Pre-Emptive Derail Prevention

I wrote this comment:

Tevin wrote:

repoman wrote:

I don’t care much for threads like this. Most of the posters tend to be men (since this is a male-dominated hobby), and the conversation usually goes the same direction it always does: Suggestions of light, non-confrontational games with cute components or themes. As sexism in nerdery goes, that’s a pretty mild form, but it’s there all the same. While there are plenty of women who enjoy games like this (my own wife, for one), I’ve known many who would rather play something more aggressive.

Well as mentioned elsewhere, this section of your post is total bullshit. To suggest that saying most women being introduced to the hobby of boardgaming prefer non-confrontational and light games is some form of "mild sexism" is ridiculous. What is "mild sexism" anyway? Is that like "mild racism"?

If I were to suggest that wives like to receive flowers from their husbands, would that make me a "mild sexist"? Of course not because 99% of the time it is true. Sure there are exceptions as with everything.

I grow so weary of these labels such as "sexist" being applied at the slightest opportunity. Denying women the right to vote is sexist. Suggesting that women like things to smell nice is not.

You are wrong.

What is sexism?

Sexism is not just a single act or restriction against (in this case) women.

Sexism can also be assumptions that we can and do make about women every day. It may not look like the sexism that you have grown up looking for, but it is.

Why?

Because it creates a stereotype of 'woman,' regarding their tastes and inclinations. It assumes that because sometimes a thing is true of some women, it must be true for all women. So we start these threads with the assumption that women will like certain things, but rarely do we ever ask 'well, what sort of things does your wife normally like?' The answers are not direct toward the actual individual, rather, that monolithic 'wife' that we build up in our minds as having certain likes and dislikes. And it makes so many assumptions about what this Wife likes. So many stereotypes. And it. Is. Sexism.

Is it as heinous as denying women's suffrage? Certainly not. But these quiet assumptions about that we, as men, make about women without ever considering them as people create the conditions that allow the denial of women's rights.

So go ahead and grow weary. I grow weary of people like you, who try and equivocate and make excuses and perpetuate the acceptance of the assumptions that I outlined above.

Grow the fuck up.

over here and I'm starting this thread to prevent a derail of that thread, since the article really has nothing to do with sexism.

Please continue here if you would like to respond.

Well you're right in the thought that Nate's article wasn't about sexism which is why it was bullshit for him to insert it into the article.

So all assumptions about the habits and preferences of women on any level is sexism according to you.

So, when a blanket question of "What kind of games would get my wife interested in gaming?" is asked, anything other than insight based on a lifetime of knowing the individual's personal tastes is sexist.

One can never draw suppositions based on prior experience. If I encounter 50 women who all believe that getting flowers is nice, I am somehow demeaning the feminine sex as a whole if I make an assumption that the 51st will feel the same way.

With that philosophy it must make your life exceedingly difficult. How can you drive if you can never make assumptions about people and the way they will behave? Will he stop for that light? Gosh, I don't know. I don't know anything about him.

It is a world view that is simply unworkable.

Of course nothing is true of everyone. Perhaps you should grow up a bit here as well and use common sense in that everybody knows there are exceptions to the rule.

I didn't even see a post by Tevin. All I see is a piece of a post that Repo took offense to, and then Tevin getting all pissy about Repo having a dissenting opinion.

Well, there was no sexism in the article, and maybe at BGG the sexism thing would pop off, but here, we're grown ups. We don't go the "my little darling only plays Carcassonne because we need to protect the women-folk from real confrontation...their hearts can't take it" bullshit.

Oh, and Tevin, saying that women like flowers isn't sexist. It's simply not inclusive. MOST people like flowers. The fact that Repo pointed out that women like flowers is simply an observation of fact. Sure, there are women who do NOT like flowers, but FTD and ProFlowers, let alone every bath and body works in America would tell you that you're an idiot if you think that women, in general, don't like things that smell nice.

There is nothing worse than someone who has indignation over something that there is no reason to be indignant about, because along with misplaced indignation comes the idea that their moral certainty will carry the day. The problem is that in many places, most fucktards will overstep and take offense at something that requires none.

Today, Tevin, you are the Fuktard.

It was included because that's the reason that the wife threads bother me on BGG. I perceive that attitude as sexist. Is it? Obviously I think so. But I didn't "insert" it into make some kind of moralistic point. It's just a reason it bothers me.

