After being depressed that female characters were considered being added to a Kickstarter game as a prompted afterthought, maybe as stretch goals, I wondered if there were any geeklists about gender balance in games.
I stumbled across what I thought was rather a good one, and potentially a useful set of questions to ask yourself when you're designing a game, if you're concerned about gender balance. Or even encouraging half the population to possibly take an interest. Bear in mind, it's just one person's opinion, but it's certainly a thought provoking list.
https://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/170291/are-there-women-game-geeklist
I'm surprised that the number of female characters in Bruges is so low. It's an opportunity missed.
ReplyDeleteI've never played Bruges Neil Robinson - what's it like?
ReplyDeleteIf it fits then have male characters or female characters or black characters or white characters. Don't artificially target just for balance sake.
ReplyDeleteBruges is one of my favourites. It features multi-use cards. Each card is a character and can be used in 6 ways, which leaves plenty to think about. It's just right for weight and length: not too heavy and plays in under an hour. It also looks very pretty.
ReplyDeleteI will have to give it a try at the club, thanks!
ReplyDeletei will say that one thing I like about Castle Ravenloft is that there are both male and female characters. Makes it a bit more fun for my daughter too.
ReplyDeleteI think what games like Legends of Andor and Robinson Crusoe are doing is great, which is one side of the character sheet features the male version of the character and the other side features the female version.
ReplyDeleteThat's great, Dave Taylor ! It's another game I've not played, but the club has it, I think. Does she have other games she likes?
ReplyDeleteClinton Coddington , it's such a simple thing to do, as well, and gives such variety. Tales of the Arabian Nights does the same thing, although whether that's to accommodate the sex-change curse or to help with gender diversity I'm not all that sure. :-)
ReplyDeleteWhy do people get so worked up about this??
ReplyDeleteIf it works with the theme, then it doesn't matter. It's not like women can't play it. It's like the dumb thing about Fakir's in the the DOW game recently. It made sense as part of the theme. Trying to shoehorn-in some politically correct "balance" is just silly.
When the little girl has walked off disappointed because there's no girl pirate in this game as well it's sad, Joe Grimer It's like convincing the 7 to 16 year old boys to sit down and play Mermaid Rain. Good luck with that. Now imagine that every game is Mermaid Rain.
ReplyDeleteNot that Mermaid Rain isn't an awesome game of course! https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/709684/are-you-man-enough-want-be-mermaid
ReplyDeleteAlicia Smith It's a game. If people are going to get so silly about it, let em, instead of watering down the theme of the game to cope for every class of human. if people are gonna get so silly about a game, then they're missing the point. Flowerfall, for example: A good game that not every body might like because of the theme but the theme works. That's the point, and what makes a good thematic game is one that sticks to the theme, instead of pandering to every audience.
ReplyDeleteOr should we include at least one African, one Aisan, one European in every single game in fear of being polically correct?? See? It's just silly.
Joe Grimer - I think arguing the extreme isn't helping your case. Of course it wouldn't make sense to shoehorn in one of every gender, race and orientation into every game. The point the OP is making is that if you put your gender hat on and look objectively at games, you'll find very few that provide positive depictions of women. Her list doesn't discuss race or other factors, but the same is true there. If the world and history was 95% white males in great shape doing awesome things, the board game market would be an accurate portrayal.
ReplyDeleteThe one place I will argue for a game to be male dominated is if it is historically appropriate. For better or worse, military and political leaders have historically been male... So it's hard to balance out genders in historical games that deal in those genres
But Joe Grimer there should be, in games where the theme would be unaffected, female characters, heck as much diversity as you can fit for that matter. It's not hurting Cauldron any. Doesn't look watered down to me. https://boardgamegeek.com/image/2485941/cauldron Reading some of the entries in the geeklist it's just plain embarrassing some of the design decisions made in games that wouldn't have been affected negatively. Anyway, I'm not going to get more into it with you, that's not the purpose of this entry. It's just to let people know about a useful resource and an interesting read.
ReplyDeleteZachary Homrighaus - re historical figures - with notable exceptions. Thatcher, for all her faults, was a powerful leader. Likewise Artemisia of Caria, Laskarina Bouboulina, and Marina Raskova, just to name a few. Elizabeth I also comes to mind...
ReplyDeleteEta: I just re-read your comment, and you are talking balance, not exclusivity. The exceptions then become even more important to represent accurately, but you are right, it cannot be truly balanced without forsaking accuracy. Alas.
Zachary Homrighaus thanks for articulating what I was trying to convey much better than I did!
