Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

An Editorial Melee About Female Gamers 135

SR71 writes "Tom's Hardware has a strong debate between two of its editors in a face-off editorial about female gamers." From the article: "I'm not being puritanical - heck, a while ago I wrote about wanting to see more sex in videogames. Neither is this about being against female gamers. I simply take issue with people falling and fawning over these female gamers, and talking high-mindedly about how professional female e-sports will soon be on a par with the male circuit." The article contans some crass language that may be NSFW.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

An Editorial Melee About Female Gamers

Comments Filter:
  • NSFW (Score:3, Informative)

    by JJMitchell ( 967409 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @03:04PM (#15108318)
    Not to mention the first picture is fairly NSFW.
    • Re:NSFW (Score:1, Redundant)

      by falcon5768 ( 629591 )
      the seconds not entirely safe either.
    • Speak for yourself, I work from home!
       
        "Dammit Ma, I told you knock first before barging in!!!"
    • Honestly I wish I had seen your post BEFORE I sent it off to a few of the girl gamers in my company. I had to issue a hearty apology quickly thereafter.

      Anyway, the feedback I got was that posers are posers. Girls who play games don't flaunt it for publicity...but attention whores will always be attention whores.

      Seemed more like male egos were at question here than any legitimate discussion of girls and games.

  • by Minwee ( 522556 ) <dcr@neverwhen.org> on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @03:11PM (#15108376) Homepage
    So? They're gamers. They're female. Yes, that really does happen.

    What seems to be getting missed is that female gamers aren't some kind of hive mind. They don't all do the same things, they don't all think the same thoughts. Saying that female gamers are all Suicide Girls or Killcreek posing in Playboy is just as inaccurate as saying that all male gamers are like Comic Book Guy and spend their entire day shooting off their mouths on forums like Tom's Hardware. It may be true for a handful of people, but that doesn't make it so for everyone.

    This article may have some shocking revelations if you are a man whose only exposure to the opposite sex has been through the "Babes of E3" calendar, but other than that it strikes me as a lot of hot air. Hot, smelly, air that could use a bath and a few hours out of its parents' basement.

    • by richdun ( 672214 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @03:21PM (#15108460)
      spend their entire day shooting off their mouths on forums like Tom's Hardware

      Or Slashdot.
    • The main point at issue was whether or not the status quo in the professional circuit (and in the media) is inadequate to uncover the truly talented female gamers.

      The pro-gaming insider thinks so. The mag-editor OTH thinks its a matter of the right groups of females teaming up in the first place.

      I tend to agree with the latter. The status quo will only change when a female team (or GASP, a coed team) emerges that competes well enough such that it would be illogical to cover the female members on their own m
      • by Minwee ( 522556 ) <dcr@neverwhen.org> on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @10:16PM (#15110822) Homepage
        At the risk of having a feminist rage moment, a big part of the problem is that many of the women who _do_ get invited or sponsored to the big events aren't going their because of their skills, but because they look good in tight shirts with a corporate logo on them.

        That not only leads to more talented players being passed over for not having "The Right Stuff" inside of their sweaters, but also creates a hostile environment for everyone. Why even bother trying to compete when you know that you're never going to be judged fairly?

        • You're absolutely correct about the issues here, but I think it's worth pointing out that this isn't a problem with gaming in particular. As far as I can tell this is a problem with Western civilization in general. America, at least, doesn't seem to have been in it's collective right mind about sex and gender issues roughly since the first colonists arrived.
        • And if you read the article, you'd know that this point is encapsulated in the pro-gamers representation of the current status quo, as I mentioned earlier.

          It shouldn't matter. If a chick in a coed team creams a top seat in a tournament, you don't think she'd get coverage even if she wasn't a looker?