So all assumptions about the habits and preferences of women on any level is sexism according to you.

I think this is a little reductive. We all make assumptions based on previous experience. Sexism is making those assumptions purely on the basis of someone's sex. When someone asks what someone should buy to play with their wife, the good response would be to find out what kind of games that person's wife likes in the first place, not to just give a kneejerk response of Lost Cities because women like it.

Tevin wrote: So go ahead and grow weary. I grow weary of people like you, who try and equivocate and make excuses and perpetuate the acceptance of the assumptions that I outlined above.

Grow the fuck up.

I'm curious if you really wanted a discussion or simply to pick a fight. You sure come across as a smug prick here attacking the person right off instead of discussing the ideas.

EDIT: Should we ice this for a Friday Freakout or just hit it early?

Interesting. I would wager to guess if you were to build a "predictive model", that gender would be have some high predictive power on the types of games an individual would like. Obviously, as more information is gathered, the prediction gets better.

I'd be very suspicious of alternate explanations, Space Ghost. Specifically, female nerds/nerd hobbies are finally becoming more common, and I suspect once you could control for some of those factors it would virtually erase gender from any spec.

Gary Sax wrote: I'd be very suspicious of alternate explanations, Space Ghost. Specifically, female nerds/nerd hobbies are finally becoming more common, and I suspect once you could control for some of those factors it would virtually erase gender from any spec.

I would agree with that, I think. But, the % of females in the hobby are still likely going to be less than the % of the males in the hobby; I think that does two things:

1) Many of the games that are created are geared more towards males (in a variety of ways)

2) A randomly chosen person is going to be more comfortable with initial games that have connections to things they played as a kid -- which would be things like Rummy, Monopoly, etc. These games happen to be correlated with gender to a high degree (look at all the AT games from the 80s -- it is heavily gender-biased in the marketing, for instance there is hardly ever a girl on the back of the box).

So, Lost Cities, Ticket to Ride, and Carcossonne have connections to things we are more familiar with. I would call it a "familiarity bias" that is often explained as "gender bias". I think that correlation makes people want to explain games in terms of gender instead of familiarity, so we get the rationalizations concerning "avoiding conflict" and "cute components", but those don't really hold water. If they did, then so many conflict-free euro games wouldn't be popular in a male-dominated hobby.

That doesn't mean that gender doesn't have predictive power from a "recommendation point of view". It just is serving as a proxy for familiarity.

C'mon Space Ghost - this is a conversation about nerds and sexism on the internet. You could at least drop a few F bombs in an attempt to fit in...

A couple things before I start:

1) I never said 'women like flowers' was sexist.

2)"I'm curious if you really wanted a discussion or simply to pick a fight. ." Jeff White

Can it be both? I'm so tired of relegating sexism to really extreme cases (eg, not allowing women to vote) when it's so much more than that. If I have to pick a fight to get that gravy train chugging, then so be it.

Moving on.

"So all assumptions about the habits and preferences of women on any level is sexism according to you. "

Yes, when they come at the expense of treating a person like an individual. Regarding women and games, the question is never, "My wife likes, x, y and z, can you recommend a game she might like based on her preferences?" The question is, "What's a good wife game?" where "wife" is just some extrapolation of, hell, I dunno, a Platonic wife that exists to play along nicely if she's patronized correctly.

"How can you drive if you can never make assumptions about people and the way they will behave?"

This is a non-issue. Drivers (legal ones, anyway) have agreed to follow rules. If they don't, they're punished. This has nothing to do with sexism.

" Perhaps you should grow up a bit here as well and use common sense in that everybody knows there are exceptions to the rule."

I'm not arguing that we all learn the exception to every rule. I'm arguing that we treat women with respect by treating them like individuals.

The best answer to "What kind of games would get my wife interested in gaming?" is "Talk to your wife about it."

"You sure come across as a smug prick here attacking the person right off instead of discussing the ideas."

I'm discussing the idea that sexism can be found in the little assumptions we make every day, and not just relegated to major violations of civil rights. That's the idea I'm discussing. If I come of as smug, well ... what the fuck ever.

"All I see is a piece of a post that Repo took offense to, and then Tevin getting all pissy about Repo having a dissenting opinion."

Again, folks are welcome to have their opinions. More power! But the opinion that sexism is only about the big, obvious things and that it has nothing to do with the attitudes that we carry around with us every day is a hot-button issue for me. When I see it, I will engage. It's important. It's worth talking about.

