is a personal attack.
Im done here. you can have the last word, but it will be the last word to a brick wall.
Making points at my post count, as if that mattered lol
|
It's straight up ridiculous to claim women have less opportunities than men in StarCraft 2. They have at least as many and I'd say there's a strong case to be made that they have more. The reason there are no female pros is that there are no good female players.
The reason there are no good female players is manifold, but mostly because females don't play very much. If we want female pros then we need female players. One way of encouraging them is by giving them their own tournaments and thus giving exposure to those who otherwise don't have the ability to succeed and then hopefully enticing more talent and encouraging any that already exists. I think anyone who has an issue with this is just straight up strange, to be honest. That said, I would have no interest in watching it myself - I don't even watch most foreigners play because the level of play is too low to satisfy me. I also don't think we're ever going to see a large amount of female players regardless of how good the community gets - ultimately, some things interest men more than women, and StarCraft ticks a lot of boxes for the males over the females.
Side point: I wonder if competitive knitting (or real world equivalent) forums have discussions about how to get males interested and have people vehemently arguing for or against male knitters only tournaments.
|
On January 06 2013 02:54 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 02:32 FabledIntegral wrote:On January 05 2013 16:04 Torte de Lini wrote: Why grow a subculture? My point is that you still aren't portraying why there is more value in specifically targeting female gamers in particular.
Whatever time, effort, and resources are devoted to developing and supporting a women's league is just that - time, effort, and resources. It's fairly self-explanatory. If someone finds particular value in doing it, I guess it's indeed their prerogative to do so. However, I may have misinterpreted the point of the article, which I was under the assumption of trying to convince the community that we need to develop and nurture a female community because of the value it will bring in the first place. What I'm saying is that you failed to produce an argument which shows why value is added and thus have provided no incentive for us to hop on a bandwagon and support a women's league. At the same time, I'm not necessarily going to expend effort to stop someone from doing one, even if I think it's completely and utterly stupid.
All you've insinuated is that women should be prioritized because they have the potential to offer a culture that the current community lacks. What I'm stating is that there is no inherent value in the diversity you are arguing for. "Promoting diversity" is little more than a sugar coated term for promoting discrimination.
You're stating that catering to one group doesn't necessarily infringe upon the other groups, but that's intrinsically untrue. Of course it does. If you're giving select privileges or advantages to a specific group, it is directly preventing others from capitalizing on those privileges or advantages. If you do a $500 tournament for women only, you are directly denying all men in the community an opportunity to win $500 in prize money by default. It is far, far more black and white than you suggest.
And no, when concerning analogies, the minor details that fault it do not discredit the user, which is such a silly and stupid thing that plagues these forums. Analogies are meant to get a point across using similarities, not identical scenarios, with the same underlying fundamental point set about by different scenarios. The affirmative action analogy is incredibly valid despite clear differences, as the underlying point is that it is promoting discrimination.
What is the point of growing the E-Sports subculture, or better yet; what is the point of creating further appeal and interest for women and women competitors? Are we really going down this line of basic marketing, sales and importance to appeal to many and larger varied crowds? We want women's leagues because more competitors and more diversification in types of competitors, areas of a scene and growth of variety is good. Is expending resources worth it? That's up for interpretation and obviously not everyone makes it a priority. Though, I can slap that statement on E-Sports and game developers and you'd see a mirror image of what I'm pushing here. If you're giving select privileges or advantages to a specific group, it is directly preventing others from capitalizing on those privileges or advantages. If you do a $500 tournament for women only, you are directly denying all men in the community an opportunity to win $500 in prize money by default. It is far, far more black and white than you suggest. This is wrong and I told you why comparing and attaching the two together is wrong. Zowie Divinia did a 500$ tournament for a Women's only tournament. The money was specifically for that tournament and not an arbitrary prize of 500$ allocated to it through decision. You're assuming that we have a bank full of money and thus decide what options we want to spend it on which is untrue. It's actually more: Which areas do we want to promote and further development in: Women leagues, okay, how much money do we want to put towards it? 500$. If they didn't do Zowie Divinia, that doesn't mean they'd put that 500$ in a different tournament or idea. That's how decisions, resources and companies work necessarily. I think that's a huge misinterpretation. It is much less black and white than you suggest. And no, when concerning analogies, the minor details that fault it do not discredit the user, which is such a silly and stupid thing that plagues these forums
If you say so, but I heavily feel like I'm less at fault than you right now. Yes. We are going down that line, no question. And you're talking to someone with a BA in Business Economics, specializing in International Economics and Concepts. You're not selling whatsoever on the value here, nor is it intuitive when it comes to the video game industry. More competitors is good, yes. However, achieving more male competitors is substantially easier than achieving more female competitors. At best you have a niche sponsor argument, but even that is ridiculous, considering that if anything what the scene needs is an absolute growth in viewers overall. Which, as mentioned, is easier to achieve on the male side. You didn't say anything remotely on why it's wrong. You continually just post stupid things like "I addressed this earlier" or "it was in the article" when your points in the article are even good ones. You do little more than say things like "some people think along this mentality, but it's a bad mentality, you need to think of it differently and have a good mentality." It's getting old. And it's still blatant discrimination. If I'm a white supremacist that wants to open a restaurant for whites only, should I be able to do it? I wouldn't open a restaurant otherwise, because I think Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Middle-Eastern (lumped), etc. are all scum. So at the very least, I'm adding value by providing services to Whites, right? That's better than no value being added at all? Regardless of what would have been done otherwise, the point is that as soon as the restaurants open, it is actively denying service to minorities. If you have the female $500 tournament, that's a tournament relating to a particular skillset that men possess, but are being denied entry for the sole reason they have a penis. Ridiculous. Your article has absolutely no substantive points in it, yet you continually reference it. Beyond annoying. I really thought I vanquished you with that last point, but let's go again! You don't have to cite your degree lol, we all have university degrees (at least I do as well). More competitors is good, having your game appeal to a better variety is also just as good. If I can get a huge appeal towards men, that's great. If I can get women interested as well as men, then I don't see why you would disagree as you do now. Show nested quote + And it's still blatant discrimination. If I'm a white supremacist that wants to open a restaurant for whites only, should I be able to do it? I wouldn't open a restaurant otherwise, because I think Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Middle-Eastern (lumped), etc. are all scum. So at the very least, I'm adding value by providing services to Whites, right? That's better than no value being added at all?
This sounds a bit desperate of a comparison. Your goals for your restaurant are both detrimental to your business as well as local reputation. It doesn't make sense on any level besides irrationality to open a white-only restaurant. How is this similar to female-leagues that help bolster a product and niche scene to a larger, more diverse audience? Does your discriminated restaurant do that? The tournament is for beneficial purposes, how is a white-only restaurant beneficial for tourism? We know why female leagues are beneficial for StarCraft. [/i][/i]
*sigh* Everyone of your posts continues as if you're "winning" some argument. Its really awful to even attempt to have a debate with your posting style. The degree was only an inference of you suggesting that I don't understand basic marketing, sales, etc.
The point is that you are suggesting that we expend extra effort and resources to promote female specific leagues for the sole reason that attracting females in particular will make the scene better. I am challenging this premise, stating that attracting females has no inherent value over attracting males, and I even suggest it has potentially negative value.
The restaurant is not desperate and is wholly pertinent. I find it to be an extremely compelling argument, in fact. There are many people that even have this mindset in certain areas. They find value in white only, as you supposedly find value in variety for the sake of variety. The discriminated restaurant caters to individuals who don't want their dining experiences disrupted by filthy minorities. At the same time, the jobs it creates and services it provides to white people overall enhances the overall economy, benefiting everyone, including minorities, indirectly.
As I've also stated numerous times before, no we don't know how female only leagues are beneficial to StarCraft. You accept the premise as true despite how many times people challenge it. And then you absurdly refer to your OWN ARTICLE as a source for it being true? Ridiculous! As mentioned before, if anything I think your suggestions have the potential to even hurt the scene and cause harm.
Please stop making it out as if your arguments are somehow "winning". Because if anything, I'm only seeing you going in circles with no substance to back your reasons. You just imply they are intrinsically true.
|
On January 06 2013 04:54 FuzzyJAM wrote: It's straight up ridiculous to claim women have less opportunities than men in StarCraft 2. They have at least as many and I'd say there's a strong case to be made that they have more. The reason there are no female pros is that there are no good female players.
The reason there are no good female players is manifold, but mostly because females don't play very much. If we want female pros then we need female players. One way of encouraging them is by giving them their own tournaments and thus giving exposure to those who otherwise don't have the ability to succeed and then hopefully enticing more talent and encouraging any that already exists. I think anyone who has an issue with this is just straight up strange, to be honest. That said, I would have no interest in watching it myself - I don't even watch most foreigners play because the level of play is too low to satisfy me. I also don't think we're ever going to see a large amount of female players regardless of how good the community gets - ultimately, some things interest men more than women, and StarCraft ticks a lot of boxes for the males over the females.
Side point: I wonder if competitive knitting (or real world equivalent) forums have discussions about how to get males interested and have people vehemently arguing for or against male knitters only tournaments.
This is basically the issue. It's not that there are really talented female players out there that are being disenfranchised by a sexist system; that's incredibly unlikely because of the rarity of talent at this game (Millions worldwide play this game but only a couple hundred compete at major tournaments.) multiplied by the relative lack of female Starcraft players. We can talk about the biological, societal, and communal reasons for that, and I think certainly the Starcraft community is not particularly inviting to women, fair enough, but these are problems with gaming culture as a whole, and we're a small (and relatively hostile) slice of that small pie. Koreans dominate the Starcraft scene, yet we don't think it's communal racism that is keeping foreigner players out of their high prizepool winner's circles; that might be part of it, but they also practice a lot, and Starcraft is practically mainstream in South Korea. I'm actually surprised that we don't see more Korean female SC players.
|
If you say so, this is going in circles and the further I reply, the more repetitive you equally get. So I'm going to stop, I've made my points both from the start and in reply to you. I disagree, but anything more I say you dismiss as either without substance or some other banal thing.
So I guess there really is no point in replying. Some agree with me, some agree with you. That's that.
|
On January 06 2013 05:23 Torte de Lini wrote: If you say so, this is going in circles and the further I reply, the more repetitive you equally get. So I'm going to stop, I've made my points both from the start and in reply to you. I disagree, but anything more I say you dismiss as either without substance or some other banal thing.
So I guess there really is no point in replying. Some agree with me, some agree with you. That's that.
Ironically it is I who found you highly repetitive, in the sense I felt you had no actual points or reasoning for why more females is a good thing. But alas, apparently I'm the same in your eyes, as shown. Thus, maybe you're right in that there is no point, and I'll agree to disagree.
|
Canada10929 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:47 Grimmyman123 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 04:39 Torte de Lini wrote:On January 06 2013 04:36 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 06 2013 02:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yesterday was good conversation, but I really think you're scraping the barrel with arguments. You said not to use the Strawman argument, but honestly, you're really pushing your luck.
For Grimmyman123, I'm not sure if you understand the concept of promoting female-leagues nor the detriment of comparing. I understand the concept - the concept is flawed. The concept isn't flawed, in fact, it's often used in qualifiers for major tournaments to add proportional promotion and value in all other regions. What's flawed is your understanding that you think women's leagues are to establish equal achievements to that of major leagues when in reality, it is a league to help display and promote female players and aspiring female progamers. That's why your current and original statements are wrong and silly, because I clearly state the purpose of female leagues to bolster and promote minor leagues and areas, similar to other regions that are not as prominent as, say, Korean. This is my last response to you because it's clear that when it comes to reading, you're selective. And now I know you are not reading nor understanding my post in their entirety. Let me make it easier for you. I at no time think that womens leagues are to establish equal achievement. It is a falicy to think they do so. This is what womens leagues are attempting to do. Promote themselves, and using an artificial gauge to show their performance. It is a failed system because the gauge is not level. So, the result is players who have good resumes and exposure but have poor knowledge of the game they profess to be an expert of. I'm done with you in this thread. It is obvious that you lack the comprehension of what people are telling you, and you cannot grasp the complex theories therein contained. Good luck with your next thread, maybe it will be founded on fact. I think you flatter yourself with the supposed complex theories contained herein You say it is a failed system, but what is the measure of your success? Simply by reading a tourney threads participants informs me of the players involved. Player names that I probably otherwise not noticed. That's successful promotion whether it is a female only tournament a iccup D level only Tourney, or a non-China/Korea tourney like TL's Legacy Star League. Artificial gauge or not, it does highlight the players involved in a way that was not done before.
Then after reading a female tourney thread, I see their name again as they are playing in the MLG open brackets (which usually doesn't get much promo.) I pay a little more attention to how they do because I am a little more familiar with the name. Does the existence of female tourneys delegitmize the efforts of Flo in the MLG open brackets? I think not.
players who have good resumes and exposure but have poor knowledge of the game they profess to be an expert of.
That's hardly an issue. There is no rule "Thou shalt have X amount of exposure based on Y level of expertise." The exposure and resume are all relative and female tourneys aren't trying to wrestle with the GSL for top tournament status. They organize the best tourney they can with the player pool they've decided to run with and the exposure it gets is the exposure it gets.
|
On November 20 2012 04:34 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: The only, only problem I have with the discussion is the idea that female-only tournaments aren't sexist, while male only tournaments would be.
That's like saying affirmative action is racist.Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 04:11 Noobity wrote: I don't like the way society is going about this kind of thing in general. Yes, women have it hard in a lot of ways, and I'm not trying to slight that. But men have it hard in a lot of other ways, and this isn't really brought to light ever. As a man who likes to think he's respectful and neutral regarding sex as possible, the rights that I don't have regarding my children, or a failed marriage, or any number of other issues caused by men in the past is pretty frustrating as it is. We have a huge issue of equality, where women have different rights from men everywhere and that's the bigger issue. Allowing tournaments limited to only one sex, be it male or female, while a great idea in theory, can only be a stepping stone in my opinion.
This is ridiculous, one problem society does not have is males being discriminated against. Just look at this community, where maybe some female players get preferential treatment in some ways, but mostly they have to put up with incredible amounts of hostility from the community for their gender. They can't ever achieve anything without constant discussion about it, Scarlett for instance still has to put up with a multitude of trolls on reddit making disgusting comments every time she's mentioned - although her case is slightly different of course. Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 04:22 Uncreative_Troll wrote:Females are a minority receiving the community’s strongest criticisms, but also receiving the least opportunities. I don't agree with that sentence. We don't see male Diamond(?) players getting into a top Korean team or males joining pro teams as a player while having barely touched Sc2 the last months... It's much easier to get noticed (and get opportunities) as a girl in a male dominated scene and I openly admit that I sometimes prefer the stream of a random female player with a webcam over a Progamer. Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: ... “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team” That's not actually a prejudice but an oppinion and a question of consistency. I don't think that many disagree with "Gamers who are not achieving, don't deserve to be on a team". I never noticed a discussion where someone asked for a female to be kicked out of a team cause she had no achievements (after the first announcement). Djokovic and Sharapova are both big tennis stars, yet Sharapova would lose without winning any games if they faced off. Stephano is the hero of the foreigner community, yet there are many Korean players that would be highly favored against him, even though he makes more money and has more fame. The WCS celebrated local tournament winners, they received a prize, were spotlighted, interviewed etc. Yet a lot of these players won't go far in a 'legit' tournament. At one point or another you have to realize that when you have divisions in the scene, with separate audiences etc. that then each scene can have its own stars. I honestly think that the best thing for female gaming would be to have more female leagues and more females playing the game. Affirmative action is racist.