          If the tourneys were co-ed, then image wouldn't need to be a pre-requisite for sponorship, just skills.
          I mean, isn't this the internet? Where no one knows your a dog until they meet you in person?
        • Sorry to barge in on your feminist rage, but that knife cuts both ways. I haven't seen any fat, bloated, pimply faced gamers being sponsored either - the ones that get sponsorship might have a few pimples, but they're also very photogenic. Sponsors aren't going to sponsor someone who looks like a middle age loser you might find hanging around the local playground.

          It's not just men who are attracted to a pretty face, and all the feminist rage of all the embittered and abused women in the world isn't going to
      • Who the hell gives a crap about someone who is that preoccupied by the 1% of the 1% who view "Professional Gaming" as the most important part of the video game culture?

        Why isnt anyone more concerned with the constant video game images of either the helpless damsel in distress, or the sex object in her "armor plated battle thong" and her "enchanted DD breasts of gravity defiance"

        Whatever these "Professional Gamers" like to fawn over at conventions is really the saddest moot point possible. How about a
  • OMG Sexism (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jfclavette ( 961511 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @03:13PM (#15108394)
    The Men/Women sports separation is about different physical characteristics of both gender. Now, why the hell would we have the same distinction, which does not make sense, in 'e-sports' ?
    • Take a look at some other sports as well. Women compete freely with men in racing and aerobatics. I see no reason that they can not be as good as men in any video game.
    • Re:OMG Sexism (Score:4, Insightful)

      by xero314 ( 722674 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @04:25PM (#15109041)
      Most of the world has finally accepted that men and women have different physical capability. Someday they will also accept that they have different mental capabilities. There is a reason that the past chess grand champions have all been men, and it's not because of some conspiracy to keep women out of it. Men have more strategic minds, and if you will look, there are studies that prove this. The part of the male brain that handles mathmatics is larger than in the femal brain (the exact opposite for language). E-sports will use far more of tha analytical skills than emotional or communication skills. Being able to judge a trajectory for an assualt or sizing up compareable forces is something male brains just do better.

      I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but people need to stop deluding themselves. Through out history there has been no objectively judge competition where women have been able to regularly hold their own against men. This does not mean men are better than women as a whole, just at those things that can be objectively judge. The flip side is I am farily certain that women would win hands down if there was a way to objectively judge child raising, and we already know they trounce men in the child bearing arena.

      My point is, men an women are different, and we should all stop getting pissed off when someone points out that one gender is better than another at a certain thing.

      Oh, besides that e-sports would still require fast reflexes, hand-eye coordination and spatial judgement, all of which are know to be better in men.
      • Actually, in terms of reaction time, women are usually faster.
      • As a member of the female persuasion, I say well written.
        • I appriciate the support. It's very hard to write about gender difference without some people wanting to label a person as sexist. This is only made worse since it tends to come up in the context of defending one genders advantage at a particular task.
      • Re:OMG Sexism (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Spinalcold ( 955025 )
        Yes, men are generally better at Math, but this is just generally speaking. Women CAN be as good as men at this, just not statistically so. Women CAN be as good gamers as men, just isn't statistically so. So what is 10%-20% less females play games than men. One other thing I would like to mention. Women don't have the ability to desipher 3d environments as well as men, they are missing some of the genetic code of gaging distance. You have all heard those jokes about how women can't tell distance or le
      • How many guys won't pretty much melt, at the site of a crying woman? We maybe fast, and good at mathmatics, but when it comes to being the one in the background running everything, women can beat us hands down. It is almost like we are just some pawns in some game at times. :-)
  • by greenreaper ( 205818 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @03:14PM (#15108396) Homepage Journal
    The lead gameplay developer for the recently-released Galactic Civilizations 2 [galciv2.com], Cari Begle, is female - she just got interviewed [freep.com] by the Detroit Free Press. Cari's the person everyone goes to when there's a bug needs fixing. Maybe playing games isn't yet a place where you can get fair competition, but developing certainly is.
  • by XenoRyet ( 824514 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @03:20PM (#15108451)
    Female Gamers, Young Gamers, Old Gamers, Minority Gamers. There is a trend here, they're all gamers. And if there's one universal truth about gamers, it's that they like to play good games.