ReplyDeleteAlso, Joe Grimer, consider the earlier response by Alicia Smith. If you have needlessly male-oriented games, how are you going to get female players - especially younger female players - involved? How many potential gamers have been turned off by not having someone to identify with? Or by having the only person they could identify with being such a shallow stereotype that they felt it was making fun of them?
ReplyDeleteThis is a really interesting topic. I'm looking at my games collection, and most of them are gender neutral, like Monopoly, but there's a definitely male bias. In some games it makes sense (like war games. only guys are stupid enough to be soldiers) and in others it makes sense thematically (a serious, historically based game about pirates is going to have all male or at least predominantly male characters). But there are a ton of games where it really doesn't matter at all, so why not try to make gaming more inclusive in the interest of bringing more varied people to the table?
ReplyDeleteWhy wouldn't you support this in the big picture? I don't get it.
But, then again, I have two girls, both of whom like games, so perhaps I'm biased.
ps: My 11yo daughter's fave games at this point are Nintendo Monopoly, Castle Ravenloft, Tahiti, Ticket to Ride, poker, cribbage and gin rummy.
Indeed Dave Taylor , indeed. Huh, I was just reading about women pirates, thinking oh yeah, there's Bonny and Read... but it turns out there were a lot more than I thought. Not a huge amount, but lots more than I thought! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_piracy
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting this list, Alicia Smith. You're doing good work.
ReplyDeleteOoh, I'm just pointing out a cool thing I saw, imagine all the hard work that went into that list, A Mandible / grasa_total is the one who should be thanked. But thank you Shreyas Sampat !
ReplyDeleteAlicia Smith there were some female pirates, but just as a game oriented around 19th century inventors would be predominantly male to be historically accurate, so a game about pirates on the high seas would be predominantly male if its goal is to be "historically accurate". Of course, a little bit of historical revisionism could be appropriate too in some cases... :-)
ReplyDeleteIt pays to point out at this juncture that "historically accurate" is itself a myth; we only have the versions of the past that have been recorded by people, who contrary to popular belief are neither infallible nor without biases.
ReplyDeleteWe can't trust that stuff, and to use it to continue to uphold a vision of the world that only allows white men to be the heroes is basically shitty to everyone else.
I like the way Robinson Crusoe implements gender... Flip the player card to choose male or female. Simple is sometimes the best solution.
ReplyDeleteI dunno Dave Taylor , you'd think we'd hear about Ching Shih more. Wikipedia says -
ReplyDeleteRegarded as one of the most powerful pirates in human history she commanded her husband's fleet after his death. At its height her fleet was composed of more than 1,500 ships and 80,000 sailors. She controlled much of the waters of the South China Sea. After years of piracy where British, Chinese and Portuguese navies could not defeat her China offered her peace in 1810 and she was able to retire and married the second in command.
So if she goes by the footnote of history, perhaps others have as well.
Hey Shreyas, I completely disagree. History is subjective, but it's not "white guys treading on everyone else". That's a too-easy interpretation and just feels like injecting needless controversy where we've been having a rather civil conversation on this topic. FWIW.
ReplyDeleteHilariously nobody has, as far as I've read, made any actual suggestions of how existing board games might/should be changed to incorporate more diversity. Yet the very possibility of diversity is so terrifying/distasteful that you've got (white, male, straight -- please correct me if I'm wrong) folks screaming pre-emptively about political correctness and rampant liberalism.
ReplyDeleteTwo-sided character cards with m/f options cost you literally nothing -- hell, it really only cost the publisher, if they had to commission art for it. Don't flip it over. Is it really so terrible?
"Watering down theme" is deserving of all the lolz. Seriously. Name me a game in which "and they're straight white men" is a salient part of the theme. One. Game.
I don't think anyone, even the OP, is suggesting ahistoricity either. You're not going to see your hex-and-chit games suddenly modeling all-female corps at the Battle of the Bulge.
But I mean damn, folks, let's just look at the top 10 at BGG:
* Twilight Struggle. Models the work of nations. No characters. No worries.
* Terra Mystica. Personally I do not love that there are, what, 1 or 2 races represented by female characters? And they're curvy hotties, IIRC. It would cost them literally nothing to dial down the witches and mermaids. Or gosh, maybe a female dwarf in the dwarf art. Please let's hear someone howl about "real dwarves." Please. I'm begging you.
* Caverna: Females on the cover. They're dwarves. Game, set, match.
* Through the Ages: Would dearly love to see some female leaders folded in there. Kind of suffers from the Great Man theory of history.
* Puerto Rico: Slaves. Awesome. Let them be slaves. Let's interrogate that fact of history, Archipelago-style. Otherwise, no characters.
