Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Hrathen

Wow, was the "Discrimination Against Females in X-wing" thread deleted by FFG?

Recommended Posts

You were brought up in a male-dominated world.  Is our argument seriously going to be "argument from tradition"?  "I experienced this as a kid, therefore what I experienced is right for everyone?"

 

It was an argument regarding what's mature. I'm pretty sure that hold's true no matter what sex you are.

 

Are you people honestly going to sit there and tell me it's inappropriate to use the term female? Really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you people honestly going to sit there and tell me it's inappropriate to use the term female? Really?

 

No. I'm simply saying that one is more appropriate than the other in this context. I don't believe that is being oversensitive. Mature would be to either agree, or disagree, but accept nonetheless that some people (in particular women) feel this way. Rather than attempt to deny it or point out flaws in the concept.

Edited by floof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There is no problem except for people being overly sensitive. If someone is put off because we use the word 'female' instead of 'woman,' they probably have more important things to worry about in their life. The former is anything but disrespectful, but there might be something to be said about a sense of entitlement.

 

I believe it would be better for a new generation to not even consider gender, race, etc. , than for them to be taught that you should be nice to the "other" people.

 

It would be great if we could all get along without gender even factoring into conversations between humans. But that can't happen if, for example, men refer to women as "females" because that word is an explicit classification of gender. It has nothing to do with "being nice". It has to do with a) respect and b) talking to or about a person as an equal.

 

Female is primarily an adjective denoting the sex

Woman is a noun referring to a person

 

By calling women "females", you explicitly reduce those persons to just their gender. That is why it is dehumanising and that is why many people find it either disrespectful or in poor taste. Language is very important in sexist or discriminatory discourse. Please don't brush it under the carpet with the "political correctness" moniker.

 

You're right; there are probably more important things to worry about in life. But right now, we're discussing issues around discrimination of women in the context of this miniatures game. So I think it's at least pertinent to bring up the disproportionate use of the word.

 

 

I agree that here it's quite clear, but not being a native speaker, I can tell you that it's easy for me to fall into a trap and say a "taboo" word without realizing or without wicked intentions.

 

It has happened to me in French, and it was quite ugly, the other person became quickly very aggressive and I didn't understand why, he also wouldn't believe that it was an honest mistake because I am fluent in French.

 

It's also important to point out that, while on the Internet it may stand out as odd, in face-to-face conversation you can convey other information through non-verbal means, which will betray the fact that you don't want to offend anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you people honestly going to sit there and tell me it's inappropriate to use the term female? Really?

 

No. I'm simply saying that one is more appropriate than the other in this context. I don't believe that is being oversensitive. Mature would be to either agree, or disagree, but accept nonetheless that some people (in particular women) feel this way. Rather than attempt to deny it or point out flaws in the concept.

Oh, I can accept that people feel all kinds of different ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I can accept that people feel all kinds of different ways.

 

Then I'm not sure what the problem you have with the argument is?

 

Examples where usage is just fine:

 

- In French, the word personne is a female noun

- X-Wing isn't as popular with female players as male players

 

Examples where usage can be considered offensive:

 

- I've been speaking to quite a few females lately.

- That female had quite a few interesting hobbies.

 
The distinction feels quite obvious to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right, I'm sure that kind of distinction is exactly what keeps women away from miniatures games.

So, for whatever reason we can no longer refer to women as 'females,' lest their feelings be hurt. Alright. How long will it be until someone takes issue with the term 'woman'? Etymologically, it comes from the Old English 'wife' + 'man.' I guess instead of referring to a woman with a term that is both purely technical and objective (they are females, aren't they?), it's more appropriate to refer to them by their defining social role and their association with the more dominant gender. That's much more fitting, and not anywhere near as sexist, dehumanizing, or insensitive, right?

Edited by WonderWAAAGH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- I've been speaking to quite a few females lately.

 

This might be the non-native speaker in me again, but this doesn't sound as offensive as other contexts. Let me explain why:

  * female, whether used as an adjective or a noun, basically splits the population in 2, so it gives you very good information on what the speaker wants to convey. In information theory, you usually like characteristics that splits sets in half, it gives you the best information whether that characteristic is present or not.