    All this talk about how to cater to one group or the other is a waste of breath IMO. Targeting any one of those groups will probably net you around 30% of that group, but it will disinterest or piss off the other 70% of that group, along with all the other groups. Where as if you just quit worrying about it, and make a good game that's enjoyable, and fun to play, you'll end up getting a larger portion of all the groups playing your game.

    My point is that most gamers, regardless of sex, race, creed, or any other factor, like playing good games. A company attempting to target a game at any specific group is just covering the fact that they're not really sure how to make a good game, so they're going to try to hoodwink some group into buying their game because "It's made for them, by them"

    • What you say would be true if there were some clear definition of "good game." It doesn't work that way though. Is Madden 06 a good game? I think it is but I'll wager there are plenty of people here who think it's not. Likewise, is Call of Duty 2 a good game? I don't think so but sales numbers disagree with me. The problem game developers face and the reason there is a qualifier in the first place for "gamer" is that different people find differrent things fun and enjoyable. Using a pigeon hole to tr
      • I would counter that you are already catogorising on a much more productive level than mentioned in the article. Madden 06 is a good sports game, it will appeal to sports gamers of any sex, creed, ect. CoD2 is a good WW2 Shooter, it will appeal to people of any type who enjoy that genra.

        So I suppose more specificaly, it's irrelivant to try to focus based on biological/sociological differences. It's much more fruitful to focus based on a genra. So maybe "gamer" does need a qualifier, but it shouldn't b

        • Your suggested pigeonholes do make more sense for games in established genres. What about games not in an established genre? Where do you really put Super Monkey Ball or Saturn Bomberman or even Burning Rangers? I do agree though that "Female", "Minority", or anything of that sort aren't good qualifiers but only because games geared towards those target demographics usually have an extremely low yield.
    • Taste isn't universal. For example I like FPSes, I'm not a massive fan (though I used to be) but I still like them, still play them. My coworker does not, he does not enjoy them. We are both male, mid 20s, tech workers. When it comes to demographics, we are about as close as they come. However we have different taste in games. I also like single player games, whereas he only plays MMORPGs.

      No matter what the game, you'll never hook every gamer, even every game of a given demographic.
    • Here's where I get curious about this marketing buzz about catering to [insert random section of the market here] gamers. We clearly DID NOT need to cater to demographics to get people who don't "fit the profile" to play video games before - otherwise, female/senior/yeti/alien/whatever gamers would never have been around to be talked about in the FIRST PLACE. Are marketing teams simply so hard-up for something to do that they make up a need to tailor-make games for certain groups?
    • or as the ad would run

      Custom computer : $1500.00
      Internet connection: $40.00
      #game and online subscription: $50.00

      Totally P0wning that MCP from accounting and ccing the screenshot to EVERYBODY:
      priceless
    • they're going to try to hoodwink some group into buying their game because "It's made for them, by them"

      Businesses operate to make money, and all decisions must serve this goal. Considering yesterday's article [slashdot.org] about Wal-Mart's influence and the success of "redneck" games, it makes more sense for small studios to channel their limited resources to a sure thing, like niche gaming. Identifying and catering to a target audience (ie, hoodwinking) is the path to money, and that is what they want.

  • It's like he repeats himself in every page, sometimes even using the exact same words.

    Granted, I tend to agree with him, but usually I only have to say things once (or maybe twice to my kids) ... not six times.

    • You do realize this is a debate between two authors, and there is only a limited number of words available to express a distinct thought? They were debating two sides, and yes, they were repetitive, that sometimes happens in debates, be they online or irl.
      • by dougmc ( 70836 )

        You do realize this is a debate between two authors

        Actually, I didn't. Oops. Good call.

        I guess I should have -- the clues were all there. The title said `melee', there were two names listed as the author, each page had a name or initials at the top (and I never noticed that they changed), the first page had one guy addressing the other guy, etc.