Halfway through the list, not seeing any problems so far.
* Agricola: You make babies. Sorry dudes, you need wimmenfolk around for that. And yet the game's mechanisms are entire gender neutral. No big, no worries.
* Netrunner: Plenty of female art on the runner cards and I think on the rest of the set. Honestly I don't know. But card games are an awesome place to put diversity on display. Rarely do we get to see ethnicity, and man that's so important for inclusiveness. Unless of course you're not actually interesting in inclusion.
* Mage Knight: Two female knights, a lizard, the rest are lads (well, I'm making assumptions about the elf and the orc). Not an awesome spread but not terrible. Could stand to see some variety.
* Eclipse: IIRC the gender and ethnicity spread of the six human play boards is explicit. And you know what? The game plays juuuuust fine.
* Castles of Burgundy: Dunno, never played it, assume it's all castles? Are there characters on cards?
I can't see a single game here where it's vitally important that any character representation be white, male and/or straight. So where's the emergency? Why raise the red flags?
Paul Beakley I guess that's the point. Women still play a lot of games regardless of supposedly being "excluded" from representation in the games themselves (heck, they often outnumber the guys at the tables at my local boardgame cafe). Granted I don't see a lot playing heavy euros like the ones on that list (though I know several who do), but does that really matter?
ReplyDeleteSo sure, it'd be nice to see more female characters in games. But I don't think it's essential at all, I don't think it would really bring any more women to gaming (and I don't think there's any evidence at all that would happen even if they did. Is there even any out there?), and I don't really see any need to pressure any publishers into including representations into their games.
If people want to encourage more women (or anyone else they feel is "excluded from the hobby"), then maybe they should just try asking them if they want to play some games. I seriously doubt that "there are no female characters in this game" is really an obstacle that prevents them from trying.
Constantine Thomas I can assure you that you are wrong on that count. But I guess we can make assertions at each other all day and night and get nowhere.
ReplyDeleteWhat does it cost you, personally, to see more female representation? Especially when it's patently obvious that there's no additional impact on theme or gameplay beyond representation? In what way do you, personally, suffer?
"Screaming preemptively"? Oh well, I think this convo has run its course...
ReplyDeleteThat's re Joe Grimer's first post to this thread.
ReplyDeleteEDIT: We're saying the same thing, Dave.
Paul Beakley I don't. And tbh I don't really care what the characters in a game are because most of the time they're irrelevant to the gameplay.
ReplyDeleteBut I don't really see the point of fixing a problem without first demonstrating that it is actually a real problem with some hard evidence. It's not enough for people to declare that "there aren't enough female characters in games" - they'd have to actually show that women are staying away from gaming because of that. As you say, mere assertions don't mean much.
I get that it's something that some people aren't happy with, but that doesn't actually mean there's something wrong with the hobby that needs to be 'fixed' (and even if there was, that doesn't mean that addressing that particular issue would be the way to fix it).
Constantine Thomas female players are saying it's a problem. Why aren't you taking their word for it?
ReplyDeletePunning Pundit I don't believe I suggested that specifically. My point was that if the hypothesis is "women are staying away from gaming because they're not presented as characters in games equally" then you need to look at some data that's capable of showing whether that's actually the case or not.
ReplyDeleteJust posting a list of games with one person's opinion on whether they do well in that regard or not is not the data you need here. Sales figures might help, but you don't really have a way to compare those with what the 'equal ideal' could be unless you have two editions of a game that changed specifically to include more female characters. So at the end of the day, how can you tell whether the hypothesis is correct?
Paul Beakley because it's anecdotal evidence, not real data. And I'd say the same thing if if it was male players complaining about something too.
ReplyDeleteThere's also a difference between people saying something is a problem and something actually being a problem. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but just saying "I have a problem with it" doesn't demonstrate that it really is - it just means you have a negative opinion about something.
Alicia Smith There is a game about Ching Shih that came out recently called Madame Ching, I don't know much about it though.
ReplyDeleteIt's the same problem as comics, isn't it? The publishers say girls don't read comics, so they don't improve representation and, what a surprise, girls don't read comics. The data is self fulfilling prophecy.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure you also saw the follow-up data about Thor sales when the female Thor appeared, yes? In case you didn't: they made record sales (and not just among female readers).
Paul Beakley I didn't, largely because I really don't get and am not interested in the idea of a "female Thor" (because Thor is the SON of Odin. Anything else isn't Thor). Besides, comics are changing to have stronger, more realistic female characters.
ReplyDeleteBut that doesn't really demonstrate anything anyway. They changed a character, it got record sales. Would they have got similar sales if they'd changed Thor in any other way? You don't know, and neither do I - unfortunately without access to alternate-universe technology we won't find out either.