Whether or not it's a good thing is different than whether or not it's racist.
|
Unlike in real sports, there is nothing actually stopping females from entering any tournament they want to. I don't see the point in having a female only league. If they want more exposure, if they want to be recognized as competitors, then they need to compete with everyone; not just within their own group. If a female does well in an MLG or something, they will be recognized for their skill just like any male that does well in an MLG.
If a female does well in a female-only tournament, what exactly should they be recognized for? Being better than other women? Ok sure, but what does that even mean? As a competitive player, I want to be able to measure my skill at what I compete at. In order to measure my skill, I need to compare it to a measuring stick. The measuring stick in this case would be the rest of the scene, not just the rest of my gender. I mean, if somebody wins a male-only tournament, it just means they are the best male player. It doesn't mean anything in relation to the entire scene, and I think that true competitive players would want to be measured against everyone in the scene.
To those of you who are not convinced, I would like to propose a compromise. Let's just say for the sake of argument that right now, female-only leagues are necessary. Here's something we can agree on, I think: In the future, female-only leagues should be phased out of existence as more females do well in big tournaments like MLGs and whatnot. If females start winning MLGs and Dreamhacks, then there would be no reason to have female leagues anymore since female heroes would be established. The rest of the females in the scene would have a hero to look up to and aspire to follow, thus, we would no longer need female-only tournaments.
I'm not convinced that we need female-only tournaments even right now, but for those of you that disagree, I'm sure we can at least agree that EVENTUALLY, they should not be necessary.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 06 2013 04:39 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 04:36 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 06 2013 02:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yesterday was good conversation, but I really think you're scraping the barrel with arguments. You said not to use the Strawman argument, but honestly, you're really pushing your luck.
For Grimmyman123, I'm not sure if you understand the concept of promoting female-leagues nor the detriment of comparing. I understand the concept - the concept is flawed. The concept isn't flawed, in fact, it's often used in qualifiers for major tournaments to add proportional promotion and value in all other regions. What's flawed is your understanding that you think women's leagues are to establish equal achievements to that of major leagues when in reality, it is a league to help display and promote female players and aspiring female progamers. That's why your current and original statements are wrong and silly, because I clearly state the purpose of female leagues to bolster and promote minor leagues and areas, similar to other regions that are not as prominent as, say, Korean. This is my last response to you because it's clear that when it comes to reading, you're selective. Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 04:36 Grimmyman123 wrote:On January 06 2013 02:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yesterday was good conversation, but I really think you're scraping the barrel with arguments. You said not to use the Strawman argument, but honestly, you're really pushing your luck.
For Grimmyman123, I'm not sure if you understand the concept of promoting female-leagues nor the detriment of comparing. I understand the concept - the concept is flawed. Just because you have 25k+ post doesnt mean your opinion is better than someone elses... that is easily acheived by posting 30 times a day.
relevance? No one is making that claim. Personal attacks only hinder your credibility.
I don't see a personal attack. He isn't calling you names. But I think you knew that.
|
After 10 pages i still don't understand why having more females is good or bad.
Counter strike had a quite successful female scene, but it had nothing to do with male players uplifting or promoting their scene, but female players doing so for their own interest, which i think is how it should work. If there isn't a female scene is probably more because of the lack of female gamers interested on sc2, than our community.
|
So I'm quoting from a few pages back, because the discussion was much better back then
On January 05 2013 09:55 FabledIntegral wrote: Also, my point wasn't rather that if 5 new female gamers are introduced, 5 male gamers are hindered from coming in. Rather, it meant, we should just grow the scene regardless by attempting to attract 5 people to the scene, regardless of gender. We should not actively attempt to target 5 female gamers (or 5 male gamers for that matter), but rather work on getting an additional 5 gamers to the scene in general (of course, 5 being a completely arbitrary number). The article fails to mention the benefit of targeting females in particular - why 5 more female gamers is superior to simply 5 more gamers.
Although I do very much appreciate the attempt get at the core values of the problem, just like theoretical physics are often done in a frictionless vacuum, I think it's a bit of an oversimplification in this matter, because the esports community is not a homogenous mass working in unison for the best of esports. I think we need to take into account that people have different interests and different motivations and that we do not deal with the choice of getting either a female tournament/interview/whatever or a male tournament/interview/whatever, but rather getting either a female tournament or no tournament at all. So the question is, is the female tournament/interview detrimental to esports as a whole? If we have the chance of bringing in 5 new female gamers, should we not take chance, just because it could not have brought in 5 new male gamers?
If this is your answer:
On January 06 2013 02:32 FabledIntegral wrote:And it's still blatant discrimination. If I'm a white supremacist that wants to open a restaurant for whites only, should I be able to do it? I wouldn't open a restaurant otherwise, because I think Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Middle-Eastern (lumped), etc. are all scum. So at the very least, I'm adding value by providing services to Whites, right? That's better than no value being added at all?
Then, how do you feel about a tournament for certain nationalities only, like just a Dutch tournament, or just a European tournament? Are they equally discriminatory as female-only tournaments? Or what about a tournament among friends or any invitational tournament where not everyone is allowed to compete? Would you object to them? Also, seeing that not all invitational tournaments include only the topmost skilled players of the world, do you object to them because some spots went to less deserving players while the more deserving players were excluded? Or what about the Brood War TSL's, where Koreans, specifically, were not allowed to compete? If you do not object to all of these examples, are you able to pinpoint exactly where the qualitative difference between arbitrary factors like gender, nationality, social network etc is and explain why gender is a worse arbitrary factor to use in discrimination than the others?
The resturant analogy is a good one and I think the difference lies in that a tournament is a competition while a restaurant is entertainment/recreation, and also that a bar is an open establishment with clear guidelines while an internet tournament is not as clearly defined. If you like to have a white supremacist restaurant in your living room, I should think no one would stop you from letting non-whites into your private house (and we'll conveniently disregard the fact that you can't start businesses that are truly private, because that's not the point). So in physical life, the boundaries between private and public are fairly well defined. On the internet, however, the boundaries are not as clearly defined and it's not immediately easy to tell if a certain activity is private or public. However, I think the female-only leagues can easily be described as public because whoever is allowed to watch them, including men. So the female tournaments are public entertainment open for watching by men and women alike.
So, to get back to your analogy, a public restaurant for whites only is just as bad as a public tournament that only women are allowed to watch. Both genders should be able to enjoy the entertainment/recreation and indeed, in female tournaments they do. So what is the entertainment/recreation made up of? That's where we have some freedom of choice. Should your restaurant (which has now been deemed open to people of any skin colour) be compelled to serve both Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola because it is discriminatory to only serve one of them? Should a sports bar be compelled to show curling as well as football, because it is discriminatory not to include all sports in a sports bar? I think the establishment should have some freedom to choose what they're doing. Besides, most female tournaments are usually sub-groups of larger tournament organizing bodies, catering to both males and females.
On January 05 2013 09:55 FabledIntegral wrote:I think it takes more resources to target female gamers than male gamers, which is completely unnecessary. I have zero interest in actively bringing female gamers to the scene, as I see zero benefit or value from doing so. I only see value in bringing people in general to the scene, which I think is easier to do so with males.
Even if the esports community were a homogenous mass working in unison for the best of esports, wouldn't female-only tournaments actually be a very valid thing to do? For one thing, there's a potential to double the market without any additional infrastructure, because women exist alongside men already, so if we could get the women interested, it would mark a huge influx of members to the community. The point I'm trying to make is that the potential in getting female players is possibly larger than the potential of getting more male players and that's why we should try. In essence, I disagree that the resources per player is higher for females and males, because there are so many females and if we could just break the barrier, we'd see a huge influx of players for very little resources. Moreover, since female gamers draw disproportionately more attention than male gamers in respect to their achievements, wouldn't it actually be desirable to hold female tournaments because they would have a statistically higher view count than a mixed-gender tournament of the same level, that is, they have a higher "profit margin" as it were?
This became a much longer post than I though it would...
|
Overall great article highlighting some important topics in regards to female gamers and how the environment could be made better for them, but I also have some critique (below).
On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote: The game doesn’t distinguish males from females, yet some organizations like to sell females just playing video-games more so than exposing them as a different gender with the same amount of determination and deserved respect.
Females can choose to join an organization that don't see them as objects of attention. I guess it is fairly obvious to see what the teams intentions are when reading an offered contract.
On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote:Right now, females suffer from 2 prejudices: - “Females gamers are being signed for being a female rather than any real remarkable achievements”
- “Female gamers who are not achieving, don’t deserve to be on a team”
(It’s a vicious circle: Female gets on a team without any achievements, female remains on the team but never sent to any events or actively used in team leagues. Never exposed, she never achieves anything or is a part of any team achievements). I think this critique often stems from females joining organizations who see them as cheap exposure, who they don't really have to commit resources to.4 Secondly it is not a vicious cycle, unless you fucked up. Most teams like winning stuff, so if a female gamer is good enough to win games she will probably be sent to an event or put on a teams lineup for a match. Basically what you're writing is that they should be given opportunities to play in team leagues even though they may not be among the 5 strongest players and they should be sent to tournaments (this is a contract issue, don't sign without a team without some form of event-obligation). While ladder rank is not a perfect measure of skill, it is good enough to let a team coach/manager randomly decide whether or not a player is good enough to be put into the active lineup for a team league. It would be ludicrous to reduce the teams overall chance of winning in favor of using a weaker player because this player deserves(?) exposure in team leagues. If the teams lineup is big enough she could be used for minor leagues alongside B-teamers. A good example of this is Flo, who signed with Quantic and participated in many (all?) MLG's with open brackets under their banner (assuming Quantic helped/paid her get to the events). But at the same time it would have been very poor team management to actively use her in the biggest team leagues, because the lineup of Quantic was filled to the brim with talented players with better chance of winning team leagues games. Finally there are a ton of daily tournaments that are open for all and everybody and the people performing in these are slowly gaining recognition in the community and it would not go unnoticed if a female gamer started consistently started doing well in these (I do realize this is not an easy feat, but it is an option). So to say it's not purely the responsibility of the team to expose a gamer.
|
Honestly, i dont understand why people even care. Thats the great thing about esports.. its not about physical strength or anything like that. If you take it beyond the game into other things, sure.
but lets get this straight, there are NO disadvantages to women playing games. unless you give yourself a retarded name like cupcakeprincess or something in game, no one is going to know what gender you are nor care.
I feel like the problem is with the female gamer culture.. how many times to we need the "o hai im a girl and i play games OMG im such a nerd ^^ kekekeek" There are a lot of serious female gamers that dont even give on that they are female just because it doesnt fucking matter. To suggest women have a disadvantage when it comes to video games, is to suggest they are inferior in some sort of what which is just fucked up.
however, its a male dominated industry. and unless the culture shifts, you are still going to have sexism. I dont think its a flaw in the community, but more a flaw in society. And to be fair, if it was the other way around, it would be the men made fun of.. mostly by their peers however.
|
On January 07 2013 00:16 Destro wrote: I feel like the problem is with the female gamer culture.. how many times to we need the "o hai im a girl and i play games OMG im such a nerd ^^ kekekeek" There are a lot of serious female gamers that dont even give on that they are female just because it doesnt fucking matter. To suggest women have a disadvantage when it comes to video games, is to suggest they are inferior in some sort of what which is just fucked up.
Because those persons in particular are attention-whoring posers. As such it's best to ignore them, or troll them hard or something. However I find those specimens to be far more prevalent in other gaming scenes than in SC2. Either way, I believe this thread is about female players that are actually competitive and into the game, and not XxX1337PR!NC355XxX[GURL GAMER OMG:DDD]
|
On January 07 2013 00:16 Destro wrote: To suggest women have a disadvantage when it comes to video games, is to suggest they are inferior in some sort of what which is just fucked up. To make that suggestion doesn't have to also mean that women are inferior to men. 1. Social explanations where societal differences between a girl and a boy growing up leads to boys being more well-equipped to rock in gaming. This one would also explain why Korean culture excel in gaming compared to more lax western gamers .
2. There are two genders. One of them doesn't have to be inferior because it is slightly less adapted to the important aspects of being a successful gamer (strategy (focus-minded), hand-eye coordination, hand speed, etc.). While this would technically mean women are inferior at gaming, it is most likely counterbalanced by something else meaning they're not inferior to men in a more general sense - Similarly to how women are inferior to men in various physical sports, but not regarded as inferior to men in other aspects of life (atleast by normal non-sexist people). (note: I don't know if there is actually a difference since e-Sport is not comparable to traditional sport on the importance of physique, that's just speculation that there could be one and if there is that it doesn't automatically turn women into second-rank citizens)
|
*From wiki* Occam's Razer - is a principle of parsimony, economy, or succinctness. It states that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected. "The simplest solution is usually the best"
Facts on issue w/ out assumption or predisposition: Sports have male and female leagues due to biological differences between genders. Starcraft is a non-physical competitive game. The current professional league of Starcraft is 99.99% male. **Figures on the population of female/male gamer/viewers are not available to me**
My conclusion on the data at hand: Adding a female league would better for the much smaller population of girls. They could gain exposure to promote themselves and attract more female players/viewers. Just like regular sports have male and female leagues it wouldn't be unreasonable for Starcraft to have a separate one. However, given that Starcraft is a non-physical game, we should offer females equal chance and opportunity compete in the regular league and under the same pretenses as males. This means that qualifying or seeding would be exactly the same for them. So in essence, you have the Official Starcraft league, and a female only league to support the smaller population of female players/gamers. Seems simple enough imo.