        Of course, it didn't help that the two seemed to agree about everything.

        Oh well, I guess that's what I get for posting before I'm fully caffienat

  • by hambonewilkins ( 739531 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @03:25PM (#15108492)
    A debate between two men about women gamers. Would have been FAR more interesting to see a debate between two female gamers.

    Instead we get lame, slightly misogynistic speculation.

  • "E-sports?" (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I simply take issue with people ... talking high-mindedly about how professional female e-sports will soon be on a par with the male circuit.

    Just out of curiosity, what is "male e-sports" (dear God, what a horrid neologism) supposed to be "on par with?" News flash to the editor posting from his parents' basement: no activity that can be accomplished while eating a bag of Cheetos qualifies as a "sport."

  • Why the hell... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by danpsmith ( 922127 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @03:42PM (#15108654)
    ...is this such a big deal? Games are out of the basement now. They don't require hours of toiling around to learn how to play. Hell, my 6 year old cousin plays more games than I ever did at his age. They are a full grown entertainment category. You're obviously going to get more girl gamers, and who cares. You'll get more of every type of gamer, because the technology has become definitely something more immersive than any other type of entertainment. Some girls will play, some won't. Some guys will play, some won't. There's not really a news story here. Attaching a stigma to the fact that there are female gamers is the same thing as saying girls aren't good at math or science or whatever. Stop putting such an emphasis on gender. And I'll still kick that bitch's ass at Quake anyday =P
    • Probably 20% of my corp in EVE are actually female, actually a high rate for that game based off of CCPs estimates based on actual account information. I've met a few of them so I know it's true. There are many males who play as females as well, but they will usually tell you. I'm sure there are females who play as males. The thing is, if someone says publicly that they are female, the reaction by many male gamers is pretty strong. You could compare it to the girl showing up at the nudist beach in Euro
  • by tokengeekgrrl ( 105602 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @04:01PM (#15108828)
    Regarding the last paragraph at this page [twitchguru.com]:
    "As long as the audiences continue to look for cam-slut poses on the female clan pages, that's where the money will go. And of course, the female gamers have to give up the easy money. I don't doubt that there are many good looking or perhaps not so good looking female gamers who could do well. And no, I don't think the first successful female clan will have to be comprised of butt-ugly chicks either, but in reality it shouldn't matter whatsoever what they look like. It's the combination of audience and sponsor expectations, combined with willing participants, that creates the current environment."


    Perhaps, in the gaming industry when it comes to women gamers, looks *are* valued more than gaming ability. Maybe if the gaming industry really did value gaming ability first and foremost when it comes to both men and women gamers, then overall women's gaming ability would improve. Obviously, as evident by the amount of money and attention spent on hot gamer girls, the industry panders to looks at the expense of ability when it comes to women gamers. If the industry wants better women gamers then that's where it should put the money and attention.

    Until that happens, why should hot gamer girls with moderate skill improve their gaming ability if it's not required of them in order to achieve whatever it is they want to achieve (publicity, advertising/modeling contracts, etc...)? For some women, capitalizing on their looks and sexuality is what works for them so more power to them. It's their choice and right to do so.

    The real question is, why does the gaming industry have a double standard where skill is valued in men gamers and looks valued in women gamers? Most likely it's because men make the games and they like looking at pretty girls so that's sets the tone for the industry as a whole.

    All that said, I am a woman gamer and enjoy playing games. For me, the entertainment is in playing, not competing, and to be honest with you, I get bored after an hour or 2. My fingers get cramped and my eyes get tired and no, I'm not willing or interested in spending 4+ hours a day to figure out the exact key mash that will give me the secret power boost at the beginning of a race as opposed to my boyfriend who is driven to play and compete online which is fine, I just prefer to do other things, unless it's Tetris, I can play Tetris for 5+ hours at a stretch. ;)

    The incentive system to compete online and achieving a high ranking to earn rewards and points drives my boyfriend to keep going but are moot when it comes to me. Maybe there needs to be a different incentive system for women gamers to entice them to achieve a higher level of ability, I don't know.