The Flying Frog Games (A Touch of Evil, Fortune and Glory, Last Night on Earth), aside from whether they are good games or not, do have quite a selection of different races, ages, and genders for players to choose to play as their characters.
ReplyDeleteSo is your answer to anything I say going to be "well we can't know for sure without being able to evaluate it against alternate realities"? Really?
ReplyDeleteAs the father of a daughter, lack of representation matters like crazy to me as well. I pick books with female protagonists. The boardgames we pick to play feature female characters in the art. I think that, if you don't have a daughter yourself, it's really hard to explain how important that is. OTOH I can also see how it would be challenging or even threatening if your goal as a parent is to help form your girl's self-image in a very traditional/conservative way.
As you say, comics are changing. And that's awesome. I can't fathom why boardgames should not as well. It costs you nothing other than, maybe in some theoretical future, you might be forced at gunpoint to have a female or POC or gay character on your play mat or cards. How awful that will be.
I feel like setting the burden of proof to whatever "real data" means is not in any way productive.
ReplyDeleteWhat I know is, it's not more expensive to draw pictures of women instead of men. Brown skin isn't more expensive to paint than white skin. There is no opportunity cost for publishers whose games include characters to make their characters diverse. There's no call to exclude white male characters from games. There's no call to get revisionist and change games that already exist. No one is losing anything, in this proposed future. It costs nothing.
However, if someone has to do scientifically rigorous research on the effects of failed representation in games, that means access to research funds and possibly a time machine. That's either expensive or impossible!
I am willing to trust the eyewitness accounting of people I've talked to who want to feel included, and currently feel like they're not.
Well, I guess you'll have to forgive me for trying to see if there's any reality to peoples' subjective perceptions and claims. I'm not one to jump on a bandwagon just because someone complains about something, I want to see some evidence to validate their claims first. As should everyone, if any sensible, rational decisions are to be made about anything.
ReplyDeleteI really don't see how women are being "excluded" from the hobby just because of art in games or what gender is used in rules. If they are being "excluded", I think it's far more likely that it'd be because of attitudes at the table itself, or because some types of games simply aren't that appealing to them.
And frankly, I've seen big groups of men and women playing at my local boardgame cafe. Heck, more often than not I see more groups of women playing than men. I've not heard any of them commenting about how there aren't enough female characters in games, or refusing to play games without female characters in them. It just doesn't seem to be an issue around here at least.
Personally, I don't really care either way if characters in a game are male or female though because I don't play or judge games for the characters in them. So put them in, I don't give a damn. I know that in games that I've seen that do have characters in them, I see a mix of both. That geeklist linked to in the OP is awful for this purpose, because its author seems to be picking games at random regardless of whether they even have characters in them or not. If they want to even have any basis for complaint then they should be only picking games where there are characters, and then looking at the male/female breakdown - and then asking if it's even appropriate to have an even mix of characters there given the context of a game.
As far as I'm concerned, this is just an claim that someone's made with little supporting evidence. As such, I don't see any reason to start making demands and getting all outraged about it.
Personally I think all this is manufactured, divisive controversy that just distracts people from doing what they're actually wanting to do - which is to play games and have fun. If you want to include people in gaming, then get out there and include them, and you'll probably find more often than not that very few people really care about things like perceived omissions in artwork.
Feeling excluded is by definition subjective. Your demand that it be somehow codified and proven via data is a convenient way to dismiss these concerns as merely a matter of taste/subjectivity, but of course it is. How could it be anything different?
ReplyDelete"It's not a problem for me, I don't see what the fuss is about" is the very definition of privilege. And your insistence that nothing change because a subjective objection cannot be proooooven without math and/or the ability to travel time and dimensions is weak sauce. Absence of proof is not proof of absence and all that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance if you want to read up on it.
Happily the world doesn't care, not one bit. The publishers and designers will do what they want, and if the invisible hand of the market pushes them toward diversifying character representation, that's what will happen. And it is. Asserting ideas like "changing slaves to Fakir was a PC move to appease a minority voice" is absurd on its face. Why on earth would a for-profit publisher do that?
Things are changing, things will change, and standing athwart history yelling Stop makes not one bit of difference.
Oh ffs, stop being so hysterical about it. I've already said I don't care either way about it. But your sort of reaction is exactly why people can't have a rational discussion about pretty much anything nowadays.