"There is nothing worse than someone who has indignation over something that there is no reason to be indignant about, because along with misplaced indignation comes the idea that their moral certainty will carry the day. The problem is that in many places, most fucktards will overstep and take offense at something that requires none.

Today, Tevin, you are the Fuktard."

Rad.

Does that come with a badge? Some sort of fancy hat?

Again, I will be the fuktard any day of the week. This is not righteous indignation. This is a Thing. It is especially a Thing in gaming (video and board) game circles. Pretending like it isn't a Thing gets us nowhere. I'm not out to show that every little thing is exist. But man, I know that I sometimes have an attitude that, while at first, doesn't seem sexist, certainly seems that way when I step back and take a look.

So I guess at the end of the day, that's what made me want to respond to Repoman. Take a step back. Think about the conversations that pop around "What's a good wife game?" Are there really never any sexist attitudes that show themselves in those conversations? Is there something wrong about asking your buddies on what your wife my like instead of asking your wife yourself?

Space Ghost wrote: That doesn't mean that gender doesn't have predictive power from a "recommendation point of view". It just is serving as a proxy for familiarity.

Absolutely, it's a powerful correlation that could work as a rule of thumb. A better measure would help, though, and I think it's increasingly possible since it's finally becoming more socially ok for women to be nerds so they can actually signal.

Christ, what an asshole.

Tevin wrote: I don’t care much for threads like this. Most of the posters tend to be men (since this is a male-dominated hobby), and While there are plenty of women who enjoy games like this, I’ve known many who would rather play something more aggressive.

Repo wrote: If I were to suggest that wives like to receive flowers from their husbands, would that make me a "mild sexist"? Of course not because 99% of the time it is true.

Tevin wrote: You are wrong.

What is sexism?

Sexism is not just a single act or restriction against (in this case) women.

Sexism can also be assumptions that we can and do make about women every day. It may not look like the sexism that you have grown up looking for, but it is.

OK, let me just get this straight....

It's OK for Tevin to say that most posters are men (stereotype) and the game industry is male-dominated (stereotype) and that most men are asshats who would offer up nonconfrontational games for the weak little women (stereotype that men would do that) and that because Tevin's wife likes light games there MUST be more women who do (stereotype).

And then when Repo says that women like flowers, he's the stereotyping prick?

Yeah, the more I think about it, Tevin's the one being sexist towards MEN!

Tevin wrote: A couple things before I start:

1) I never said 'women like flowers' was sexist.

Yes, you did.

"So all assumptions about the habits and preferences of women on any level is sexism according to you. "

Yes, when they come at the expense of treating a person like an individual. Regarding women and games, the question is never, "My wife likes, x, y and z, can you recommend a game she might like based on her preferences?" The question is, "What's a good wife game?" where "wife" is just some extrapolation of, hell, I dunno, a Platonic wife that exists to play along nicely if she's patronized correctly.

Dude, my wife just read this and is wondering if you actually are a woman, or if you're just so pussywhipped that you go off on any man who makes any blanket statement about women just to tell your master how good you did so she might break you off some trim. Seriously, you're a fucking moron. There was no fight here. You STARTED the fight. There was no "maybe play this" and STILL ISN'T, so your argument might have been great at BGG where guys who have never seen pussy talk about women as if they know any, but this place isn't it.

PS: She says every woman she knows likes flowers. She also says that every woman she knows likes smelly-good lotions. Just sayin. If you don't have a vagina, maybe you should not talk about shit that you clearly have no practical experience in, like WHAT WOMEN WANT.

"How can you drive if you can never make assumptions about people and the way they will behave?"

This is a non-issue. Drivers (legal ones, anyway) have agreed to follow rules. If they don't, they're punished. This has nothing to do with sexism.

What kind of fucked up world do you live in, Tevin? One where everyone knows NOTHING about ANYTHING? You retard, everyone makes VALID assumptions. I assume that people need oxygen to survive. I have no actual proof on hand, but I'm pretty sure. That's a simple example. How about this: Americans buy bigger cars than Asians. Is that racist? NO. It's an observation based on the fact that most Asian countries have predominantly small cars where Americans like SUVs and midsize. (Yes, I would know)

You sit in judgement with what I'm sure is a smug look, but the fact is that if you make no judgements about anyone based on experience, it allows me to make a group of judgements about you:
1. You may have never been outside.
2. You may not actually know anyone.