    Or maybe it's ok that there aren't professional women gamers.

    - tokengeekgrrl
    • I've been discussing this with one of my other friends, both of us seeming more enlightened than most woman-exploiting men.

      I raised the point that there will always be women who will exploit their female gender to get ahead as long as males make it so easy to do. Most men are ridiculously gullible for a woman who knows just what to do. (The same also applies in reverse.) So as long as it's easy for one side to exploit the other, they're going to do that.

      If that means that women gamers who are attractive
      • Exactly the points I was trying to make but you said them so much better, thanks!

        To expand on your thoughts regarding women and competition, women can and often are competitive in specific areas in which they choose to be. I'm sure there are some women who are competitive in gaming and would love to compete professionally. I know plenty of guys who are competitive about gaming and others who see it as entertainment and are not competitive about it. All women and men who play games share just that fact, t
        • To expand on your thoughts regarding women and competition, women can and often are competitive in specific areas in which they choose to be. I'm sure there are some women who are competitive in gaming and would love to compete professionally. I know plenty of guys who are competitive about gaming and others who see it as entertainment and are not competitive about it. All women and men who play games share just that fact, they all play games, but what each enjoys from and how each views it is unique to tha
      • "both of us seeming more enlightened than most woman-exploiting men."

        Am I the only one here who read this sentence and then decided that the rest of this post has no redeeming value whatsoever?

        God, if you're going to do the obligatory "Marry me!" Slashdot post, be honest about it! (Hint: Not all women are in to misandry. Really!)
        • God, if you're going to do the obligatory "Marry me!" Slashdot post, be honest about it! (Hint: Not all women are in to misandry. Really!)

          Try this on for size. Maybe it's not a "Marry me!" Slashdot post. Maybe I'm being honest in my opinions and heartfelt in my statements.

          I placed the "seeming" (should have been "seemingly") in the statement in order to indicate more of a subjunctive mood, and less of of an indicative one. Thus rendering my point-of-view, and opinion, rather than a statement of fact.

          You'
        • Wow, sounds like someone has had too much coffee and is a tad bit on edge.

          It's pretty obvious to me that we were having a discussion, that's all, one that is actually related to the topic at hand as opposed to your post which doesn't add anything to the discussion whatsoever.

          And for the record, my boyfriend can attest to my not being interested in misandry just as I can attest that he is not interested in misogyny.

          - tokengeekgrrl
    • I loved that bit in "Hearts of Darkness". The coke came right out my nose.
  • Next time you're in the aisles of your favorite bookstore, take a peek at some of the fiction aimed towards women. You know the type I'm talking about. [b0g.org]

    Now take a look at a book aimed more at a male audience [images.bol.de].

    Which one of these has the lurid sex scenes, do ya figure?

    I loaned LoTR to my wife. After reading part of it, she stopped. Why? No sex. If she can't read a classic with a little sex in it [amazon.com], she'd just as soon read something cheesy with a lot of sex in it [amazon.com].

    Or compare the typical cheesy male-targeted TV [scifi.com]
    • You know, you're right. Who among us can claim that they don't get sexually aroused by combat boots? =) Actually, to a certain type of reader (and most likely to Tom Clancy himself), that sort of stuff is pr0n.

      Anyway, you reminded me of a fun game we used to play at the trashy novel section of the bookstore. Each participant would grab a trashy novel and then skim it for a sex scene. The first one to come across a sex scene won.
    • "Sex" is not entirely the same with "romance". For us men, sex is primarily a domination game, often not involving a positive attitude towards our object of pleasure, just raw instinct. Romance, on the other hand, has a lot more depth: in most romantic scenes that end with sex, the male also feels "love" for the female, were "love" is defined as something more than sexual attraction. I guess it all boils down to women wanting to feel secure within the environment that they will perform the act of procreatio
    • Wow. You are so wrong, it's not even funny. Allow me to speak from experience.