ReplyDelete(and don't get me started on that Five Tribes BS. Replacing Slaves with Fakirs was ridiculous because it was a shallow, cosmetic change that didn't actually fix the problem that was being complained about. Instead of sacrificing slaves to demons, now you kidnap beggars off the street and sacrifice them to the djinn (ignoring the fact that you do the same to Elders in either case, but that's OK because they're just "meeples") - but that's somehow supposed to be "better" because slaves aren't involved? It's typical of how short-sighted and irrational people are when it comes to these "touchy" issues).
But evidently you've decided to see me as The Enemy here despite the fact that I've repeatedly said that I don't mind or care if anyone decides to add more women or any other "excluded" group to games, but that's that. Good luck with your crusades, I guess - we're done here.
Hysterical!
ReplyDeleteIf this is you not caring about it, you're doing a terrible job.
Haha blocked, awesome. Very calm and rational, no hysteria there.
ReplyDeleteOn the pirate theme Merchants and Marauders has a selection of captains from various sexes and backgrounds. For other games if sex or race don't matter then don't denote one. If flavour is the reason, like Shadowrun Crossfire, every race has a male and female version.
ReplyDeleteThe whole principle is not a case of if there is a demand for equality but that it hurts no one to have equality in a game. There are some exceptions that could be made for games that specifically model some narrow event. Even this argument is hard to justify for new games bing produced given the heightened awareness of equality in all spectrums. Even if there were statistics to prove it wasn't needed it's still a bad choice to not strive for it. Because again a goal of equality should never be seen as the wrong statistical target.
Funny thing is I've never claimed that it would do any harm to have "more inclusive" artwork in a game.
ReplyDeleteAll I've asked is for some evidence that not having it there is somehow doing damage to the hobby or driving people away or excluding them. If there is, I'll gladly accept that - if not, then I'll shrug and say that at best you need to use a different argument to make your case (or at worst maybe that your case is baseless and not as bad as you claim it to be). But apparently some people don't even want to find out what the data is, and would just rather shriek at anyone who dares to disagrees with them - because you know, if others can't see their point then they must be "part of the problem".
As far as I'm concerned If anyone starts saying "we don't need evidence", or thinks the best way to persuade people is to shout emotional arguments at them, or starts using conspiracy theory language to try to promote their cause then their cause is already lost. I don't have the time or inclination to deal with that sort of person, and I don't see why I should be obliged to waste my time reading their posts or hearing what they say either until or unless they adopt a more civilised attitude.
Or to put it like you did - a goal of rational discourse should never be seen as the wrong way to discuss something.
Your entirely missing the point. There doesn't need to be statistical evidence. The goal should always be equality. What is the magic number that would suddenly make the statistic needed? There is no magic number that should suddenly set off the light bulb that says it's better to design games that have a majority of people in mind instead of potentially excluding them.
ReplyDeleteChris Groff No, I'm not missing the point. I'm saying that you need to demonstrate that the inequalities you claim are there are preventing people from entering the hobby, or forcing them to leave it. Show what the problem is and show that fixing it would improve the situation instead of just blindly charging ahead and trying to fix something that may not even be the cause of the perceived problem in the first place.
ReplyDeleteThat is a separate point from "the goal should always be equality". Maybe it should, but how do you know that achieving "equality" (whatever that means) would provide any significant benefits? If every game suddenly were to become "equal" in its presentation, do you honestly think that women (or "minorities" or anyone else) would suddenly flood to the boardgaming hobby? I strongly doubt it, because I don't think that the presentation of characters and gender in boardgames is what's keeping anyone away from it - I think those are pretty superficial issues in the grand scheme of things.
I think it's far more likely that cost, or social circumstances (not having people to play with, peer pressure against gaming etc), overly complex rules explanations, people not being open-minded to newcomers in groups, and other more immediate and obvious issues are far bigger obstacles that can exclude people from games than whether there are enough of a specific kind of character presented in a game.
I'd rather see us focussing on getting more PEOPLE involved in and interested in gaming - not focussing on any specific gender, ethnicity, orientation or whatever (and I do see that, and I think it's great). I don't want to see the sort of hostile, divisive, irrational, antagonistic, in-your-face approach and language used by others in this thread getting in the way of that.
Yes, yes, yes. Equality is not the singular reason that some people aren't interested, it's probably not even in the top five. I'm not suggesting that equality is the driving force. It may never garner one new player. But that still doesn't matter it shouldn't be a goal. Fortunately it's also an easily achievable one and many designers are realizing that. To want proof that equality will bring new players before striving for it is so backwards.
ReplyDeleteIf "lack of equality" is not the cause of the problem (or even in the top five causes), then doing anything about it isn't the solution - as far as I'm concerned it's just wasting time and effort on feel-good window-dressing.