|
On January 06 2013 22:37 iMAniaC wrote:So I'm quoting from a few pages back, because the discussion was much better back then Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 09:55 FabledIntegral wrote: Also, my point wasn't rather that if 5 new female gamers are introduced, 5 male gamers are hindered from coming in. Rather, it meant, we should just grow the scene regardless by attempting to attract 5 people to the scene, regardless of gender. We should not actively attempt to target 5 female gamers (or 5 male gamers for that matter), but rather work on getting an additional 5 gamers to the scene in general (of course, 5 being a completely arbitrary number). The article fails to mention the benefit of targeting females in particular - why 5 more female gamers is superior to simply 5 more gamers. Although I do very much appreciate the attempt get at the core values of the problem, just like theoretical physics are often done in a frictionless vacuum, I think it's a bit of an oversimplification in this matter, because the esports community is not a homogenous mass working in unison for the best of esports. I think we need to take into account that people have different interests and different motivations and that we do not deal with the choice of getting either a female tournament/interview/whatever or a male tournament/interview/whatever, but rather getting either a female tournament or no tournament at all. So the question is, is the female tournament/interview detrimental to esports as a whole? If we have the chance of bringing in 5 new female gamers, should we not take chance, just because it could not have brought in 5 new male gamers? If this is your answer: Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 02:32 FabledIntegral wrote:And it's still blatant discrimination. If I'm a white supremacist that wants to open a restaurant for whites only, should I be able to do it? I wouldn't open a restaurant otherwise, because I think Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Middle-Eastern (lumped), etc. are all scum. So at the very least, I'm adding value by providing services to Whites, right? That's better than no value being added at all? Then, how do you feel about a tournament for certain nationalities only, like just a Dutch tournament, or just a European tournament? Are they equally discriminatory as female-only tournaments? Or what about a tournament among friends or any invitational tournament where not everyone is allowed to compete? Would you object to them? Also, seeing that not all invitational tournaments include only the topmost skilled players of the world, do you object to them because some spots went to less deserving players while the more deserving players were excluded? Or what about the Brood War TSL's, where Koreans, specifically, were not allowed to compete? If you do not object to all of these examples, are you able to pinpoint exactly where the qualitative difference between arbitrary factors like gender, nationality, social network etc is and explain why gender is a worse arbitrary factor to use in discrimination than the others? The resturant analogy is a good one and I think the difference lies in that a tournament is a competition while a restaurant is entertainment/recreation, and also that a bar is an open establishment with clear guidelines while an internet tournament is not as clearly defined. If you like to have a white supremacist restaurant in your living room, I should think no one would stop you from letting non-whites into your private house (and we'll conveniently disregard the fact that you can't start businesses that are truly private, because that's not the point). So in physical life, the boundaries between private and public are fairly well defined. On the internet, however, the boundaries are not as clearly defined and it's not immediately easy to tell if a certain activity is private or public. However, I think the female-only leagues can easily be described as public because whoever is allowed to watch them, including men. So the female tournaments are public entertainment open for watching by men and women alike. So, to get back to your analogy, a public restaurant for whites only is just as bad as a public tournament that only women are allowed to watch. Both genders should be able to enjoy the entertainment/recreation and indeed, in female tournaments they do. So what is the entertainment/recreation made up of? That's where we have some freedom of choice. Should your restaurant (which has now been deemed open to people of any skin colour) be compelled to serve both Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola because it is discriminatory to only serve one of them? Should a sports bar be compelled to show curling as well as football, because it is discriminatory not to include all sports in a sports bar? I think the establishment should have some freedom to choose what they're doing. Besides, most female tournaments are usually sub-groups of larger tournament organizing bodies, catering to both males and females. Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 09:55 FabledIntegral wrote:I think it takes more resources to target female gamers than male gamers, which is completely unnecessary. I have zero interest in actively bringing female gamers to the scene, as I see zero benefit or value from doing so. I only see value in bringing people in general to the scene, which I think is easier to do so with males. Even if the esports community were a homogenous mass working in unison for the best of esports, wouldn't female-only tournaments actually be a very valid thing to do? For one thing, there's a potential to double the market without any additional infrastructure, because women exist alongside men already, so if we could get the women interested, it would mark a huge influx of members to the community. The point I'm trying to make is that the potential in getting female players is possibly larger than the potential of getting more male players and that's why we should try. In essence, I disagree that the resources per player is higher for females and males, because there are so many females and if we could just break the barrier, we'd see a huge influx of players for very little resources. Moreover, since female gamers draw disproportionately more attention than male gamers in respect to their achievements, wouldn't it actually be desirable to hold female tournaments because they would have a statistically higher view count than a mixed-gender tournament of the same level, that is, they have a higher "profit margin" as it were? This became a much longer post than I though it would...
This is the kind of response I was looking for! Still don't necessarily agree with you, but its awesome to see points actually being addressed, having reasons for why it should be done, etc. And while I would love to take the time to write up a response, unfortunately I'm without a desktop and am using a tablet right now... Would take forever to structure a well put rebuttal or whatnot. Hopefully ASUS stops dicking around with the RMA that's taking 3 weeks now... Seeing as I just left my Acer laptop to be repaired at a shop this weekend too =(.
|
On January 07 2013 00:16 Destro wrote: Honestly, i dont understand why people even care. Thats the great thing about esports.. its not about physical strength or anything like that. If you take it beyond the game into other things, sure.
but lets get this straight, there are NO disadvantages to women playing games. unless you give yourself a retarded name like cupcakeprincess or something in game, no one is going to know what gender you are nor care.
I feel like the problem is with the female gamer culture.. how many times to we need the "o hai im a girl and i play games OMG im such a nerd ^^ kekekeek" There are a lot of serious female gamers that dont even give on that they are female just because it doesnt fucking matter. To suggest women have a disadvantage when it comes to video games, is to suggest they are inferior in some sort of what which is just fucked up.
however, its a male dominated industry. and unless the culture shifts, you are still going to have sexism. I dont think its a flaw in the community, but more a flaw in society. And to be fair, if it was the other way around, it would be the men made fun of.. mostly by their peers however. Chess has separate men's and women's world championships because women are just not competitive in high level chess (unless their name is Judit Polgár). Competitions in other board games such as Weiqi (Go) and Xiangqi are also often separated in men's and women's category.
So there is a lot of prevedent for havin separate men's and women's tournaments in strategy games. There is probably more to it than the scene as a whole being male dominated.
|
Training environments are male-dominated, which may hinder female players. I don't endorse lowering the bar so that female competitors can make it over, but I see the sense in creating practice environments that will more efficiently help female competitors reach that level.
Female teams/clans/practice partner lists might be very valuable indeed.
|
On January 07 2013 15:46 Severedevil wrote: Training environments are male-dominated, which may hinder female players. I don't endorse lowering the bar so that female competitors can make it over, but I see the sense in creating practice environments that will more efficiently help female competitors reach that level.
Female teams/clans/practice partner lists might be very valuable indeed. ....wat? You're going to have to explain this one bit more. I don't understand how a training environment composed of males would hinder a female player from improving.
|
On January 07 2013 13:39 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 22:37 iMAniaC wrote:So I'm quoting from a few pages back, because the discussion was much better back then On January 05 2013 09:55 FabledIntegral wrote: Also, my point wasn't rather that if 5 new female gamers are introduced, 5 male gamers are hindered from coming in. Rather, it meant, we should just grow the scene regardless by attempting to attract 5 people to the scene, regardless of gender. We should not actively attempt to target 5 female gamers (or 5 male gamers for that matter), but rather work on getting an additional 5 gamers to the scene in general (of course, 5 being a completely arbitrary number). The article fails to mention the benefit of targeting females in particular - why 5 more female gamers is superior to simply 5 more gamers. Although I do very much appreciate the attempt get at the core values of the problem, just like theoretical physics are often done in a frictionless vacuum, I think it's a bit of an oversimplification in this matter, because the esports community is not a homogenous mass working in unison for the best of esports. I think we need to take into account that people have different interests and different motivations and that we do not deal with the choice of getting either a female tournament/interview/whatever or a male tournament/interview/whatever, but rather getting either a female tournament or no tournament at all. So the question is, is the female tournament/interview detrimental to esports as a whole? If we have the chance of bringing in 5 new female gamers, should we not take chance, just because it could not have brought in 5 new male gamers? If this is your answer: On January 06 2013 02:32 FabledIntegral wrote:And it's still blatant discrimination. If I'm a white supremacist that wants to open a restaurant for whites only, should I be able to do it? I wouldn't open a restaurant otherwise, because I think Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Middle-Eastern (lumped), etc. are all scum. So at the very least, I'm adding value by providing services to Whites, right? That's better than no value being added at all? Then, how do you feel about a tournament for certain nationalities only, like just a Dutch tournament, or just a European tournament? Are they equally discriminatory as female-only tournaments? Or what about a tournament among friends or any invitational tournament where not everyone is allowed to compete? Would you object to them? Also, seeing that not all invitational tournaments include only the topmost skilled players of the world, do you object to them because some spots went to less deserving players while the more deserving players were excluded? Or what about the Brood War TSL's, where Koreans, specifically, were not allowed to compete? If you do not object to all of these examples, are you able to pinpoint exactly where the qualitative difference between arbitrary factors like gender, nationality, social network etc is and explain why gender is a worse arbitrary factor to use in discrimination than the others? The resturant analogy is a good one and I think the difference lies in that a tournament is a competition while a restaurant is entertainment/recreation, and also that a bar is an open establishment with clear guidelines while an internet tournament is not as clearly defined. If you like to have a white supremacist restaurant in your living room, I should think no one would stop you from letting non-whites into your private house (and we'll conveniently disregard the fact that you can't start businesses that are truly private, because that's not the point). So in physical life, the boundaries between private and public are fairly well defined. On the internet, however, the boundaries are not as clearly defined and it's not immediately easy to tell if a certain activity is private or public. However, I think the female-only leagues can easily be described as public because whoever is allowed to watch them, including men. So the female tournaments are public entertainment open for watching by men and women alike. So, to get back to your analogy, a public restaurant for whites only is just as bad as a public tournament that only women are allowed to watch. Both genders should be able to enjoy the entertainment/recreation and indeed, in female tournaments they do. So what is the entertainment/recreation made up of? That's where we have some freedom of choice. Should your restaurant (which has now been deemed open to people of any skin colour) be compelled to serve both Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola because it is discriminatory to only serve one of them? Should a sports bar be compelled to show curling as well as football, because it is discriminatory not to include all sports in a sports bar? I think the establishment should have some freedom to choose what they're doing. Besides, most female tournaments are usually sub-groups of larger tournament organizing bodies, catering to both males and females. On January 05 2013 09:55 FabledIntegral wrote:I think it takes more resources to target female gamers than male gamers, which is completely unnecessary. I have zero interest in actively bringing female gamers to the scene, as I see zero benefit or value from doing so. I only see value in bringing people in general to the scene, which I think is easier to do so with males. Even if the esports community were a homogenous mass working in unison for the best of esports, wouldn't female-only tournaments actually be a very valid thing to do? For one thing, there's a potential to double the market without any additional infrastructure, because women exist alongside men already, so if we could get the women interested, it would mark a huge influx of members to the community. The point I'm trying to make is that the potential in getting female players is possibly larger than the potential of getting more male players and that's why we should try. In essence, I disagree that the resources per player is higher for females and males, because there are so many females and if we could just break the barrier, we'd see a huge influx of players for very little resources. Moreover, since female gamers draw disproportionately more attention than male gamers in respect to their achievements, wouldn't it actually be desirable to hold female tournaments because they would have a statistically higher view count than a mixed-gender tournament of the same level, that is, they have a higher "profit margin" as it were? This became a much longer post than I though it would... This is the kind of response I was looking for! Still don't necessarily agree with you, but its awesome to see points actually being addressed, having reasons for why it should be done, etc. And while I would love to take the time to write up a response, unfortunately I'm without a desktop and am using a tablet right now... Would take forever to structure a well put rebuttal or whatnot. Hopefully ASUS stops dicking around with the RMA that's taking 3 weeks now... Seeing as I just left my Acer laptop to be repaired at a shop this weekend too =(.
You're welcome I'm subscribed to this thread, so I'll probably see your response whenever you get around to it. I, too wouldn't want to answer a wall-of-text on only a tablet!
|
I think the primary problem with female gamers is the fanbase. I feel sorry for any female progamer getting showered with "omg u so pretty" comments / e-flirting where male pros receive fan messages based on actual ingame prowess.
|
I think it needs to be reiterated that very few if any people are getting offended at the bare concept of female-only Starcraft events.
I think the animosity comes from styling and presenting these events as if they were professional level competitions, when they don't include skilled players.
I think there are several thousand people in the Starcraft community who put in a lot of time and effort to become recognized as real competitors, sacrificing a lot of time and energy to no avail, and they see essentially casual players being shooed in to wear the badge of honor. That's the core problem here.
Probably 90% of the attention Scarlett receives is from her outstanding play, and then the other 10% is her gender. And I don't think anyone is really mad about that extra attention at all. She deserves it, she's really good at the game. She's far, far past the mark, and the community is happy to give her extra attention.
I don't think the gender factor is even very important. Any similar situation would make people mad. I think if some male actor or singer or say Justin Bieber started streaming silver level Starcraft II, and then next thing you know TL signs him for the massive adbuxx, the community would absolutely lose its collective shit and go into full fucking meltdown mode. The horror.
So I've sort of said this before, but until you can find 7 or 8 more Scarletts, present your female-only competitions as casual events-- competitive in nature, but targeted towards a wider segment of the female community. I think it's a better way to draw in newcomers, and you'll dodge 99.9% of the nerdrage.
|
On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote: Females sit uncomfortably on a double-edged sword where they cannot be proud of their gender...
I'm a bit perplexed that it appears you didn't talk to any gender studies experts before writing this piece.
Many modern feminists or gender studies experts believe that women will not be equal until they can say "now I don't have to be woman anymore" (as opposed to the previous belief where one day women could say "now I can finally be a woman").
The gender "female" is synonymous with the lesser in all major languages. You throw like a girl, you hit like a girl, you cried like a little girl, don't get your panties in a bunch... or perhaps my favorite, when GJ Jane says "suck my cock" perhaps the ultimate insult to women in a movie that was trying to show women can be strong. When she said that, she was implying that she had become powerful because she had a penis, not because she had a vagina. Sad how poorly society understands this huh?
Sexism is ingrained in language. How could women be proud of what we have made women into?
They can't. And that is why many modern feminists believe we will achieve equally when they can say "now I don't have to be woman anymore."
As for the relationship with E-Sports, well it is no different that any other relationship. Female only tournaments reinforces the belief that females are lesser. That simply isn't true. They can compete. Females were thought once not to be able to go school for fear they wouldn't understand it. But now females normally out test males, even in male dominated areas, such as math.
SC2 today is full of males, and thus the chances of finding a great male player is much higher. However, if you took a random sampling of male players from the scene and had them compete against a random sample of females with equal RTS experience, I bet it would be very close.
EDIT: My mistake, I didn't realize this was old, thought it was a series of pieces he released along with this article: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=427926
|
You're transcending the cultural-feministic issues of eSports and broadening to a range of language and history of culture. Regardless of my degree and the classes I took, to deviate onto such a subject that broad is pretty strenuous and pointless, since there's no resolve either and we have different perspectives.
Female only tournaments reinforces the belief that females are lesser I don't see how that makes necessary sense? It's by assumption people think this rather than heightening the exposure of a non-majority class of people (class being category or differentiation in gender, ethnic groups, etc.). Then you broaden it again to comparisons in schools, which, if I recall how I wrote this article, we were stepping away from comparisons.
Don't compare genders, there are entire fields of study devoted to the political and sociological study of women and the history, but even at the introduction level of political classes, most prominent feminist political groups aim to separate the need to compare the two genders/sexes. It's not about being equal to men, it's about being two same-level party of people, exposing both for who they are independently, not in relation to one another.
|
Females-only tournament doesn't make women lesser any more than the NAACP endorses segregation. Female-only tournaments showcase the female StarCraft II players that get lost in an ocean of testosterone. It shows that we're not actually a 100% male scene, and that we want more women to play. Even if you don't see the value of a diverse female demographic, an inclusive scene attracts eyes. We're trying to defy the still-prevalent stereotype that all gamers are socially inept man-nerds. We want people to know that we have and welcome socially inept women too.
|
On September 04 2013 06:04 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote: Females sit uncomfortably on a double-edged sword where they cannot be proud of their gender... The gender "female" is synonymous with the lesser in all major languages. You throw like a girl, you hit like a girl, you cried like a little girl, don't get your panties in a bunch... or perhaps my favorite, when GJ Jane says "suck my cock" perhaps the ultimate insult to women in a movie that was trying to show women can be strong. When she said that, she was implying that she had become powerful because she had a penis, not because she had a vagina. Sad how poorly society understands this huh? Sexism is ingrained in language. How could women be proud of what we have made women into?