      Women like literature that discusses social issues. Whether those are issues of justice, social acceptability, or relationship standards, that's where women gravitate. Women love Judge Judy, they love Jerry Springer, and they love Sex and the City. Okay, maybe those shows are trash. But in the same vein, they also love The Scarlet Letter, which is primarily a critique of puritanical society and its justice system. They a
  • Yes, there's nothing wrong with them being attractive. Or having photos of this. But if it were really about the gaming, would they all be that beautiful? Not one ugly girl among them?

    The problem is not that there are pretty girl gamers, if they are genuine. The problem is the ugly girl gamers - there aren't any.

  • but more about ones who use their gaming to pronounce their sexiness.

    I for one, don't see why this is such a big deal.

    It's been happening since I started gaming in 1978, so if you still can't deal with it, admit you're a virgin and learn how to smile, listen, and engage in polite conversation.

    Your problem will go away.
  • by shalla ( 642644 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @05:54PM (#15109634)
    The opinion piece wasn't really about female gamers. It was about professional gamers and the differences between the genders in who gets sponsorship. Aaron McKenna says that guys get sponsorships based on skills and women based on their looks, and that hurts the gaming itself. I wouldn't be shocked if that were true right now, but that's because we're discussing publicity and marketability. When companies are choosing who will be their public face, they tend to go with the best looking specimens with adequate skills they can find. That this hasn't yet taken over the male gamers' representations is the surprise for me. I'm sure that will be coming.

    As others have already stated, gamers are gamers. I tend to hate articles about female gamers, or what it would take to draw more women to gaming, or why women don't like certain types of games, or how they play differently than men. If it's a good game and a woman has access to it and the time to play it and an introduction to it, she's likely to play it. Everything else is just gravy.
    • That this hasn't yet taken over the male gamers' representations is the surprise for me. I'm sure that will be coming.

      It's just a question of audience. The male audience for "e-sports" is much bigger than the female. So the female gamers have to be sexy to appeal to the audience, but the audience doesn't care about how males look, so their aesthetic appeal is ignored.

      If the female (or homosexual, I spose) component of the "e-sport" audience gets larger, then expect to see the same pressure on male pro-
    • That this hasn't yet taken over the male gamers' representations is the surprise for me.

      It doesn't surprise me. Currently, men are overwhelmingly the audience for video games. I think it's fair to say that male gamers are, at the very least, no better than "average" attractiveness. So having incredibly attractive male pro gamers would end up making the largest part of the demographic feel inadequate. And if these guys are attractive at the expense of their gaming ability, they'll come to be resented fo

      • It doesn't surprise me. Currently, men are overwhelmingly the audience for video games.

        But is that really true anymore? Maybe certain types of games (first person shooters, for example), but about half of the people I game with regularly are women. I'm talking CoH, CoV, WoW, Everquest, muds, and puzzle games primarily, though a lot of women I know play console games with their kids.
  • ... it was about clans, professionals, and media whores. (Media whores come in both genders and don't have to be sexual. Some people will do anything for attention.)

    What percentage of female gamers belong to any sort of 'clan' and have ANY connection to what they were talking about?

    For that matter, what percentage of MALE gamers belong to a clan or play professionally?

    Sure, maybe professional female gamers are a bit of a joke - but there's a case to be made that ALL professional gamers are a bit of a joke.
    • I'd have questioned the need for six pages of fascinating prose about gender equality in a niche form of entertainment, but gender image equality in the minority who make money from it? Besides the fact that it wasn't about female gamers, as you say, who even gives a shit? Very few people who ought to, and lots of interfering people with overactive consciences, that's who.