ReplyDeletePeople can do whatever they want with the gender of characters in games in future. If they're changing it then whoopee, good for them. I just don't think it'll change or improve anything, because it's mostly likely a completely insignificant contributor to the reason why some people feel excluded from gaming.
But apparently people are only interested in blowing up superficial issues like this out of all proportion and focussing on them, and not in finding out what those other bigger issues may be or in doing something about those. Well done, I guess?
Attitudes are often a leading factor why people feel excluded from anything. Saying that equality is a trivial or insignificant thing probably isn't the right attitude we want to show in this hobby.
ReplyDeleteAsking that people demonstrate the inequalities isn't really a fair request. If you dismiss the anecdotal evidence, it leaves only formalized studies that we know aren't going to happen. You've set things up such that no one will be able to say anything to you that will you convince you otherwise, and you've given yourself no reason to challenge your own beliefs. But it's not hard to believe that a lack of representation in games could deter women and minorities from playing and feeling included. When looking at similar media, we've seen a surge in sales and interest when female and minority characters were included. It's of course arguable that a new Thor of any type could have caused the sales surge at this point, but the previous new Thor failed to have this sustained sales increase. Then there's the popularity of the likes of Captain Marvel and Ms. Marvel, and I suspect Spider-Woman and Spider-Gwen will be referred to similarly in a year from now.
ReplyDeleteWe could also look at educational theories and studies about oppression and inclusion, and we find that lack of representation in the hard sciences is indeed a factor in why some women and minorities do not pursue paths in those fields. People want to feel included. People don't want to feel like a minority that's simply allowed to be there.
But like I said, it's a factor. Like you, I want to focus on getting people involved in the hobby. I know there's no magic bullet. You also have to make many of the gaming venues feel safe for the non-white, the non-male, and the non-straight. You also have to fight the various stereotypes about board gaming that still exist. You also have to improve the accessibility of board games, which is a statement that can and should be taken in various ways. There's a lot involved, and no one is saying that there is only way to fix it. But will it help to improve representation where possible? Absolutely! It's one of the easier barriers to address, so let's have the game companies work that one while we and our mindful peers work on the other factors out in the field.
Good thing I'm not saying that then, isn't it. Do try reading what I actually said instead of what you think I'm saying.
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying that equality itself is insignificant or trivial or superficial - it's the supposed "inequality in how characters are presented in boardgames" that is insignificant and trivial. You said it yourself - that's most likely not even a major cause of the issues, or why some people are feeling excluded.
But I feel I'm talking to a brick wall here. If you want to keep misrepresenting what I say then there's not much point in continuing this discussion.
If it's such a superficial issue, it's easily fixed. It's annoying me and other people. Ever tried to sleep in a room with a mosquito? Let's swat it.
ReplyDeleteI should not have to go out and CHANGE THE WORLD before I merely ask that game designers consider giving me games with an equal number of meaningful female characters that aren't cheesecake, and gender neutral or equal time rules. I spotted this interesting article - http://www.themarysue.com/wonder-forge-justice-league-game-response/
So game designers, suppose you perceive that your game, which is a themey sort of one, would not be ruined by having female characters, and you want to be friendly to women players. How do you go about this?
What do you do to earn all gold stars from the originator of the geek list?
Also consider adding to the geeklist, people have been adding to it, the owner takes submissions.
ReplyDeleteConstantine Thomas if no one understands what you are saying, maybe you are saying it wrong.
ReplyDeleteWoman here. Woman gamer.
ReplyDeleteI am personally annoyed when the only characters with depth or ability I can play are male. I am also annoyed when there are fewer female characters to choose from than males.
I am not so annoyed that I don't play, because, I love playing board games. There are things that annoy me more, like bad game mechanics. There are things that annoy me less (but annoy others more), like similar-colored game pieces.
I haven't asked any of the women I play with if they are similarly annoyed, but now I plan to. I'd like to know. I asked my husband, if he had the choice between playing two equally-powered characters, one male and one female, which would he choose, and he quite reasonably said male. I asked him why, and he said because it would be more comfortable. This sort of highlights why I am annoyed by the gender disparity in games. I am expected to just go ahead and just be uncomfortable in most games, because that is my only choice. Men don't have that problem. Ok, sure, for me it is a minor discomfort. An annoyance, as I said. But it is constant.
I don't know how much of a role gender inequity plays in drawing or turning away female gamers, but from some of the comments above, I reckon it's not zero.
Do the male gamers here ever deliberately choose to play female pieces/characters (given no special power or ability disparity), or do you tend to choose male characters? And...why? (I am genuinely curious, and I sincerely hope I'm not starting something here.)