How does this sexism theory of yours account for you're a dick not being a compliment? Is you jump like an elephant an expression of elephant discrimination?
|
On September 05 2013 10:24 Darkwhite wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2013 06:04 BronzeKnee wrote:On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote: Females sit uncomfortably on a double-edged sword where they cannot be proud of their gender... The gender "female" is synonymous with the lesser in all major languages. You throw like a girl, you hit like a girl, you cried like a little girl, don't get your panties in a bunch... or perhaps my favorite, when GJ Jane says "suck my cock" perhaps the ultimate insult to women in a movie that was trying to show women can be strong. When she said that, she was implying that she had become powerful because she had a penis, not because she had a vagina. Sad how poorly society understands this huh? Sexism is ingrained in language. How could women be proud of what we have made women into? How does this sexism theory of yours account for you're a dick not being a compliment? Is you jump like an elephant an expression of elephant discrimination? I really hope your defense of a sexism-riddled language isn't that we still use male genitalia to insult people.
|
On September 05 2013 13:10 Shantastic wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 10:24 Darkwhite wrote:On September 04 2013 06:04 BronzeKnee wrote:On November 20 2012 03:03 Torte de Lini wrote: Females sit uncomfortably on a double-edged sword where they cannot be proud of their gender... The gender "female" is synonymous with the lesser in all major languages. You throw like a girl, you hit like a girl, you cried like a little girl, don't get your panties in a bunch... or perhaps my favorite, when GJ Jane says "suck my cock" perhaps the ultimate insult to women in a movie that was trying to show women can be strong. When she said that, she was implying that she had become powerful because she had a penis, not because she had a vagina. Sad how poorly society understands this huh? Sexism is ingrained in language. How could women be proud of what we have made women into? How does this sexism theory of yours account for you're a dick not being a compliment? Is you jump like an elephant an expression of elephant discrimination? I really hope your defense of a sexism-riddled language isn't that we still use male genitalia to insult people.
Well, that's not necessarily a hard mistake to make. At a superficial level, using "you're a dick" to insult people would seem congruent with using "you're a bitch" to insult people. They aren't actually the same, though. Calling a man a "bitch" or a "pussy" is to degrade him by emasculating him; that is, to show him as lacking some fundamental masculine quality. Calling him a "dick" doesn't have that effect.
Also, regardless of what I just said, the fact that the term "you're a dick" is still present in our day-to-day language does not negate the claim that sexism is ingrained in language. In fact, I would cite that as further evidence.
|
I think that people consistently miss the point that exposure to female role models can lead to an increased player base. Even if you're of the belief that pretending discrimination doesn't exist is the only way to make it not actually exist, you have to acknowledge the purely practical role of expanding esports by appealing to a lesser-exploited demographic.
|
On September 05 2013 14:03 Pontius Pirate wrote: I think that people consistently miss the point that exposure to female role models can lead to an increased player base. Even if you're of the belief that pretending discrimination doesn't exist is the only way to make it not actually exist, you have to acknowledge the purely practical role of expanding esports by appealing to a lesser-exploited demographic.
ding ding ding we have a winner (:
|
I think it would be nice to have both Male and Female leagues, but also leagues with both.
Like....say I league(Just an example) that would have both Male and Female divisions, and then a bonus tournament with them mixed(Like, top 8 of each).
But, now that I sit and think about it, it would end up a lot of "SEE! <Gender> IS BETTER THAN <Gender>!!!!!" and might not help anything..
|
Counter-Strike has a male and female league, but the issue of comparison never comes up
|
On September 05 2013 15:15 Torte de Lini wrote: Counter-Strike has a male and female league, but the issue of comparison never comes up
Counter strike itself never really comes up anymore
|
On September 05 2013 14:03 Pontius Pirate wrote: I think that people consistently miss the point that exposure to female role models can lead to an increased player base. Even if you're of the belief that pretending discrimination doesn't exist is the only way to make it not actually exist, you have to acknowledge the purely practical role of expanding esports by appealing to a lesser-exploited demographic. ^That.
|
On September 05 2013 15:23 QuackPocketDuck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 15:15 Torte de Lini wrote: Counter-Strike has a male and female league, but the issue of comparison never comes up Counter strike itself never really comes up anymore
they nailed down some pretty important things,.
|
On September 05 2013 15:15 Torte de Lini wrote: Counter-Strike has a male and female league, but the issue of comparison never comes up
I don't know about germany, but here in Denmark, there is DEFINATLY a comparison between male and female gamers, also in counterstrike.
At Copenhagen Games 2013 we had a female only CS tourney, and everyone looking at them agreed on that it was not their skills that made them watch, as the male gamers far outskilled them.
on thread topic: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
|
Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues.
|
On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote + Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues.
What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort?
And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport?
|
On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport?
Maybe its just statistics.(and/or women are wired in such a way that they are worse in sc then man on average) If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons.
|
On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons.
Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win...
Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football?
|
On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport?
You're cherry-picking. You're saying men perform better than women in eSport based on their achievements (and women's lack thereof), but you don't also weigh how many men don't achieve compare to women.
Why is that? Stop comparing. I'm not asking to actually do it, I'm stating that the constant comparison is faulty and can't be actually applied to make arguments.
|
On September 05 2013 18:02 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? You're cherry-picking. You're saying men perform better than women in eSport based on their achievements (and women's lack thereof), but you don't also weigh how many men don't achieve compare to women. Why is that? Stop comparing.
I'm comparing becausea bigger player pool does not mean better top players.
|
On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football?
We're not highlighting who is the best of a certain class of players, we're highlight minority genders for participating: thus opening up more interested groups and widening the popularity of our eSport.
On September 05 2013 18:04 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:02 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? You're cherry-picking. You're saying men perform better than women in eSport based on their achievements (and women's lack thereof), but you don't also weigh how many men don't achieve compare to women. Why is that? Stop comparing. I'm comparing because number of players does not equal more skilled ones.
No one said that lol You're fighting yourself.
|
On September 05 2013 18:05 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football? We're not highlighting who is the best of a certain class of players, we're highlight minority genders for participating: thus opening up more interested groups and widening the popularity of our eSport.
From the past, chess history among other things, we can deduce that female leagues or other minority leagues does infact NOT help for shizzle. All it does is further isolate the minority, and thus "giving" them their achivements.
Would you want to be a pro in a sport that see you as an inferior caste of player, to the point of where they make a "special" tournament for you?
|
No one's talking about bringing attention to females being the best of all or best of their class. That's you and what you're arguing about when they are neither the goal of what we are suggesting nor of our arguments.
You're literally arguing with yourself about something no one else is talking about.
|
On September 05 2013 18:05 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football? We're not highlighting who is the best of a certain class of players, we're highlight minority genders for participating: thus opening up more interested groups and widening the popularity of our eSport. Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:04 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:02 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? You're cherry-picking. You're saying men perform better than women in eSport based on their achievements (and women's lack thereof), but you don't also weigh how many men don't achieve compare to women. Why is that? Stop comparing. I'm comparing because number of players does not equal more skilled ones. No one said that lol You're fighting yourself.
It's the exact thing you wrote, maybe you meant otherwise, but thats what anyonewould interprent by reading the post i quoted,
|
On September 05 2013 18:08 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:05 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football? We're not highlighting who is the best of a certain class of players, we're highlight minority genders for participating: thus opening up more interested groups and widening the popularity of our eSport. From the past, chess history among other things, we can deduce that female leagues or other minority leagues does infact NOT help for shizzle. All it does is further isolate the minority, and thus "giving" them their achivements. Would you want to be a pro in a sport that see you as an inferior caste of player, to the point of where they make a "special" tournament for you?
Creating minority idols further spurs interest from classes of people they are related to. WNBA and Women's Soccer spurs role-models for women to participate and be active in organized sports. Widening the popularity of the sport as spectators and active participants.
|
On September 05 2013 18:09 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:05 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football? We're not highlighting who is the best of a certain class of players, we're highlight minority genders for participating: thus opening up more interested groups and widening the popularity of our eSport. On September 05 2013 18:04 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:02 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? You're cherry-picking. You're saying men perform better than women in eSport based on their achievements (and women's lack thereof), but you don't also weigh how many men don't achieve compare to women. Why is that? Stop comparing. I'm comparing because number of players does not equal more skilled ones. No one said that lol You're fighting yourself. It's the exact thing you wrote, maybe you meant otherwise, but thats what anyonewould interprent by reading the post i quoted,
Read the article then, it's a more expansive idea of what I'm saying here lol
|
On September 05 2013 18:08 Torte de Lini wrote: No one's talking about bringing attention to females being the best of all or best of their class. That's you and what you're arguing about when they are neither the goal of what we are suggesting nor of our arguments.
You're literally arguing with yourself about something no one else is talking about.
No, i'm arguing against the concept of female only leagues, as they are damaging to the very players you wanna help by making them.
I'm not even talking about brining them attention, i'm literally arguing that no attention should be on this "issue" at all, since it's not an issue to begin with.
|
On September 05 2013 18:11 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:08 Torte de Lini wrote: No one's talking about bringing attention to females being the best of all or best of their class. That's you and what you're arguing about when they are neither the goal of what we are suggesting nor of our arguments.
You're literally arguing with yourself about something no one else is talking about. No, i'm arguing against the concept of female only leagues, as they are damaging to the very players you wanna help by making them. I'm not even talking about brining them attention, i'm literally arguing that no attention should be on this "issue" at all, since it's not an issue to begin with.
There is no harm in doing it, in fact; it only furthers the ultimate goal of eSports as a growing subculture. Which is the whole summary of all my topics: the analysis of eSports as a growing subculture. It's the slogan on the website lol
Not sure how offering more opportunities other groups of people, similar to geographic regions, is damaging and the result being negligible (it's not)
Your argument's basis is something no one is talking about. The perception that winning in a women's league is detrimental because its somehow comparatively inferior.
1. Comparisons are, by default, slanted and skewed poorly because of the sizes 2. That's not the goal and your personal perception based on point #1: the comparison that isn't right to be done at all.
|
On September 05 2013 18:10 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:08 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:05 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football? We're not highlighting who is the best of a certain class of players, we're highlight minority genders for participating: thus opening up more interested groups and widening the popularity of our eSport. From the past, chess history among other things, we can deduce that female leagues or other minority leagues does infact NOT help for shizzle. All it does is further isolate the minority, and thus "giving" them their achivements. Would you want to be a pro in a sport that see you as an inferior caste of player, to the point of where they make a "special" tournament for you? Creating minority idols further spurs interest from classes of people they are related to. WNBA and Women's Soccer spurs role-models for women to participate and be active in organized sports. Widening the popularity of the sport as spectators and active participants.
Be honest here. Why do you think people watch WNBA? Or Women's Soccer? Or Women's handball? Physical sport is a place where males will always dominate because of their superior body. Hence the female leagues will always be niche things.
In esport, no such thing are holding you back from becomming good.
|
On September 05 2013 18:14 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:10 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:08 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:05 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football? We're not highlighting who is the best of a certain class of players, we're highlight minority genders for participating: thus opening up more interested groups and widening the popularity of our eSport. From the past, chess history among other things, we can deduce that female leagues or other minority leagues does infact NOT help for shizzle. All it does is further isolate the minority, and thus "giving" them their achivements. Would you want to be a pro in a sport that see you as an inferior caste of player, to the point of where they make a "special" tournament for you? Creating minority idols further spurs interest from classes of people they are related to. WNBA and Women's Soccer spurs role-models for women to participate and be active in organized sports. Widening the popularity of the sport as spectators and active participants. Be honest here. Why do you think people watch WNBA? Or Women's Soccer? Or Women's handball? Physical sport is a place where males will always dominate because of their superior body. Hence the female leagues will always be niche things. In esport, no such thing are holding you back from becoming good.
The goals are the same.
|
On September 05 2013 18:14 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:11 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:08 Torte de Lini wrote: No one's talking about bringing attention to females being the best of all or best of their class. That's you and what you're arguing about when they are neither the goal of what we are suggesting nor of our arguments.
You're literally arguing with yourself about something no one else is talking about. No, i'm arguing against the concept of female only leagues, as they are damaging to the very players you wanna help by making them. I'm not even talking about brining them attention, i'm literally arguing that no attention should be on this "issue" at all, since it's not an issue to begin with. There is no harm in doing it, in fact; it only furthers the ultimate goal of eSports as a growing subculture. Which is the whole summary of all my topics: the analysis of eSports as a growing subculture. It's the slogan on the website lol Not sure how offering more opportunities other groups of people, similar to geographic regions, is damaging and the result being negligible (it's not)
Ok, so your ultimate goal is simply to bring more minorities into esport, by giving them easier tournaments they can participate in. How exactly does that fit into the nature of sports of any kind, which is "Competetiveness"? How are the minority players ever gonna evolve their skill, if they have have no need to?
|
On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football?
Ya something along that line, Its not realy a secret that verry few women play games and that manny guys like to play football. Off course this does not go always and for everyone... but for the population in general as a whole.
There are female leagues in nearly all sports, and their league beeing weaker doesnt realy deter the women from competing in for example tennis or cycling and they dont see it as an insult to have a league for themselves. Its realy silly to see it as an insult imo. Having said that, i repeat that i think making female sc championships and promote them wont lead to manny more female players (wich is one of the goals mentioned) it has not realy worked that way in other sports where females are hugely under represented. Its still a good idea though i think but for the reason to reward thoose female players, not for increasing their numbers.
|
On September 05 2013 18:16 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:14 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:10 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:08 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:05 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football? We're not highlighting who is the best of a certain class of players, we're highlight minority genders for participating: thus opening up more interested groups and widening the popularity of our eSport. From the past, chess history among other things, we can deduce that female leagues or other minority leagues does infact NOT help for shizzle. All it does is further isolate the minority, and thus "giving" them their achivements. Would you want to be a pro in a sport that see you as an inferior caste of player, to the point of where they make a "special" tournament for you? Creating minority idols further spurs interest from classes of people they are related to. WNBA and Women's Soccer spurs role-models for women to participate and be active in organized sports. Widening the popularity of the sport as spectators and active participants. Be honest here. Why do you think people watch WNBA? Or Women's Soccer? Or Women's handball? Physical sport is a place where males will always dominate because of their superior body. Hence the female leagues will always be niche things. In esport, no such thing are holding you back from becoming good. The goals are the same.
The goals of male physical sport, is to crown the best players in the world.
The goals of female physical sport, is to crown the best female players in the world.
|
On September 05 2013 18:18 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:14 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:11 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:08 Torte de Lini wrote: No one's talking about bringing attention to females being the best of all or best of their class. That's you and what you're arguing about when they are neither the goal of what we are suggesting nor of our arguments.
You're literally arguing with yourself about something no one else is talking about. No, i'm arguing against the concept of female only leagues, as they are damaging to the very players you wanna help by making them. I'm not even talking about brining them attention, i'm literally arguing that no attention should be on this "issue" at all, since it's not an issue to begin with. There is no harm in doing it, in fact; it only furthers the ultimate goal of eSports as a growing subculture. Which is the whole summary of all my topics: the analysis of eSports as a growing subculture. It's the slogan on the website lol Not sure how offering more opportunities other groups of people, similar to geographic regions, is damaging and the result being negligible (it's not) Ok, so your ultimate goal is simply to bring more minorities into esport, by giving them easier tournaments they can participate in. How exactly does that fit into the nature of sports of any kind, which is "Competetiveness"? How are the minority players ever gonna evolve their skill, if they have have no need to?
No, it's to expand the popularity and growth of eSports by offering different sets of competitors people can relate to and also exposing regional/gender heroes.