  * you mentioned that females can refer to both humans and animals, but coupled with "speaking" and "lately" it's 99% sure that the speaker is referring to humans, unless he is a zookeeper.

  * females here also "downgrades" the speaker as well, I feel. He's a male (supposedly) speaking with females. So they're human, but in an animal context, which leads to the difference between sexes and inevitably to mating.

 

So what I'm basically saying is that, to me (large accent on me here, you probably will not agree), "I've been speaking to quite a few females lately" adds mating/sexual intent to "I've been speaking to quite a few women lately". And there's nothing wrong about that, it's the natural way of things (hence the "downgrading" as you call it for both the speaker and the women).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right, I'm sure that kind of distinction is exactly what keeps women away from miniatures games.

I didn't claim it was the exact reason. Not sure why you're deflecting or twisting my words. I'm just trying to contribute to the discussion in a positive way to by highlighting possible issues for discussion. But in an effort to engage with you here, what do you think it is that dissuades women from participating more in miniatures games?

 

 

- I've been speaking to quite a few females lately.

 

This might be the non-native speaker in me again, but this doesn't sound as offensive as other contexts. Let me explain why:

  * female, whether used as an adjective or a noun, basically splits the population in 2, so it gives you very good information on what the speaker wants to convey. In information theory, you usually like characteristics that splits sets in half, it gives you the best information whether that characteristic is present or not.

  * you mentioned that females can refer to both humans and animals, but coupled with "speaking" and "lately" it's 99% sure that the speaker is referring to humans, unless he is a zookeeper.

  * females here also "downgrades" the speaker as well, I feel. He's a male (supposedly) speaking with females. So they're human, but in an animal context, which leads to the difference between sexes and inevitably to mating.

 

So what I'm basically saying is that, to me (large accent on me here, you probably will not agree), "I've been speaking to quite a few females lately" adds mating/sexual intent to "I've been speaking to quite a few women lately". And there's nothing wrong about that, it's the natural way of things (hence the "downgrading" as you call it for both the speaker and the women).

 

That's okay. I'm not a native speaker either (Swedish, here). Where are you from?

 

You nailed it with the last sentence. Saying "I've been speaking to quite a few females lately" does add an explicit sexual tone to the phrase as opposed to "I've been speaking to quite a few women lately". It's a way of classifying based on a characteristic. Or, to be precise, it moves the focus from them as a person to them as a gender. By referring to somebody as "that female" rather than "that woman", you reduce her down to just her gender. This is a common theme in topics of sexual objectification.

 

Does that help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right, I'm sure that kind of distinction is exactly what keeps women away from miniatures games.

I didn't claim it was the exact reason. Not sure why you're deflecting or twisting my words. I'm just trying to contribute to the discussion in a positive way to by highlighting possible issues for discussion. But in an effort to engage with you here, what do you think it is that dissuades women from participating more in miniatures games?

- I've been speaking to quite a few females lately.

This might be the non-native speaker in me again, but this doesn't sound as offensive as other contexts. Let me explain why: * female, whether used as an adjective or a noun, basically splits the population in 2, so it gives you very good information on what the speaker wants to convey. In information theory, you usually like characteristics that splits sets in half, it gives you the best information whether that characteristic is present or not. * you mentioned that females can refer to both humans and animals, but coupled with "speaking" and "lately" it's 99% sure that the speaker is referring to humans, unless he is a zookeeper. * females here also "downgrades" the speaker as well, I feel. He's a male (supposedly) speaking with females. So they're human, but in an animal context, which leads to the difference between sexes and inevitably to mating. So what I'm basically saying is that, to me (large accent on me here, you probably will not agree), "I've been speaking to quite a few females lately" adds mating/sexual intent to "I've been speaking to quite a few women lately". And there's nothing wrong about that, it's the natural way of things (hence the "downgrading" as you call it for both the speaker and the women).