If you can't accept the simple truth that without insult or injury it is safe to assume that a brown skinned male who speaks fluent Spanish would very likely prefer Latin American cuisine to Chinese Pig Blood Soup, I expect that you've never been out of the house.

" Perhaps you should grow up a bit here as well and use common sense in that everybody knows there are exceptions to the rule."

I'm not arguing that we all learn the exception to every rule. I'm arguing that we treat women with respect by treating them like individuals.

The best answer to "What kind of games would get my wife interested in gaming?" is "Talk to your wife about it."

"You sure come across as a smug prick here attacking the person right off instead of discussing the ideas."

I'm discussing the idea that sexism can be found in the little assumptions we make every day, and not just relegated to major violations of civil rights. That's the idea I'm discussing. If I come of as smug, well ... what the fuck ever.

DUDE!!! YOU STARTED THIS!!! Nate never said that all women are Carcassonne lovers and wouldn't play Space Hulk....NOBODY SAID ANYTHING BUT YOU. I mean, can you not get that it's not disrespectful to make assumptions provided they're based upon a widely held view, such as the flowers anecdote? I mean, nobody here said (nor would they) ANYTHING about women in general, other than that they like flowers. (I said lotion, too, and both my wife and I stand by that)

"All I see is a piece of a post that Repo took offense to, and then Tevin getting all pissy about Repo having a dissenting opinion."

Again, folks are welcome to have their opinions. More power! But the opinion that sexism is only about the big, obvious things and that it has nothing to do with the attitudes that we carry around with us every day is a hot-button issue for me. When I see it, I will engage. It's important. It's worth talking about.

ENGAGE WHAT?!?!!? NOBODY SAID SHIT. You are taking this opportunity to exact some sort of agenda on all of us, most of whom AGREE WITH YOU. So, what the fuck? Nobody said anything about women. This is not BGG. I suggest you go back there and fight your good fight because you're seriously deranged bringing this up here. We have Loter to defend the gay and women's rights, and we certainly don't need to be lectured to by some unknown random loser with a shitty attitude who chose to pick a fight with an upstanding member of the community. So, go back to whatever fucked up planet you came from.

"There is nothing worse than someone who has indignation over something that there is no reason to be indignant about, because along with misplaced indignation comes the idea that their moral certainty will carry the day. The problem is that in many places, most fucktards will overstep and take offense at something that requires none.

Today, Tevin, you are the Fuktard."

Rad.

Does that come with a badge? Some sort of fancy hat?

Walk to the nearest mirror, if you dare, and report back. I suspect you were born with it.

Again, I will be the fuktard any day of the week. This is not righteous indignation. This is a Thing. It is especially a Thing in gaming (video and board) game circles. Pretending like it isn't a Thing gets us nowhere. I'm not out to show that every little thing is exist. But man, I know that I sometimes have an attitude that, while at first, doesn't seem sexist, certainly seems that way when I step back and take a look.

You see, it's not a Thing in our world. Maybe in the sad little place you live people are assholes to women and make them go to their menstruation shack or whatever, but here, Shellie (a woman) talks about Arkham Horror and if you come here and put up a "what should I play with my wife" post, you're going to get told that you need to ASK HER, just as you said.

But nobody said that. You started this clusterfuck. Let me know what the hat looks like, I'm truly intregued at this point.

So I guess at the end of the day, that's what made me want to respond to Repoman. Take a step back. Think about the conversations that pop around "What's a good wife game?" Are there really never any sexist attitudes that show themselves in those conversations? Is there something wrong about asking your buddies on what your wife my like instead of asking your wife yourself?

No, you take a step back. You put your dick in this horse, you chose to fuck it, not us. So, Captain Misogyny, let us know what you figure out, because NOT A SOUL HERE asked any of the questions you posited, the original post had no reference to anything, and the only thing that caused this brouhaha is your stupid, silly ass.

"I hate these kinds of posts because BLAH FUCKING BLAHDY BLAH BLAH"

Do the world a favor and fuck off. Find somewhere else to spout your rhetoric, fuckwad.

Bullwinkle wrote: Christ, what an asshole.

Err...which one? (I'm sorry, I haven't read the original article yet. I opened this thread and, after the first post, got thoroughly stuck with the same baffled look on my face as Nipper the RCA Dog ["His Master's Voice..."]). This 1 liner was the next thing that stuck out at me....