Competition is a frame set by anyone. Little leagues a leagues or competitions regardless how "lesser" they are to full-grown males. It achieves the idea fair play, competition and local activity (or national)/popularity of said sport.
No one's talking about the evolution of skill or the capabilities that females can achieve just as highly as males. I never make that argument and never will touch on the subject as a whole.
|
On September 05 2013 18:19 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:16 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:14 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:10 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:08 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:05 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: [quote]
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football? We're not highlighting who is the best of a certain class of players, we're highlight minority genders for participating: thus opening up more interested groups and widening the popularity of our eSport. From the past, chess history among other things, we can deduce that female leagues or other minority leagues does infact NOT help for shizzle. All it does is further isolate the minority, and thus "giving" them their achivements. Would you want to be a pro in a sport that see you as an inferior caste of player, to the point of where they make a "special" tournament for you? Creating minority idols further spurs interest from classes of people they are related to. WNBA and Women's Soccer spurs role-models for women to participate and be active in organized sports. Widening the popularity of the sport as spectators and active participants. Be honest here. Why do you think people watch WNBA? Or Women's Soccer? Or Women's handball? Physical sport is a place where males will always dominate because of their superior body. Hence the female leagues will always be niche things. In esport, no such thing are holding you back from becoming good. The goals are the same. The goals of male physical sport, is to crown the best players in the world. The goals of female physical sport, is to crown the best female players in the world.
Regardless of who is the best and who isn't, the results are the same in that they promote the legitimacy of competitive sports and said broadcasting offers a sport culture that can widen if it appeals to the most diversified audiences it can reach.
|
I can do this all day. I can tell you like talking rather than reading.
|
On September 05 2013 18:14 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:11 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:08 Torte de Lini wrote: No one's talking about bringing attention to females being the best of all or best of their class. That's you and what you're arguing about when they are neither the goal of what we are suggesting nor of our arguments.
You're literally arguing with yourself about something no one else is talking about. No, i'm arguing against the concept of female only leagues, as they are damaging to the very players you wanna help by making them. I'm not even talking about brining them attention, i'm literally arguing that no attention should be on this "issue" at all, since it's not an issue to begin with. There is no harm in doing it, in fact; it only furthers the ultimate goal of eSports as a growing subculture. Which is the whole summary of all my topics: the analysis of eSports as a growing subculture. It's the slogan on the website lol Not sure how offering more opportunities other groups of people, similar to geographic regions, is damaging and the result being negligible (it's not) Your argument's basis is something no one is talking about. The perception that winning in a women's league is detrimental because its somehow comparatively inferior. 1. Comparisons are, by default, slanted and skewed poorly because of the sizes 2. That's not the goal and your personal perception based on point #1: the comparison that isn't right to be done at all.
The comparison is there, because the rule of thumb, that males are generally better at competetive sports(both physical and mental) have not been broken for centuries,
Edit, the comparison in itself, is the male audience's way of measuring how far women have progressed, inaccurate or not.
|
On September 05 2013 18:19 Rassy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football? Ya something along that line, Its not realy a secret that verry few women play games and that manny guys like to play football. Off course this does not go always and for everyone... but for the population in general as a whole. There are female leagues in nearly all sports, and their league beeing weaker doesnt realy deter the women from competing in for example tennis or cycling and they dont see it as an insult to have a league for themselves. Its realy silly to see it as an insult imo.
winner
|
On September 05 2013 18:23 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:14 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:11 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:08 Torte de Lini wrote: No one's talking about bringing attention to females being the best of all or best of their class. That's you and what you're arguing about when they are neither the goal of what we are suggesting nor of our arguments.
You're literally arguing with yourself about something no one else is talking about. No, i'm arguing against the concept of female only leagues, as they are damaging to the very players you wanna help by making them. I'm not even talking about brining them attention, i'm literally arguing that no attention should be on this "issue" at all, since it's not an issue to begin with. There is no harm in doing it, in fact; it only furthers the ultimate goal of eSports as a growing subculture. Which is the whole summary of all my topics: the analysis of eSports as a growing subculture. It's the slogan on the website lol Not sure how offering more opportunities other groups of people, similar to geographic regions, is damaging and the result being negligible (it's not) Your argument's basis is something no one is talking about. The perception that winning in a women's league is detrimental because its somehow comparatively inferior. 1. Comparisons are, by default, slanted and skewed poorly because of the sizes 2. That's not the goal and your personal perception based on point #1: the comparison that isn't right to be done at all. The comparison is there, because the rule of thumb, that males are generally better at competetive sports(both physical and mental) have not been broken for centuries,
Their genetics allow them to excel. That's something we can't alter and it is because of their sex, not gender, that they are physically better.
It's really beside the point. We're looking to raise minority genders participation in the eSports to further the popularity with relatable people. We want more people to play StarCraft II, not necessarily in tournaments, but with the interest and mindset to be competitively active in smaller stuff or simply to gain more fans of the eSport, despite the reasons.
anyone keeping track how many times I've said this?
|
On September 05 2013 18:23 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:19 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football? Ya something along that line, Its not realy a secret that verry few women play games and that manny guys like to play football. Off course this does not go always and for everyone... but for the population in general as a whole. There are female leagues in nearly all sports, and their league beeing weaker doesnt realy deter the women from competing in for example tennis or cycling and they dont see it as an insult to have a league for themselves. Its realy silly to see it as an insult imo. winner
No, thats not a winner. In his case, the physical sport, women will never be able to compete with men for being the worlds best. They simply have no chioce but to accept that fact, so yes in that case it's silly to think like that.
However, in esport, or other mental sports, like chess, theres no such handicap given to the female players, hence it would be an insult towards them to make them their own leagues.
|
On September 05 2013 18:24 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:23 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:14 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:11 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:08 Torte de Lini wrote: No one's talking about bringing attention to females being the best of all or best of their class. That's you and what you're arguing about when they are neither the goal of what we are suggesting nor of our arguments.
You're literally arguing with yourself about something no one else is talking about. No, i'm arguing against the concept of female only leagues, as they are damaging to the very players you wanna help by making them. I'm not even talking about brining them attention, i'm literally arguing that no attention should be on this "issue" at all, since it's not an issue to begin with. There is no harm in doing it, in fact; it only furthers the ultimate goal of eSports as a growing subculture. Which is the whole summary of all my topics: the analysis of eSports as a growing subculture. It's the slogan on the website lol Not sure how offering more opportunities other groups of people, similar to geographic regions, is damaging and the result being negligible (it's not) Your argument's basis is something no one is talking about. The perception that winning in a women's league is detrimental because its somehow comparatively inferior. 1. Comparisons are, by default, slanted and skewed poorly because of the sizes 2. That's not the goal and your personal perception based on point #1: the comparison that isn't right to be done at all. The comparison is there, because the rule of thumb, that males are generally better at competetive sports(both physical and mental) have not been broken for centuries, Their genetics allow them to excel. That's something we can't alter and it is because of their sex, not gender, that they are physically better. It's really beside the point. We're looking to raise minority genders participation in the eSports to further the popularity with relatable people. We want more people to play StarCraft II, not necessarily in tournaments, but with the interest and mindset to be competitively active in smaller stuff or simply to gain more fans of the eSport, despite the reasons. anyone keeping track how many times I've said this?
But males don't have any genetics that make them superior MENTALLY, to women, in which case one would wonder why males have also dominated mental sports for centuries?
|
On September 05 2013 18:27 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:23 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:19 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 18:01 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 17:54 Rassy wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? Maybe its just statistics. If say 1 in 10.000 people can make pro level, and 1 in 100.000 people can become a pro champion, then with 2million man playing you have 200 pros and 20 champions, with 10k women playing you then have 1 women at pro level and no champions. Female league can motivate and attrackt more female players but i think the effects of it will be extremely small because females already have to go well out of their normal average behaviour to start playing in the first place, they already must have a huge motivation. In chess there are female leagues but they didnt succeed in making more women play chess at all. Though i do think women deserve their own events and championships to at least reward them in some way for their achievements, i dont think this will lead to more female players. It might increase the male player base though lol, but then its for the wrong reasons. Wheres the achivement in defeating a lesser caste of players? Gongratz, you are the best of the worst.. what? I would personally see it as an insult if people made an entire tournament of weak players just so i could win... Also, what is this "normal behavior" that you think females all share? Something along the lines of males always wanting to to play football? Ya something along that line, Its not realy a secret that verry few women play games and that manny guys like to play football. Off course this does not go always and for everyone... but for the population in general as a whole. There are female leagues in nearly all sports, and their league beeing weaker doesnt realy deter the women from competing in for example tennis or cycling and they dont see it as an insult to have a league for themselves. Its realy silly to see it as an insult imo. winner No, thats not a winner. In his case, the physical sport, women will never be able to compete with men for being the worlds best. They simply have no chioce but to accept that fact, so yes in that case it's silly to think like that. However, in esport, or other mental sports, like chess, theres no such handicap given to the female players, hence it would be an insult towards them to make them their own leagues.
He understands the overall point and understands that your perception is a personal one because you can't grasp the idea of broadening a sport rather than the competitions within the sport through "weaker" leagues lol
You're focusing on the wrong elements.
|
On September 05 2013 18:28 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:24 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:23 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:14 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 18:11 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:08 Torte de Lini wrote: No one's talking about bringing attention to females being the best of all or best of their class. That's you and what you're arguing about when they are neither the goal of what we are suggesting nor of our arguments.
You're literally arguing with yourself about something no one else is talking about. No, i'm arguing against the concept of female only leagues, as they are damaging to the very players you wanna help by making them. I'm not even talking about brining them attention, i'm literally arguing that no attention should be on this "issue" at all, since it's not an issue to begin with. There is no harm in doing it, in fact; it only furthers the ultimate goal of eSports as a growing subculture. Which is the whole summary of all my topics: the analysis of eSports as a growing subculture. It's the slogan on the website lol Not sure how offering more opportunities other groups of people, similar to geographic regions, is damaging and the result being negligible (it's not) Your argument's basis is something no one is talking about. The perception that winning in a women's league is detrimental because its somehow comparatively inferior. 1. Comparisons are, by default, slanted and skewed poorly because of the sizes 2. That's not the goal and your personal perception based on point #1: the comparison that isn't right to be done at all. The comparison is there, because the rule of thumb, that males are generally better at competetive sports(both physical and mental) have not been broken for centuries, Their genetics allow them to excel. That's something we can't alter and it is because of their sex, not gender, that they are physically better. It's really beside the point. We're looking to raise minority genders participation in the eSports to further the popularity with relatable people. We want more people to play StarCraft II, not necessarily in tournaments, but with the interest and mindset to be competitively active in smaller stuff or simply to gain more fans of the eSport, despite the reasons. anyone keeping track how many times I've said this? But males don't have any genetics that make them superior MENTALLY, to women, in which case one would wonder why males have also dominated mental sports for centuries?
Maybe we should have more female leagues to garner more interest in females to play StarCraft and through that, create more equally-mentally strong females that can compete amongst men.
maybe
Like, what you want is exactly what would happen with my suggestion. It's like if I was interested in knowing if African SC2 players were just as good as Koreans. What would be the best way to bring those out and create more competitors and spectators within that region?
|
On September 05 2013 18:22 Torte de Lini wrote: I can do this all day. I can tell you like talking rather than reading.
I can also go on it all day, because this is more a debate of philosophy than fact. However i would like to write instead of read, as i like to give myself time to think about my answers, so that they hold true to what i think. I.e. it would make a VERY slow chat
btw, brb 30 min, i need to eat.
|
On September 05 2013 18:32 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:22 Torte de Lini wrote: I can do this all day. I can tell you like talking rather than reading. I can also go on it all day, because this is more a debate of philosophy than fact. However i would like to write instead of read, as i like to give myself time to think about my answers, so that they hold true to what i think. I.e. it would make a VERY slow chat btw, brb 30 min, i need to eat.
No, it's more of your misperception of the goals.
|
On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:
What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort?
Social expectations and pressure would be my guess.
I mean gaming has come a very, very long way, to the point where a lot of people play games. That said, hardcore gaming is still very much a minority and a niche. Still, competitive gaming is probably at its highest point in terms of worldwide popularity and accessibility, and people are growing increasingly more aware of this phenomenon and are probably a lot more acceptant of it than they were in the 90s and early 00s.
But it's a bit of a vicious circle, because there really aren't many female players at the top level of eSports. I mean in SC2 we have Scarlett, and warranted or not there is still controversy as to whether or not she qualifies as a female player (which to an extent exacerbates the problem of how female gamers are perceived) and... well there are others, but they simply don't have the same results. Brood War had ToSsGirL but a quick glance at her TLPD reveals she wasn't at that level either. So tune in to a big eSports event, what are the odds you're going to see a female players? Will you see one on a top DotA 2 team? On a top LoL team? On a top CS:GO team? Anyone other than Scarlett competing at the top of SC2? Not really...
And because of that, alongside other subcultures and mentalities in gaming that further consolidate these expectations of females in games, the laymen (read: non-gamers and casual gamers a.k.a. the vast majority of people) will find hardcore female gamers very much an oddity and will call them out on it. The prospect of a girl playing something other than flash games/mobile games/the sims/whatever casual games and trying to be competitive and aspiring to be a professional gamer seems to them as outlandish as being a professional gamer at all used to be, say, 15 years ago. It's almost unheard of, even though us hardcore gamers would disagree.
Let's say you're a girl in her late teens/early twenties whose passion for gaming overpowers the interest for other more common and "expected" activities that society thinks your demographic should be into. If you're one of these very very few, what do you face? Well you face social stigma from most real life acquaintances that know you're playing a video game lots and trying to be really good at it, to the point of being called a no-life loser, a freak, an addict and other painfully ignorant bollocks of the like, and then online you face a different kind of stigma entirely, but one that's also owed to the same preconceptions and expectations. (see: "lol you have internet in the kitchen?", "i love you please have my babies", "lol fuck off attention whore", "10/10 would bang" all at the same time before you even have a chance to establish your personality or intentions)
The reason competitive gaming as a whole wasn't so big back in the day is because of social stigma. It was unheard of, and therefore weird, and the people who took part in it were considered weirdos and nerds and outcasts. Of course, the accessibility of gaming and the internet increasing exponentially, coupled with the evolution of trends like the CoD/Halo brodude gaming nights (that we ironically enough despise and make fun of) and other casual games like Minecraft springing to popularity (and all the youtube entertainment/let's play videos that came with that) and most recently the sheer popularity of LoL and DotA 2; all of this has done nothing but further legitimize gaming in the eyes of the laymen, no matter how much some of us hardcore gamers detest it and like to consider far inferior. But if not for such things, and not for the evolution of technology, I think we'd all be "enjoying" the same social stigma and weird looks from the non-gaming crowd.
So the vicious circle can be boiled down to: few if any females in competitive gaming -> people do not expect there to be any females in competitive gaming -> this expectation coupled with the vitriolic and trollish nature of the internet overwhelms most females' desire to seriously pursue their passion for gaming -> few if any females in competitive gaming.
It's a tricky issue to say the least, but there's no doubt in my mind the issue is much more extrinsic than intrinsic.
|
Oof, I didn't want to get into that, but your opening statement is spot-on. I'll read the rest in a bit!
|
On September 05 2013 18:04 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:02 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? You're cherry-picking. You're saying men perform better than women in eSport based on their achievements (and women's lack thereof), but you don't also weigh how many men don't achieve compare to women. Why is that? Stop comparing. I'm comparing becausea bigger player pool does not mean better top players.