      From a journalism point of view, normal gamers are a non-story. Each has their own trials and tribulations which they duly deal with and

    • More than you may think... My fiance just joined a clan on Halo 2. It is all girls/women, and there are 76 clan members.
  • Although I think the articles make some generalizations which may be unfair, the point is essentially true. It is scummy to call yourself a professional at something, but then self yourself on sex, unless selling sex is your job of course. I personally just do not respect women who use their bodies to get ahead.

    Also, I think that the article was essentially complaining (once you remove a few inflammatory generalizations) is that gamers selling sex are taking away sponsorship opportunities from people who ar
  • Angsty guilt fest (Score:3, Insightful)

    by caffeination ( 947825 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @06:29PM (#15109829)
    I agree with the quote in the summary (merely skimmed through the boring, boring article) Most of us are decent people, and we'll treat female gamers with the same respect as anyone else (however much that may happen to be). Most gamers aren't dickhead teenagers, and most games aren't misogenistic trash.

    Everyone, including female gamers, has to put up with the stupid minority. From what I saw and heard during the months I managed to do this on Xbox Live, I learned that girls are just as good at this as guys.

    Girls are people, people are good at dealing with other people and the stupid shit they do. I think they (journalists) get so tied up in thinking about them being "girls" that they forget that class girl extends person.

  • by thelost ( 808451 )
    seriously some guys obviously feel threatened too easily, go crawl back into your fucking caves.
  • I'll be amazed when the "male circuit" becomes something that more than some nerds on the internet and the country of Korea actually cares about.
  • This is a rather ridiculous argument. They split up the issue in a rather odd way. On one hand you have one editor taking the anti-female position. The strange thing is that this editor has a problem with the women being sex symbols (despite millions of years of built in instinct that assures that this is a natural aspect of gender relations in our species).

    Then you have the other editor pretending to support women being taken seriously in gaming, and that editor sees no problem with them showing their asse
  • Look at women's tennis - Anna Kournikova hardly ever (if ever?) won the Grand Slam or Wimbledon, etc. but who cares? At that time, she was the most recognized face of women's tennis. In fact some of the ugly women complained about her why she was getting all of the press coverage when she hadn't won. And you know what? I would specifically watch women's tennis matches just to see her play, even if she did lose.

    Hey, if a nice set of T's and a tight A allows a women to get corporate sponsorship, then go
  • First, e-sports are barely "sports" yet at all, whatever they may become they aren't really a "sport" yet, not even in the way that bowling and darts are a sport. Second, Shirley Muldowney was probably the best drag racer ever. So she got sponsorships, attention and fame (within the context of that sport) Danica Patrick is a "pretty good" Indy car driver, but also a hottie, so she gets more attention fame etc, within the context of that sports personality. Also see Anna K, and Maria Sharpova or similar exam
  • Clue-bat: Sponsorships are about celebrity, which includes skill, appearance, legend, and personality.

    Look a NASCAR. Look at golf. Sponsorships do not track directly with success in competition. Look at talent shows like American Idol.

    Sure, it may offend our geek principles that anything but skill can determine outcomes. But, now that money is involved, are we really surprised to see gaming descend to the same level as every other competition?
  • ALL'S FAIR writes:
    How can we call down women who use what they've got to get ahead? In every endeavor (work, politics, sports, etc.) women who want to compete have to slog through a never-ending bog of discrimination. If a woman uses her looks to get ahead, that's her right. The success she gains by her looks will never balance out the discrimination she has to deal with.

    PART OF THE PROBLEM writes:
    We are geeks. Geeks believe in the value of skill and intellect over physical appearance. In gaming, more
  • I don't know about the text but I give the article a 92 % just based on the pics.

    He lost me after going off on Female Gamers contrasting his wife, whom I am to assume is a good christian woman who would never show her midriff for a new DEALIENWARE Laptop. Let me guess she said No F'n way am I posing for a website dressed like that and you learned a "very special" lesson

    Gaming is open to all from ButUgly to Smokin Hot. Guy, Girl, Tranny, whatever. But if you are going to have a full page pic of said game

No line available at 300 baud.

Working...