That's okay. I'm not a native speaker either (Swedish, here). Where are you from? You nailed it with the last sentence. Saying "I've been speaking to quite a few females lately" does add an explicit sexual tone to the phrase as opposed to "I've been speaking to quite a few women lately". It's a way of classifying based on a characteristic. Or, to be precise, it moves the focus from them as a person to them as a gender. By referring to somebody as "that female" rather than "that woman", you reduce her down to just her gender. This is a common theme in topics of sexual objectification. Does that help?

There's no singular, universal element dissuading females from playing miniatures games, it just doesn't appear to be something that many of them are interested in. Think about it from the opposite perspective: what's dissuading you from participating in activities that people would perceive as being traditionally effeminate? Have you gotten a pedicure lately, or are you afraid of being referred to as a 'male' when you walk into the salon? Or is that something you simply have no interest in doing?

Edited by WonderWAAAGH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You're right, I'm sure that kind of distinction is exactly what keeps women away from miniatures games.

I didn't claim it was the exact reason. Not sure why you're deflecting or twisting my words. I'm just trying to contribute to the discussion in a positive way to by highlighting possible issues for discussion. But in an effort to engage with you here, what do you think it is that dissuades women from participating more in miniatures games?

 

 

- I've been speaking to quite a few females lately.

 

This might be the non-native speaker in me again, but this doesn't sound as offensive as other contexts. Let me explain why:

  * female, whether used as an adjective or a noun, basically splits the population in 2, so it gives you very good information on what the speaker wants to convey. In information theory, you usually like characteristics that splits sets in half, it gives you the best information whether that characteristic is present or not.

  * you mentioned that females can refer to both humans and animals, but coupled with "speaking" and "lately" it's 99% sure that the speaker is referring to humans, unless he is a zookeeper.

  * females here also "downgrades" the speaker as well, I feel. He's a male (supposedly) speaking with females. So they're human, but in an animal context, which leads to the difference between sexes and inevitably to mating.

 

So what I'm basically saying is that, to me (large accent on me here, you probably will not agree), "I've been speaking to quite a few females lately" adds mating/sexual intent to "I've been speaking to quite a few women lately". And there's nothing wrong about that, it's the natural way of things (hence the "downgrading" as you call it for both the speaker and the women).

 

That's okay. I'm not a native speaker either (Swedish, here). Where are you from?

 

You nailed it with the last sentence. Saying "I've been speaking to quite a few females lately" does add an explicit sexual tone to the phrase as opposed to "I've been speaking to quite a few women lately". It's a way of classifying based on a characteristic. Or, to be precise, it moves the focus from them as a person to them as a gender. By referring to somebody as "that female" rather than "that woman", you reduce her down to just her gender. This is a common theme in topics of sexual objectification.

 

Does that help?

 

 

I'm from Romania.

 

I would argue that in that context you don't "reduce" a woman to her gender, you "select" the most important characteristic for that conversation, because, let's face it, gender plays a big role in a sexual context. You're not objectifying her in any way, there are no "female" objects, only living beings. I disagree with the whole "objectifying" discourse that the new breed of feminists have, it implies that somehow women have no gains from sexual interactions. I see the sentence almost equal to "I've been speaking to quite a few members of the opposite sex lately", which carries the same weight and implications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no singular, universal element dissuading females from playing miniatures games, it just doesn't appear to be something that many of them are interested in. Think about it from the opposite perspective: what's dissuading you from participating in activities that people would conceive as being traditionally effeminate? Have you gotten a pedicure lately, or are you afraid of being referred to as a 'male' when you walk into the salon? Or is that something you simply have no interest in doing?

 

For me, the problem is less with the miniatures games themselves (which are largely fine) but rather with aspects of the male-dominated culture around them. This can be intimidating or off-putting to women. That is something we can all recognise, I'm sure. How men speak to and about women is a contributing factor in that.

 

You're right that interest itself can be an issue. Less women might be interested or drawn to the game. Does this make wargaming traditionally masculine? Or are less women attracted to wargaming because it's traditionally masculine? Chicken or egg. For my part, I would argue that describing anything as "traditionally masculine/feminine" can be harmful and detracts from your earlier point about how gender shouldn't really be a factor in any given activity.