Yes it does, thats a statistical law.
|
Yeah, he doesn't read that much
|
The only difference between this and having region locked tournaments is the fan bases. Korea > foreigners. Not because of any genetics but because of culture that makes it easier to develop. There are tournaments restricted to/for Finnish players. This is fine.
+ Show Spoiler [competitiveness] +I've usually noticed males being more competitive than females. I don't know if this is nature or nurture, but it definitely would effect the development and skill level.
|
On September 05 2013 18:58 DusTerr wrote: I've usually noticed males being more competitive than females. I don't know if this is nature or nurture, but it definitely would effect the development and skill level.
There most definitely is a biological facet to the issue as well (which needless to say doesn't affect everyone equally; but nevertheless should not be ignored), but the much stronger factor is probably the conditioned one, that is societal expectations and the peer pressure/stigma that results from them.
|
On September 05 2013 18:54 Rassy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:04 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 18:02 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 05 2013 17:28 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 16:54 Torte de Lini wrote: Theres nothing thats holding women back from being as good as men in gaming. Personally i think males tend to take it more seriously and work harder for it, kinda like how korean sc2 players are better than most EU players.
This is incorrect. There isn't any evidence that shows men taking it more seriously than women, you're making an assumption based on the current situation (which is a result of many things). Hence why comparison is just wrong in these gender issues. What is there to hold females gamers back from being as good as male gamers, besides effort? And how is it even a "gender issue" that men perform better than women in esport? You're cherry-picking. You're saying men perform better than women in eSport based on their achievements (and women's lack thereof), but you don't also weigh how many men don't achieve compare to women. Why is that? Stop comparing. I'm comparing becausea bigger player pool does not mean better top players. Yes it does, thats a statistical law.
If that was true, then EU sc2 players would be better than KR players.
|
On September 05 2013 19:11 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 18:58 DusTerr wrote: I've usually noticed males being more competitive than females. I don't know if this is nature or nurture, but it definitely would effect the development and skill level. There most definitely is a biological facet to the issue as well (which needless to say doesn't affect everyone equally; but nevertheless should not be ignored), but the much stronger factor is probably the conditioned one, that is societal expectations and the peer pressure/stigma that results from them.
I don't know dude. 30 years ago, being a gamer meant being the scum of earth personified, male or female. Look what it became, even with several times higher peer pressure than female gamers are facing now.
|
On September 05 2013 19:14 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 19:11 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On September 05 2013 18:58 DusTerr wrote: I've usually noticed males being more competitive than females. I don't know if this is nature or nurture, but it definitely would effect the development and skill level. There most definitely is a biological facet to the issue as well (which needless to say doesn't affect everyone equally; but nevertheless should not be ignored), but the much stronger factor is probably the conditioned one, that is societal expectations and the peer pressure/stigma that results from them. I don't know dude. 30 years ago, being a gamer meant being the scum of earth personified, male or female. Look what it became, even with several times higher peer pressure than female gamers are facing now.
Read my longer post.
|
On September 05 2013 18:57 Torte de Lini wrote: Yeah, he doesn't read that much
... Comming with that sort of strawmen, usually rip you 100% of credibility.
|
I'm not too worried about perception of people or the classifications of people to be honest.
|
On September 05 2013 19:14 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 19:14 cloneThorN wrote:On September 05 2013 19:11 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On September 05 2013 18:58 DusTerr wrote: I've usually noticed males being more competitive than females. I don't know if this is nature or nurture, but it definitely would effect the development and skill level. There most definitely is a biological facet to the issue as well (which needless to say doesn't affect everyone equally; but nevertheless should not be ignored), but the much stronger factor is probably the conditioned one, that is societal expectations and the peer pressure/stigma that results from them. I don't know dude. 30 years ago, being a gamer meant being the scum of earth personified, male or female. Look what it became, even with several times higher peer pressure than female gamers are facing now. Read my longer post.
Just read it now(get to the point quicker dammit, no one but me and tor di is gonna read that wall).
I did agree with it, however theres also some risc in it:
A: Getting female gamers into sc2 via female only tournaments could create a split between the genders in sc2, like in physical sports.
B: Female only tournament could potientially be dominated by as few as 4-5 players as they scene will be new.
C. Reinforce the idea that games are for men, seing as we needed to create an effin female league in a game, for women to be able to compete even at the lowest level.
|
On September 05 2013 19:18 Torte de Lini wrote: I'm not too worried about perception of people or the classifications of people to be honest.
You don't care about perception, but you wanna change how women percive gaming? You are arguing against yourself...
Also classifications are nessecary tools to be able to communicate effeciently :O
EDIT: Also, it's bullshit that you don't care about how people percive you. It's part of human nature to compare oneself with others, and our social society greatly enhances that need.
|
your personal perception. specifically
|
The 'chess' question was answered decades ago...it's the competitive nature of the 'male condition', it has nothing to do with intelligence, problem solving or love of the game. Females do not need to compete, they choose the fittest (best gamer, sharpest mind, biggest biceps etc) mate and away they go!
This will never change and this is why we as spectators and fans will find it difficult to support an inferior level of competition. I want more women playing too, but creating a 4th tier of competition would be counterproductive.
|
+ Show Spoiler +Just read it now(get to the point quicker dammit, no one but me and tor di is gonna read that wall).
I did agree with it, however theres also some risc in it:
A: Getting female gamers into sc2 via female only tournaments could create a split between the genders in sc2, like in physical sports.
B: Female only tournament could potientially be dominated by as few as 4-5 players as they scene will be new.
C. Reinforce the idea that games are for men, seing as we needed to create an effin female league in a game, for women to be able to compete even at the lowest level. You don't care about perception, but you wanna change how women percive gaming? You are arguing against yourself...
I read the wall.
Regarding point A---it's interesting that many people assume there isn't already a "split" between genders in gaming. While it is possible to mask one's gender in gaming, does that really mean we can get rid of gender distinctions altogether? Gaming doesn't exist in a vacuum---it exists in a world in which gender divisions still run deep. Right now, we can see the influence of gender divisions in the fact that the player pool for female players is much smaller. There are also far fewer females entering tournaments. Creating a female-only league would ease the external social barriers---many of which exist outside of gaming itself---that reduce the female player pool.
Regarding point C---again, it's interesting that many people assume that these perceptions don't already exist. the idea that "games are for men"---let's consider that for a moment. Why is the female player pool so small? Again, it's helpful to look outside of gaming itself, because gaming does not exist apart from the rest of society. There are no physical barriers to female participation---no one is stopping women from buying the game---so something else is going on. All of the arguments that people raise about why women don't participate---physicality, men enjoy the competition more, women are more interested in other things, and so on---reinforce the deeper idea that, in one way or another, "games are for men." But creating a female-only league subverts this idea by encouraging women to play games competitively.
Two different meanings of perception, like Torte said. So his statement isn't inconsistent.
|
Good lord this topic haha I was going to do females in esports in general, but god...
|
Good article. One thing of note though: Gabriella Issacs was the only female SC2 player who entered for the South African qualifiers, so she was allowed to go through automatically. She also was a bronze player at the time. I am sure there are many female gamers who are actually better than most gamers, but who prefer to hide behind anonymity and non-exposure.
|
I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but why shouldn't we have tournaments for black people? I'm of the opinion, unless proven otherwise, that women can physically and intellectually do the same shit in gaming men do. So, acknowledging women as a minority in competitive gaming, I think they are the same as any other minority. In SC2, I think black people are a minority (which certainly seems to be the case for TL in recent poll), so why don't we organize tournaments for black people?
Edit: typo
|
On September 06 2013 00:38 ZenithM wrote: I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but what shouldn't we have tournaments for black people? I'm of the opinion, unless proven otherwise, that women can physically and intellectually do the same shit in gaming men do. So, acknowledging women as a minority in competitive gaming, I think they are the same as any other minority. In SC2, I think black people are a minority (which certainly seems to be the case for TL in recent poll), so why don't we organize tournaments for black people?
We could if we wanted to. Same thing with homosexuals, though I think in terms of interest; gaming is more of a gender and age interest than ethnic background.
Can't confirm though
|
Oh god I'm TL rusty. I don't really agree with the article, but it's well written.
|
On September 06 2013 00:38 ZenithM wrote: I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but what shouldn't we have tournaments for black people? I'm of the opinion, unless proven otherwise, that women can physically and intellectually do the same shit in gaming men do. So, acknowledging women as a minority in competitive gaming, I think they are the same as any other minority. In SC2, I think black people are a minority (which certainly seems to be the case for TL in recent poll), so why don't we organize tournaments for black people?
In the vast majority physical competitions, we accept that men and women have different physical features that can put them at an advantage or disadvantage in a specific event. They don’t attempt to justify the division, because exceptions can always be found. Competitive gaming is the same way and some events are gender specific. Before we get upset there are events that are only for women in Esports, we need to go talk to the Olympics about women’s table tennis and badminton. I am sure if I dug around I could find five other sports were it would seem that gender would not affect competition too. And I am sure we could all come up with reasons why those events should be separated by gender too and they would be reasonable. Gender specific events are nothing new for any physical competitions and Esports really isn't any different.
|
On September 06 2013 00:38 ZenithM wrote: I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but why shouldn't we have tournaments for black people? I'm of the opinion, unless proven otherwise, that women can physically and intellectually do the same shit in gaming men do. So, acknowledging women as a minority in competitive gaming, I think they are the same as any other minority. In SC2, I think black people are a minority (which certainly seems to be the case for TL in recent poll), so why don't we organize tournaments for black people?
Edit: typo
Because there's no apparent interest in a tournament for black people.
WE are not organizing tournaments for anybody. There is no central authority that determines what kind of tournaments are being run and who gets to play in them. People and organizations do what they like and what they think there's a sufficient degree of interest for.
|
It isn't obvious to me that gender doesn't affect performance in table tennis or badminton (though apparently badminton mixed doubles is an olympic sport). For example, the fastest serve and smashes recorded for men in badminton are way faster than those for women. I know it was just an example and that you could probably indeed find some non-mixed sport where I have trouble pulling out arguments from the web like that, but I don't think we should do it that way in "e-sports" because traditional sports do it this way.
On September 06 2013 00:59 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2013 00:38 ZenithM wrote: I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but why shouldn't we have tournaments for black people? I'm of the opinion, unless proven otherwise, that women can physically and intellectually do the same shit in gaming men do. So, acknowledging women as a minority in competitive gaming, I think they are the same as any other minority. In SC2, I think black people are a minority (which certainly seems to be the case for TL in recent poll), so why don't we organize tournaments for black people?
Edit: typo Because there's no apparent interest in a tournament for black people. Well tell that to OP, not to me. There is a whole paragraph in his post that basically says that we should be more interested in the competitive women scene than we are now.
|
On September 06 2013 01:08 ZenithM wrote:It isn't obvious to me that gender doesn't affect performance in table tennis or badminton (though apparently badminton mixed doubles is an olympic sport). For example, the fastest serve and smashes recorded for men in badminton are way faster than those for women. I know it was just an example and that you could probably indeed find some non-mixed sport where I have trouble pulling out arguments from the web like that, but I don't think we should do it that way in "e-sports" because traditional sports do it this way. Show nested quote +On September 06 2013 00:59 Talin wrote:On September 06 2013 00:38 ZenithM wrote: I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but why shouldn't we have tournaments for black people? I'm of the opinion, unless proven otherwise, that women can physically and intellectually do the same shit in gaming men do. So, acknowledging women as a minority in competitive gaming, I think they are the same as any other minority. In SC2, I think black people are a minority (which certainly seems to be the case for TL in recent poll), so why don't we organize tournaments for black people?
Edit: typo Because there's no apparent interest in a tournament for black people. Well tell that to OP, not to me. There is a whole paragraph in his post that basically says that we should be more interested in the competitive women scene than we are now. There could be gender performance differences in both table tennis or badminton, but I am sure we could find conflicting evidence for both sides of the argument. Standard table pool has male and female competitions as well, though I couldn't tell you why(maybe because men are naturally taller and reach can be big advantage in pool), but who cares? If we really dig deep, we can find a ton of sports that have gender specific competitions that don't make a huge amount of sense.
The point is that trying to rationalize through science or some form of medical evidence is sort of a fools errand, since people will just turn around and provide their own cherry picked evidence.
The fact is that having more women involved with the scene would be dope. It would increase the market share of the game, help deal with that pesky sexism issue that keeps cropping up(its everywhere, but we can only deal with Esports in general), and make everything better. Because, it is a little known fact in the game world, that girls make everything better. And if a few gender specific competitions every year are what is needed to get the ball rolling, it is worth it. Some of the matches might look like season 1 GSL, but that isn't a huge deal.
|
I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but why shouldn't we have tournaments for black people? I'm of the opinion, unless proven otherwise, that women can physically and intellectually do the same shit in gaming men do. So, acknowledging women as a minority in competitive gaming, I think they are the same as any other minority. In SC2, I think black people are a minority (which certainly seems to be the case for TL in recent poll), so why don't we organize tournaments for black people?
Edit: typo
Seems like a good question to me. I guess the tricky point for me is that gender and race, while both traits that mark difference, are not really the same thing. So the reasons fewer women play SC2 are not the same as the reasons fewer black people, male and female, play SC2. It can get kind of complicated, but basically the social context is very different.
It isn't obvious to me that gender doesn't affect performance in table tennis or badminton (though apparently badminton mixed doubles is an olympic sport). For example, the fastest serve and smashes recorded for men in badminton are way faster than those for women. I know it was just an example and that you could probably indeed find some non-mixed sport where I have trouble pulling out arguments from the web like that, but I don't think we should do it that way in "e-sports" because traditional sports do it this way.
I myself don't know if female-only leagues are the best way to open gaming up to women. But I do agree that they may help subvert the masculine, male-dominated environment that has emerged around gaming. Sometimes it can be hard to observe just how male/masculine-oriented gaming culture is, especially if you're a man.
|
On September 06 2013 00:46 ZenithM wrote: Oh god I'm TL rusty. I don't really agree with the article, but it's well written.
I respect your opinion and thank you for the compliment
|
Now we're talking haha. We want girls in gaming because we like girls, that I can agree with. Imo OP is trying to make it sound more complicated than it really is. I don't think it's really a "help the minority" issue. In the end, we just want girls to be interested in the same game we're interested in :D
|
Men are only better at physical sports because the most popular sports favor men.
|
On September 06 2013 01:52 ZenithM wrote: Now we're talking haha. We want girls in gaming because we like girls, that I can agree with. Imo OP is trying to make it sound more complicated than it really is. I don't think it's really a "help the minority" issue. In the end, we just want girls to be interested in the same game we're interested in :D
No, it's really about broadening the interest of eSports in all areas. I could make arguments that there should be more tournaments in Australia to broaden interest as well.
The detailing of that post would be, of course, different
|
On September 06 2013 01:56 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2013 01:52 ZenithM wrote: Now we're talking haha. We want girls in gaming because we like girls, that I can agree with. Imo OP is trying to make it sound more complicated than it really is. I don't think it's really a "help the minority" issue. In the end, we just want girls to be interested in the same game we're interested in :D
No, it's really about broadening the interest of eSports in all areas. I could make arguments that there should be more tournaments in Australia to broaden interest as well. The detailing of that post would be, of course, different
There's actually a pretty decent number of tournaments in Australia and SEA, they just don't really get coverage/attention outside their own scene.
|
Meh, I forgot about eSports.
|
On September 06 2013 01:59 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2013 01:56 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 06 2013 01:52 ZenithM wrote: Now we're talking haha. We want girls in gaming because we like girls, that I can agree with. Imo OP is trying to make it sound more complicated than it really is. I don't think it's really a "help the minority" issue. In the end, we just want girls to be interested in the same game we're interested in :D
No, it's really about broadening the interest of eSports in all areas. I could make arguments that there should be more tournaments in Australia to broaden interest as well. The detailing of that post would be, of course, different There's actually a pretty decent number of tournaments in Australia and SEA, they just don't really get coverage/attention outside their own scene.