I really like that geeklist Alicia posted. It has broadened my perspective even more. There are a variety of gender issues discussed I hadn't put much thought to, yet, and it's interesting to see that other people besides myself are also bothered by some things. And I'm glad to hear about some games (on the list and in this thread)that have the gender balance thing figured out! :)
Thank you Jenn Mitchell , that was very interesting! I'd be fascinated to hear what the female gamers you speak to have to say.
ReplyDeleteJenn Mitchell I actually like playing female characters in games. Especially in very thematic games, part of the idea is too be someone or something you are not (maybe more so in RPG's, but again, in highly thematic games it can be the case). Anyhow, over the years I've become comfortable with who I am, so it doesn't bother me at all.
ReplyDeleteJenn Mitchell I play a mix, possibly tending towards the female end more.
ReplyDeleteIf various characters have different abilities I look to those first, not gender. If there is no difference between them the usually I'll just pick my a favourite colour.
ReplyDeleteI don't care what gender the characters are, because it's just a bit of wood or card that allows me to do something in the game, not a projection or representation of my own sexuality or gender or whatever. I'll just play whichever ones have the abilities I want to use in the game.
ReplyDeleteConstantine Thomas But if the abilities are equal, would you choose a male character or a female one, or just grab at random?
ReplyDeleteJenn Mitchell Well I guess the only game I can think of like that is Cluedo (e.g. there's no difference between Col Mustard and Miss Peacock) - in most games I've seen that have characters there's usually something to distinguish them and reasons to take one over another that go beyond gender. But if they're all identical then it wouldn't make any difference to anything which one I chose anyway. So I'd just probably pick at random.
ReplyDeleteBecause as I said, at the end of the day it's just bits of card or wood or paper. Why do we need to project gender or sexuality into that at all? Why do we need those to look like specific genders to feel validated? (I mean, boardgames aren't exactly the first place I'd think of to look for role models or inspiration or validation).
I guess I think that if it made no difference, none of the designers would make anything with a gender. They'd all just be meeples or robots or something, and pronouns would be "it/they" instead of "he/she."
ReplyDeleteBut thank you for your response. Lots of men here seems to be more flexible on this than my husband. :)
For folks who "don't get it", I enjoy using my imagination, it's always been a pretty active one since I was a kid, so I guess that is part of what makes the difference for me. To me the world is not simply cold, hard numbers...it still has some life left in it.
ReplyDeleteJenn Mitchell I suspect that in a lot of cases they do just use meeples (e.g. carcassonne) if it's not important and you're just playing "a person". (Cluedo's a weirdo one I guess, but the point is that it's a simple deduction game about the people who'd show up at the house, so they may as well be a mix of men and women even if they're all the same in practise. But I guess you could just replace them with "purple meeple" and "blue meeple" and "red meeple" etc and not really have much of a practical difference - though it wouldn't really fit the theme very well)
ReplyDeleteIf however there's some kind of theme or story to the game and there's a "Queen Valeria" character in the game then she'd be better represented by a picture of a queen on a token or character sheet rather than a random generic meeple.
But either way, I don't see why it should have to make any difference to whether or not someone wants to play the game.
"Why does it always say 'he', Aunty, in the rules?" "Why isn't there a girl character in this game, Aunty?" What do I answer?"It shouldn't make any difference to whether you want to play it?" Of course not, but there you go, subtle conditioning from the get go that what she thinks doesn't matter, she's just a girl, she's not wanted whether or not the game designers intended that or not.
ReplyDeleteRepresentation matters - I don't want my little niece to grow up thinking she should think any less of her gender or that boys are more valuable. Neither, apparently are the fathers of girls who have discussed the topic on this thread.
And I would prefer not to have objectified and trivialised depictions of women in characters and artwork in my face, it's disrespectful of me and of women in general. That's part of why it makes a difference as to whether or not someone wants to play the game.
So, how else can we promote m/f equality in games? The double sided cards with sexes on each side has been mentioned, and has a lot going for it. In rules writing - now, there's a tricky one.
Alternating he and she just seems awkward to me she/he or he/she is clumsy to read aloud.
They?
The player draws two cards, and then if they like the look of them may keep both, or if they don't, they can then discard one of them. They must keep the other.
That's not too bad, I suppose.
Alicia Smith I'm curious - what games are you playing with your niece that that have male-only characters anyway, where she's asking those questions?