 

TLDR: It becomes less about "How can we ensure 50% of the player base is made up of women?", but rather "How can we ensure those women who do want to engage with this activity aren't turned away?"

Edited by floof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it slightly funny that the people trying to be sensitive to the whole using women versus female are insensitive to the difference between gender and sex.

Edited by AtillaTheFun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe that is it the fluff side of Star Wars is what puts women off of playing the game.

I agree.

Consider that in WH40k you have one faction that is nothing but women. 100% of the models and characters in the Sisters of Battle are female. So if it's just a matter of "not enough women pilots" then we should see a ton of women playing 40k with SoB armies. But we don't, so there's pretty solid evidence that just having women characters isn't enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You didn't answer my question.

 

Okay. I'll answer your question.

 

What's dissuading me from participating in a activities that people would perceive as being traditionally effeminate? Perhaps those activities being perceived as traditionally effeminate, or perhaps a lack of interest. Former is a societal problem.

 

Have I gotten a pedicure? Yes. Have I gotten a pedicure lately? No.

 

Am I afraid of being referred to as a 'male' when I walk into the salon? No, I'm not afraid of being referred to as a male. Would I like it? No, I would absolutely not like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the topic of women maybe wanting more female characters to relate to, I expect the new films will have a better gender balance than the OT did, so assuming that FFG makes ships from those (why wouldn't they?) I would expect to see a lot more female named pilots coming from that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You didn't answer my question.

 

Okay. I'll answer your question.

 

What's dissuading me from participating in a activities that people would perceive as being traditionally effeminate? Perhaps those activities being perceived as traditionally effeminate, or perhaps a lack of interest. Former is a societal problem.

 

Have I gotten a pedicure? Yes. Have I gotten a pedicure lately? No.

 

Am I afraid of being referred to as a 'male' when I walk into the salon? No, I'm not afraid of being referred to as a male. Would I like it? No, I would absolutely not like it.

 

 

:huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I afraid of being referred to as a 'male' when I walk into the salon? No, I'm not afraid of being referred to as a male. Would I like it? No, I would absolutely not like it.

That seems far less a societal problem than a personal one. Unless you're actually a female, that is.

Edited by WonderWAAAGH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Am I afraid of being referred to as a 'male' when I walk into the salon? No, I'm not afraid of being referred to as a male. Would I like it? No, I would absolutely not like it.

That seems far less a societal problem than a personal one. Unless you're actually female, that is.

 

 

Look, mate, I'm struggling to relate to you on this topic. I can't quite understand your position and why the tone you are repeatedly taking with me is a hostile or snarky one. You have stated that you accept some women (and men) find certain language disrespectful - but you disagree that this is a problem? That's okay of course, but it doesn't make it less of a problem for those people.

 

I'm not sure what it is you are attempting to bring to the discussion. I would love for you to elaborate a little in your responses.

Edited by floof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't quite understand your position and why the tone you are repeatedly taking with me is a hostile or snarky one.

Snarky and aggressive is how WonderWaaagh is. It takes a bit getting used to, but once you do you can read past the tone and see what he's saying.

Not saying that I agree with everything he says but he's not nearly as big as a troll as he comes off like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that some people, regardless of their gender, or even the context of the situation, will get their feelings hurt no matter what. Some, not all. Is it really such a pressing social concern that we have to now watch whether we say 'female' instead of 'woman,' for fear of stepping on someone's toes? Perhaps you didn't catch my edit to post #82. Seriously, where does the semantic distortion end?

I can't quite understand your position and why the tone you are repeatedly taking with me is a hostile or snarky one.

Snarky and aggressive is how WonderWaaagh is. It takes a bit getting used to, but once you do you can read past the tone and see what he's saying.Not saying that I agree with everything he says but he's not nearly as big as a troll as he comes off like.

Love you too, Vanor. ;)

Edited by WonderWAAAGH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...