Why no WCS for SEA?
|
On September 06 2013 02:13 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2013 01:59 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On September 06 2013 01:56 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 06 2013 01:52 ZenithM wrote: Now we're talking haha. We want girls in gaming because we like girls, that I can agree with. Imo OP is trying to make it sound more complicated than it really is. I don't think it's really a "help the minority" issue. In the end, we just want girls to be interested in the same game we're interested in :D
No, it's really about broadening the interest of eSports in all areas. I could make arguments that there should be more tournaments in Australia to broaden interest as well. The detailing of that post would be, of course, different There's actually a pretty decent number of tournaments in Australia and SEA, they just don't really get coverage/attention outside their own scene. Why no WCS for SEA? To many countries, to much ocean and no single production company to get it done. Its like WCS EU, but with way more expensive flights for the players. Maybe 2014.
|
Until the female interest base is increased, naturally there won't be a lot of girls playing. Proportionality.
Female tournaments are fine, but that means that we'll actually need to have female gamers for that tourney --> unless we assume every girl is rich, we'll need girls on teams that aren't on the level of Innovation.
Open tournaments and anything involving qualifying competition between both sexes will need to be completely fair though for obv. reasons. For invites, there's probably a tradeoff somewhere between publicity/interest base increase and qualifying people with actual skill but that'll be up to tourney hosts right, if they want to handle the consequences that comes from entering some no-names because they're girls, go for it.
tbqh not sure why we're re-hashing the same goddamn issues every time. Ffs, the issues presented aren't exactly rocket science and will never be, it's just that not a lot of finger-lifting is going on.
|
On September 06 2013 02:59 ymir233 wrote: Until the female interest base is increased, naturally there won't be a lot of girls playing. Proportionality.
Female tournaments are fine, but that means that we'll actually need to have female gamers for that tourney --> unless we assume every girl is rich, we'll need girls on teams that aren't on the level of Innovation.
Open tournaments and anything involving qualifying competition between both sexes will need to be completely fair though for obv. reasons. For invites, there's probably a tradeoff somewhere between publicity/interest base increase and qualifying people with actual skill but that'll be up to tourney hosts right, if they want to handle the consequences that comes from entering some no-names because they're girls, go for it.
tbqh not sure why we're re-hashing the same goddamn issues every time. Ffs, the issues presented aren't exactly rocket science and will never be, it's just that not a lot of finger-lifting is going on.
Not really rehashing an issue, this was written in 2012
|
On September 06 2013 02:17 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2013 02:13 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 06 2013 01:59 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On September 06 2013 01:56 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 06 2013 01:52 ZenithM wrote: Now we're talking haha. We want girls in gaming because we like girls, that I can agree with. Imo OP is trying to make it sound more complicated than it really is. I don't think it's really a "help the minority" issue. In the end, we just want girls to be interested in the same game we're interested in :D
No, it's really about broadening the interest of eSports in all areas. I could make arguments that there should be more tournaments in Australia to broaden interest as well. The detailing of that post would be, of course, different There's actually a pretty decent number of tournaments in Australia and SEA, they just don't really get coverage/attention outside their own scene. Why no WCS for SEA? To many countries, to much ocean and no single production company to get it done. Its like WCS EU, but with way more expensive flights for the players. Maybe 2014.
I'd say there's other issues factoring into it as well, most notably lack of interest. I'm not sure exactly how large the SC2 scene over there is, it's probably not tiny (as evidenced by the active tournaments and lots of players) but it's not huge either. As for the community in general, well, they just don't seem to give a damn about SEA players and the tournaments they compete in, which is a damn shame considering how many talented players they've got. But at the same time they aren't doing the best job of providing exposure to themselves and their team either, they're not competing abroad as much as they used to (remember when mOOnGLaDe used to come to a lot of major foreign events and play some really sick games?) and it definitely shows.
Same goes for the Chinese scene, although I imagine recent visa drama and the hype surrounding Jim and MacSed helped a bit there.
|
On September 06 2013 03:05 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2013 02:17 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2013 02:13 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 06 2013 01:59 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On September 06 2013 01:56 Torte de Lini wrote:On September 06 2013 01:52 ZenithM wrote: Now we're talking haha. We want girls in gaming because we like girls, that I can agree with. Imo OP is trying to make it sound more complicated than it really is. I don't think it's really a "help the minority" issue. In the end, we just want girls to be interested in the same game we're interested in :D
No, it's really about broadening the interest of eSports in all areas. I could make arguments that there should be more tournaments in Australia to broaden interest as well. The detailing of that post would be, of course, different There's actually a pretty decent number of tournaments in Australia and SEA, they just don't really get coverage/attention outside their own scene. Why no WCS for SEA? To many countries, to much ocean and no single production company to get it done. Its like WCS EU, but with way more expensive flights for the players. Maybe 2014. I'd say there's other issues factoring into it as well, most notably lack of interest. I'm not sure exactly how large the SC2 scene over there is, it's probably not tiny (as evidenced by the active tournaments and lots of players) but it's not huge either. As for the community in general, well, they just don't seem to give a damn about SEA players and the tournaments they compete in, which is a damn shame considering how many talented players they've got. But at the same time they aren't doing the best job of providing exposure to themselves and their team either, they're not competing abroad as much as they used to (remember when mOOnGLaDe used to come to a lot of major foreign events and play some really sick games?) and it definitely shows. Same goes for the Chinese scene, although I imagine recent visa drama and the hype surrounding Jim and MacSed helped a bit there.
To be fair, we have a pretty hard time getting the scene to care about NA players too, unless they are already established. SC2 is just a rough scene for anyone who is new and has not come up through the Korean system. You have a lot of proving to do and not a lot of venues to do it in.
|
I really do not understand this entire topic at all. If a player, male or female, is good (in ingame skill, fan-interactions, interviews or whatever): awesome, deserves recognition. If a player, male or female is bad at these things then they probably do not "deserve" recognition. I seriously fail so hard at understanding why this is a hot-topic. It boggles my mind, actually.
Or an example of what I mean: Male/Female player wins a tournament against other male/female players, the level of play was ridiculously low -> Why should that get recognition? If the case is: Male/Female player wins a tournament against other male/female players, the level of play was high, then you should obviously give respect because this player played well. This gender issue doesn't make sense at all...
|
On September 06 2013 04:12 Azelja wrote: I really do not understand this entire topic at all. If a player, male or female, is good (in ingame skill, fan-interactions, interviews or whatever): awesome, deserves recognition. If a player, male or female is bad at these things then they probably do not "deserve" recognition. I seriously fail so hard at understanding why this is a hot-topic. It boggles my mind, actually.
Or an example of what I mean: Male/Female player wins a tournament against other male/female players, the level of play was ridiculously low -> Why should that get recognition? If the case is: Male/Female player wins a tournament against other male/female players, the level of play was high, then you should obviously give respect because this player played well. This gender issue doesn't make sense at all... That entire discussion was just hashed out in the last two pages. You can read it if you want. The short version is as follow:
1: Girl are awesome and more girls in the scene would be great 2: There are not a lot of female pros out there 3: Female only leagues and other events might be a way to get more women involved with the scene. Which is good for everyone. 4: Girls are dope.
Expanding the audience is a good thing and getting a large part of the other 50% of people on the planet(aka, women) involved would be great.
|
On September 06 2013 01:50 RuiBarbO wrote: I myself don't know if female-only leagues are the best way to open gaming up to women. But I do agree that they may help subvert the masculine, male-dominated environment that has emerged around gaming. Sometimes it can be hard to observe just how male/masculine-oriented gaming culture is, especially if you're a man.
I thought I'd write this post as an answer to cloneThorN, but I didn't have the time while he was still around, so I'll write it as a response to you instead. As an added benefit, it'll come off as less aggressive, so I guess that's a good thing Besides, he didn't like wall-of-texts and this is going to be one. Alternately, if you don't care about a wall-of-text either, then I'll just post it to whoever's interested, because I think it shouldn't be left unsaid, considering the discussion up to this point.
Anyway, the last few pages there have been a lot of opinions about female-only tournaments and their inefficiency as a means to get more girls into gaming and, this being a serious thread, let's actually be serious and take a look at the actual effects. Are female-only tournaments an efficient means of getting more girls into gaming?
There are very few women that compete in tournaments with men, so let's take four of the most prominent ones as examples: Maddelisk, flo, Aphrodite and finally Scarlett (sorry if I left out any favourites; it's not intended as a complete list, just a set of examples). Maddelisk had never played an RTS before Starcraft and in the beginning, she only played with friends. But then she competed in a female-only tournament and thought it was fun and gradually got more serious about it. Today, she's very close to what guys want girl games to be: She competes in mixed-gender tournaments (Dreamhack) and her goal is to be the best, not just the best woman. And her way into SC2 was through female-only tournaments.
Next, let's consider flo. She used to be a CS player, so she had played professionally before. However, she, too, started her path to Starcraft progaming with female-only tournaments. Of course, it's impossible to know if flo would've turned pro in SC even without the female-only tournaments, but she's said that winning 3000$ in Zowie Divina, a female-only tournament, made things a lot easier with her family. Perhaps, without that money, she would have started college right away instead of dedicating an entire year to progaming. Or maybe, without that money, she wouldn't have gone to all those MLG's, competing against guys just the way guys want girl gamers to do.
Aphrodite got into SC2 by being RainBOw's girlfriend (at least I think that's how it went down). However, her true turn of events came at Zowie Divina, a female-only tournament, where the StarTale coach was so impressed with her playing that she got a spot on the team. Later, she tried to qualify for GSL, just like guys want girl gamers to do.
Lastly, there's Scarlett, who's just so good you'd think she couldn't be compared to the others. However, she can, because just like the previous three, Scarlett, too, started off in female-only tournaments. Of course, it's hard to say exactly how much of a difference the tournaments did, overall, but nonetheless, they were stepping stones for these four women. Moreover, every now and then, you see that these women are told that they're an inspiration to other women who want to become pro, so presumably we get a snowball effect from having them here, which, of course, female-only tournaments contributed to.
The female scene is probably too small to make any meaningful statistical generalizations about, but I think it's safe to say that the burden of proof is on those who say that female-only tournaments don't work because this or that. The general trend sure points in the opposite direction: With female-only tournaments, we get more female gamers.
However, one may ask "But what if there weren't any female-only tournaments? If having this demeaning gender split caused potential women progamers to turn away in disgust, wouldn't we see a better scene without the female-only tournaments?". Well, the interesting thing is that we've tried that as well. From November 2012 until June 2013, there wasn't a single female-only tournament happening (at least that I know of). This includes the launch of HotS right in the middle of the timespan, so old players who came back for the expansion would've noticed that the community had abandoned female-only tournaments. However, this didn't result in a wave of new female faces in mixed tournaments at all, so it would indicate that the answer to the question at the beginning of this paragraph is "No, we wouldn't see a better female scene without female-only tournaments". I hope that there's a regular series of female-only tournaments going on at the launch of LotV, so that we can get a better basis for comparison. At the very least, it seems there's nothing to lose.
Lastly, we should mention social groups such as GoSc and Madmoizerg. Our empirical basis for saying something about their effects is very hard to quantify, especially because the social groups and tournaments can be very intertwined with a few persons being involved in a lot of things, but I'd just like to point out that IeSF is having a female-only SC2 championship this year, that the French female-only social group Madmoizerg pointed it out and that the French qualifiers had 24 competitors, which is actually a lot, all things considering. My guess is that without the involvement of Madmoizerg, there wouldn't have been as many players.
In summary, people are entitled to their own opinions about a gender split and whatever signals that may give, but just looking at the numbers, female-only tournaments, as a means to getting more women interested in SC2 progaming, sure seems to work, especially in combination with social groups.
|
I still don't understand the point behind female leagues besides specific viewership. If you think female players need a separate tournament to get recognized for their skill, you should aim to make lower skill req tournaments in general. Not because females are worse than males, but because they aren't showing results worthy of the bigger/tougher tournaments. You could say males overshadow them or something else, but I don't think that's the case. Any female that gets any form of publicity is immediately noticed and remembered, just due to the fact that they are female and that's not a common thing in gaming.
I'm basically saying a female league just gives them a much better chance at being noticed over males, without actually providing anything noteworthy for the female community. That's like saying "Hey, there's not enough cash tournaments for low masters. Let's throw a $10,000 pool to them.". Yes, it helps that specific area, but wtf are you trying to do? If they're good enough to be a GSL/WCS/IEM/Dreamhack champion, they will eventually become one. You need to support everyone, and not grab at shit that isn't relevant or supportive of overall growth.
|
On September 06 2013 17:55 FetusThrower wrote: I still don't understand the point behind female leagues besides specific viewership. If you think female players need a separate tournament to get recognized for their skill, you should aim to make lower skill req tournaments in general. Not because females are worse than males, but because they aren't showing results worthy of the bigger/tougher tournaments. You could say males overshadow them or something else, but I don't think that's the case. Any female that gets any form of publicity is immediately noticed and remembered, just due to the fact that they are female and that's not a common thing in gaming.
I'm basically saying a female league just gives them a much better chance at being noticed over males, without actually providing anything noteworthy for the female community. That's like saying "Hey, there's not enough cash tournaments for low masters. Let's throw a $10,000 pool to them.". Yes, it helps that specific area, but wtf are you trying to do? If they're good enough to be a GSL/WCS/IEM/Dreamhack champion, they will eventually become one. You need to support everyone, and not grab at shit that isn't relevant or supportive of overall growth.
read any post by Plansix
|
On September 06 2013 16:34 iMAniaC wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2013 01:50 RuiBarbO wrote: I myself don't know if female-only leagues are the best way to open gaming up to women. But I do agree that they may help subvert the masculine, male-dominated environment that has emerged around gaming. Sometimes it can be hard to observe just how male/masculine-oriented gaming culture is, especially if you're a man. I thought I'd write this post as an answer to cloneThorN, but I didn't have the time while he was still around, so I'll write it as a response to you instead. As an added benefit, it'll come off as less aggressive, so I guess that's a good thing Besides, he didn't like wall-of-texts and this is going to be one. Alternately, if you don't care about a wall-of-text either, then I'll just post it to whoever's interested, because I think it shouldn't be left unsaid, considering the discussion up to this point. Anyway, the last few pages there have been a lot of opinions about female-only tournaments and their inefficiency as a means to get more girls into gaming and, this being a serious thread, let's actually be serious and take a look at the actual effects. Are female-only tournaments an efficient means of getting more girls into gaming? There are very few women that compete in tournaments with men, so let's take four of the most prominent ones as examples: Maddelisk, flo, Aphrodite and finally Scarlett (sorry if I left out any favourites; it's not intended as a complete list, just a set of examples). Maddelisk had never played an RTS before Starcraft and in the beginning, she only played with friends. But then she competed in a female-only tournament and thought it was fun and gradually got more serious about it. Today, she's very close to what guys want girl games to be: She competes in mixed-gender tournaments (Dreamhack) and her goal is to be the best, not just the best woman. And her way into SC2 was through female-only tournaments. Next, let's consider flo. She used to be a CS player, so she had played professionally before. However, she, too, started her path to Starcraft progaming with female-only tournaments. Of course, it's impossible to know if flo would've turned pro in SC even without the female-only tournaments, but she's said that winning 3000$ in Zowie Divina, a female-only tournament, made things a lot easier with her family. Perhaps, without that money, she would have started college right away instead of dedicating an entire year to progaming. Or maybe, without that money, she wouldn't have gone to all those MLG's, competing against guys just the way guys want girl gamers to do. Aphrodite got into SC2 by being RainBOw's girlfriend (at least I think that's how it went down). However, her true turn of events came at Zowie Divina, a female-only tournament, where the StarTale coach was so impressed with her playing that she got a spot on the team. Later, she tried to qualify for GSL, just like guys want girl gamers to do. Lastly, there's Scarlett, who's just so good you'd think she couldn't be compared to the others. However, she can, because just like the previous three, Scarlett, too, started off in female-only tournaments. Of course, it's hard to say exactly how much of a difference the tournaments did, overall, but nonetheless, they were stepping stones for these four women. Moreover, every now and then, you see that these women are told that they're an inspiration to other women who want to become pro, so presumably we get a snowball effect from having them here, which, of course, female-only tournaments contributed to. The female scene is probably too small to make any meaningful statistical generalizations about, but I think it's safe to say that the burden of proof is on those who say that female-only tournaments don't work because this or that. The general trend sure points in the opposite direction: With female-only tournaments, we get more female gamers. However, one may ask "But what if there weren't any female-only tournaments? If having this demeaning gender split caused potential women progamers to turn away in disgust, wouldn't we see a better scene without the female-only tournaments?". Well, the interesting thing is that we've tried that as well. From November 2012 until June 2013, there wasn't a single female-only tournament happening (at least that I know of). This includes the launch of HotS right in the middle of the timespan, so old players who came back for the expansion would've noticed that the community had abandoned female-only tournaments. However, this didn't result in a wave of new female faces in mixed tournaments at all, so it would indicate that the answer to the question at the beginning of this paragraph is "No, we wouldn't see a better female scene without female-only tournaments". I hope that there's a regular series of female-only tournaments going on at the launch of LotV, so that we can get a better basis for comparison. At the very least, it seems there's nothing to lose. Lastly, we should mention social groups such as GoSc and Madmoizerg. Our empirical basis for saying something about their effects is very hard to quantify, especially because the social groups and tournaments can be very intertwined with a few persons being involved in a lot of things, but I'd just like to point out that IeSF is having a female-only SC2 championship this year, that the French female-only social group Madmoizerg pointed it out and that the French qualifiers had 24 competitors, which is actually a lot, all things considering. My guess is that without the involvement of Madmoizerg, there wouldn't have been as many players. In summary, people are entitled to their own opinions about a gender split and whatever signals that may give, but just looking at the numbers, female-only tournaments, as a means to getting more women interested in SC2 progaming, sure seems to work, especially in combination with social groups.
1. I never said I don't like walls of text. I said no one besides me and other super interrested people are gonna read it, because people normally hate when the point is not made clear fast.
2. What do you mean by less agressive?
3. Political correctness or not, no new female player, and especially their parents, will reconigze Scarlett as a women from the get-go. Maybe with time, i very highly doubt that you can use her as a promo or ideal for new female players.
4. We actually see a few new females at each LAN, however they mostly suck like the rest of us, so they won't get to the rounds thats getting broadcasted.
5. I have yet to watch people comment on the possibility of splitting the sc2 scene in two(male and female), like it have happende in sports.
6. I will give you that female only tournaments have yielded the best results, however the ammount of pro female players we got was so insignificant, that they had no influence whatsoever. Keep in mind this game does not last forever.
|
On September 06 2013 18:25 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2013 16:34 iMAniaC wrote:On September 06 2013 01:50 RuiBarbO wrote: I myself don't know if female-only leagues are the best way to open gaming up to women. But I do agree that they may help subvert the masculine, male-dominated environment that has emerged around gaming. Sometimes it can be hard to observe just how male/masculine-oriented gaming culture is, especially if you're a man. I thought I'd write this post as an answer to cloneThorN, but I didn't have the time while he was still around, so I'll write it as a response to you instead. As an added benefit, it'll come off as less aggressive, so I guess that's a good thing Besides, he didn't like wall-of-texts and this is going to be one. Alternately, if you don't care about a wall-of-text either, then I'll just post it to whoever's interested, because I think it shouldn't be left unsaid, considering the discussion up to this point. Anyway, the last few pages there have been a lot of opinions about female-only tournaments and their inefficiency as a means to get more girls into gaming and, this being a serious thread, let's actually be serious and take a look at the actual effects. Are female-only tournaments an efficient means of getting more girls into gaming? There are very few women that compete in tournaments with men, so let's take four of the most prominent ones as examples: Maddelisk, flo, Aphrodite and finally Scarlett (sorry if I left out any favourites; it's not intended as a complete list, just a set of examples). Maddelisk had never played an RTS before Starcraft and in the beginning, she only played with friends. But then she competed in a female-only tournament and thought it was fun and gradually got more serious about it. Today, she's very close to what guys want girl games to be: She competes in mixed-gender tournaments (Dreamhack) and her goal is to be the best, not just the best woman. And her way into SC2 was through female-only tournaments. Next, let's consider flo. She used to be a CS player, so she had played professionally before. However, she, too, started her path to Starcraft progaming with female-only tournaments. Of course, it's impossible to know if flo would've turned pro in SC even without the female-only tournaments, but she's said that winning 3000$ in Zowie Divina, a female-only tournament, made things a lot easier with her family. Perhaps, without that money, she would have started college right away instead of dedicating an entire year to progaming. Or maybe, without that money, she wouldn't have gone to all those MLG's, competing against guys just the way guys want girl gamers to do. Aphrodite got into SC2 by being RainBOw's girlfriend (at least I think that's how it went down). However, her true turn of events came at Zowie Divina, a female-only tournament, where the StarTale coach was so impressed with her playing that she got a spot on the team. Later, she tried to qualify for GSL, just like guys want girl gamers to do. Lastly, there's Scarlett, who's just so good you'd think she couldn't be compared to the others. However, she can, because just like the previous three, Scarlett, too, started off in female-only tournaments. Of course, it's hard to say exactly how much of a difference the tournaments did, overall, but nonetheless, they were stepping stones for these four women. Moreover, every now and then, you see that these women are told that they're an inspiration to other women who want to become pro, so presumably we get a snowball effect from having them here, which, of course, female-only tournaments contributed to. The female scene is probably too small to make any meaningful statistical generalizations about, but I think it's safe to say that the burden of proof is on those who say that female-only tournaments don't work because this or that. The general trend sure points in the opposite direction: With female-only tournaments, we get more female gamers. However, one may ask "But what if there weren't any female-only tournaments? If having this demeaning gender split caused potential women progamers to turn away in disgust, wouldn't we see a better scene without the female-only tournaments?". Well, the interesting thing is that we've tried that as well. From November 2012 until June 2013, there wasn't a single female-only tournament happening (at least that I know of). This includes the launch of HotS right in the middle of the timespan, so old players who came back for the expansion would've noticed that the community had abandoned female-only tournaments. However, this didn't result in a wave of new female faces in mixed tournaments at all, so it would indicate that the answer to the question at the beginning of this paragraph is "No, we wouldn't see a better female scene without female-only tournaments". I hope that there's a regular series of female-only tournaments going on at the launch of LotV, so that we can get a better basis for comparison. At the very least, it seems there's nothing to lose. Lastly, we should mention social groups such as GoSc and Madmoizerg. Our empirical basis for saying something about their effects is very hard to quantify, especially because the social groups and tournaments can be very intertwined with a few persons being involved in a lot of things, but I'd just like to point out that IeSF is having a female-only SC2 championship this year, that the French female-only social group Madmoizerg pointed it out and that the French qualifiers had 24 competitors, which is actually a lot, all things considering. My guess is that without the involvement of Madmoizerg, there wouldn't have been as many players. In summary, people are entitled to their own opinions about a gender split and whatever signals that may give, but just looking at the numbers, female-only tournaments, as a means to getting more women interested in SC2 progaming, sure seems to work, especially in combination with social groups. 1. I never said I don't like walls of text. I said no one besides me and other super interrested people are gonna read it, because people normally hate when the point is not made clear fast.
Oh, right. My bad.
2. What do you mean by less agressive?
I was going to reply directly to your statements and it's very easy to adopt a more aggressive tone when disagreeing with a direct statement, rather than just chipping in with my two cents. So it was a comment on my own writing
3. Political correctness or not, no new female player, and especially their parents, will reconigze Scarlett as a women from the get-go. Maybe with time, i very highly doubt that you can use her as a promo or ideal for new female players.
She was one of my four examples, so there's three others even if you don't accept Scarlett as a proper example. However, it would be much worse to leave her out of the examples than to include her. You can't talk about prominent female progamers without mentioning Scarlett.
4. We actually see a few new females at each LAN, however they mostly suck like the rest of us, so they won't get to the rounds thats getting broadcasted.
But how many of these new faces would we see even if there were female-only tournaments and would we see more or less new faces if there were? That's the question. But I don't think we can find an answer to that because there's only been one expansion so far, so we can't really compare the situation to any other situation.
5. I have yet to watch people comment on the possibility of splitting the sc2 scene in two(male and female), like it have happende in sports.
Personally, I don't think we need to worry about that. One thing is making a special tournament for a minority group, it's a whole other matter to exclude a minority group from an established line of tournaments, because you can't claim that it's positive discrimination if you're catering to the strongest group. I don't think we're ever going to see gender restrictions on GSL or Dreamhack, for example, so women who want to compete with men will always have that opportunity.
We might see a gender split if the female-only side of the scene became so lucrative that there simply isn't any point for women to compete against men any longer, because they'd rather win easy money in the female tournaments. However, with the amount of female-only tournaments so far this year there doesn't seem to be a danger of that happening anytime soon. But you're right, it could happen through extraordinary circumstances. And even if it did, I think it would be easier to merge the two established scenes later than it would be to get women into SC2 without doing anything that might cause a splitting of the scene, given extraordinary circumstances.
6. I will give you that female only tournaments have yielded the best results, however the ammount of pro female players we got was so insignificant, that they had no influence whatsoever. Keep in mind this game does not last forever.
I'm not quite sure where that argument is going. "Yes, female-only tournaments have yielded the best results, but the results were so insignificant that..." ... that we should do what? We should have stopped people from doing them on a volunteer basis? We should pretend they never existed because the results were not good enough? Did they somehow harm the scene by having "no influence whatsoever"?
|
+ Show Spoiler +On September 06 2013 16:34 iMAniaC wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2013 01:50 RuiBarbO wrote: I myself don't know if female-only leagues are the best way to open gaming up to women. But I do agree that they may help subvert the masculine, male-dominated environment that has emerged around gaming. Sometimes it can be hard to observe just how male/masculine-oriented gaming culture is, especially if you're a man. I thought I'd write this post as an answer to cloneThorN, but I didn't have the time while he was still around, so I'll write it as a response to you instead. As an added benefit, it'll come off as less aggressive, so I guess that's a good thing Besides, he didn't like wall-of-texts and this is going to be one. Alternately, if you don't care about a wall-of-text either, then I'll just post it to whoever's interested, because I think it shouldn't be left unsaid, considering the discussion up to this point. Anyway, the last few pages there have been a lot of opinions about female-only tournaments and their inefficiency as a means to get more girls into gaming and, this being a serious thread, let's actually be serious and take a look at the actual effects. Are female-only tournaments an efficient means of getting more girls into gaming? There are very few women that compete in tournaments with men, so let's take four of the most prominent ones as examples: Maddelisk, flo, Aphrodite and finally Scarlett (sorry if I left out any favourites; it's not intended as a complete list, just a set of examples). Maddelisk had never played an RTS before Starcraft and in the beginning, she only played with friends. But then she competed in a female-only tournament and thought it was fun and gradually got more serious about it. Today, she's very close to what guys want girl games to be: She competes in mixed-gender tournaments (Dreamhack) and her goal is to be the best, not just the best woman. And her way into SC2 was through female-only tournaments. Next, let's consider flo. She used to be a CS player, so she had played professionally before. However, she, too, started her path to Starcraft progaming with female-only tournaments. Of course, it's impossible to know if flo would've turned pro in SC even without the female-only tournaments, but she's said that winning 3000$ in Zowie Divina, a female-only tournament, made things a lot easier with her family. Perhaps, without that money, she would have started college right away instead of dedicating an entire year to progaming. Or maybe, without that money, she wouldn't have gone to all those MLG's, competing against guys just the way guys want girl gamers to do. Aphrodite got into SC2 by being RainBOw's girlfriend (at least I think that's how it went down). However, her true turn of events came at Zowie Divina, a female-only tournament, where the StarTale coach was so impressed with her playing that she got a spot on the team. Later, she tried to qualify for GSL, just like guys want girl gamers to do. Lastly, there's Scarlett, who's just so good you'd think she couldn't be compared to the others. However, she can, because just like the previous three, Scarlett, too, started off in female-only tournaments. Of course, it's hard to say exactly how much of a difference the tournaments did, overall, but nonetheless, they were stepping stones for these four women. Moreover, every now and then, you see that these women are told that they're an inspiration to other women who want to become pro, so presumably we get a snowball effect from having them here, which, of course, female-only tournaments contributed to. The female scene is probably too small to make any meaningful statistical generalizations about, but I think it's safe to say that the burden of proof is on those who say that female-only tournaments don't work because this or that. The general trend sure points in the opposite direction: With female-only tournaments, we get more female gamers. However, one may ask "But what if there weren't any female-only tournaments? If having this demeaning gender split caused potential women progamers to turn away in disgust, wouldn't we see a better scene without the female-only tournaments?". Well, the interesting thing is that we've tried that as well. From November 2012 until June 2013, there wasn't a single female-only tournament happening (at least that I know of). This includes the launch of HotS right in the middle of the timespan, so old players who came back for the expansion would've noticed that the community had abandoned female-only tournaments. However, this didn't result in a wave of new female faces in mixed tournaments at all, so it would indicate that the answer to the question at the beginning of this paragraph is "No, we wouldn't see a better female scene without female-only tournaments". I hope that there's a regular series of female-only tournaments going on at the launch of LotV, so that we can get a better basis for comparison. At the very least, it seems there's nothing to lose. Lastly, we should mention social groups such as GoSc and Madmoizerg. Our empirical basis for saying something about their effects is very hard to quantify, especially because the social groups and tournaments can be very intertwined with a few persons being involved in a lot of things, but I'd just like to point out that IeSF is having a female-only SC2 championship this year, that the French female-only social group Madmoizerg pointed it out and that the French qualifiers had 24 competitors, which is actually a lot, all things considering. My guess is that without the involvement of Madmoizerg, there wouldn't have been as many players. In summary, people are entitled to their own opinions about a gender split and whatever signals that may give, but just looking at the numbers, female-only tournaments, as a means to getting more women interested in SC2 progaming, sure seems to work, especially in combination with social groups.
Well, that definitely answered my question. Also, I must say that's some solid research.
|
|
|
|