ReplyDeleteOne of my friends has two daughters (8-10 yrs old) and we've played Tokaido, Survive: Escape from Atlantis, King of Tokyo, and Takenoko. Of those Tokaido's the only one with characters and the girls didn't really think twice about what characters they wanted to play or not, they just went for the ones they liked the look/sound of most (I think one played a male character and the other a female one). They didn't seem to care that all the monsters in King of Tokyo were by implication male either. For them at least it wasn't an issue.
The rules gender question is a thorny one. I think "he/him" works fine, but I know that it's a standard that's just there to make things easier to read and that no sexism is intended in it (and most of the time - at least in RPG books - that's said up front, though I've not seen it said much in boardgame rules). I don't particularly care if it's replaced with "she/her", though it does sound a bit strange to me after a while and sounds like it's excluding men so I guess that doesn't solve the problem. Switching between "he/him" and "she/her" works, but I find the constant changing a bit jarring. Using "he/she" is just too awkward IMO, and I think "they" just sounds horrible no matter what. And "it" is right out :).
It's unfortunate that the english language doesn't have a decent generic/neutral singular pronoun to use in such cases, but that's how it is I guess. Maybe rules should just refer to readers/players in the second-person instead (i.e. "you") and skirt the whole thing?
"I don't particularly care if it's replaced with "she/her", though it does sound a bit strange to me after a while"
ReplyDeleteWhy should it? I've had to put up with "He/him" since I started reading. Is it okay for women to be excluded all this time but suddenly when it's men it sounds a bit strange? Just because it's not intended as sexism doesn't mean it's not perpetuating sexism.
You might see what I'm getting at.
Perhaps alternating usage might be the way to go, after all.
There are gender neutral terms, but I don't think there's much enthusiasm for them, I suspect because most people have never heard of them. Zie and zer? Something like that.
About the games with only male characters. The original Citadels was one of them. Castle Panic was griped about, and there were grumblings about the Governor's Daughter in Black Fleet. That at least doesn't have male or female characters as such - you're just directing ships and improving them, as yourself, so that's something at least.
Alicia Smith Steady on. Yeah, I get why it sounds strange to me, because if they use "she" all the time then it sounds like the manual is referring to someone who isn't me (a male). But I also get that it's a placeholder for 'the player' and that we're generally going to have to use one gender term or the other to make it readable. Which is why I'm OK with it whether it's "he" or "she" all the time.
ReplyDeleteI don't like alternating usage because it's jarring, both because it's inconsistent and because when it's female I get the same "not referring to me" feel that you get when it's just male all the time - but I can live with it. And those gender neutral terms just sound ridiculous to me.
I'm fine with a compromise that alternates the genders in the text, but at the end of the day that's probably about as good as it's going to get in that regard given the underlying linguistic problems here.
So have you actually tried just playing games that DO have female characters in them, rather than perpetuating the problem by playing games that have only male ones? There's not much you're going to be able to do about games that already exist that have only male characters, after all. so if they're that much of a problem then why not find games that do have mixed characters?
I think you have to think of the target audience too. Maybe you'd like the concept of "target audience" to be abolished and things should be aimed at everyone equally, but that's probably not going to happen because among other reasons men and women just don't like the same things. You could have a game about dress-making that has male and female characters, but that's probably not going to appeal to a lot of male players. Or a game about directly competing with eachother to brutally kill as many monsters as possible, which probably wouldn't appeal to a lot of female players even if half of the characters were female. So should you force male and female players to like both for the ideal of equality? I don't think that would be a good idea.
Regardless of anyone's ideals of equality, that sort of thing isn't going to go away. I'd like to see games that appeal to both men and women, but I don't want to see games that appeal more to one gender or the other disappear in the process in the name of "equality".
Me? Play games with female characters? That's a very odd question to ask? Why would I not? Finding games with female characters that are empowered practical people, that's a bit of a challenge.
ReplyDeleteHence my original starting off of this thread by publicizing a useful geeklist, and hoping people add to it good and bad.
I have played games with all male characters, but I would be pleasantly surprised to find that you'd played a game with all female characters characters. Such imbalance, and yet we are potentially half the gaming population.
I have avoided buying games that objectify women, and I am looking long and hard at the games I am buying.
Well, I guess that's the thing isn't it. If publishers put female characters in games they may get accused of objectifying them by the very people they're trying to appease, or of making them weaker or making them bad role models or whatever (even if it isn't intended). But if people just assume that however a publisher presents female characters must be bad or sexist unless they get it absolutely 100% perfect to what their ideal is (even if it's not intended that way, because that "perpetuates it") then that's not exactly going to encourage them to equalise things.
ReplyDeleteAnd I was asking more about whether you play games that have some female characters with your niece, if you don't like playing games with only or mostly male characters. I mean... I think Pandemic has some good female characters (scientists, etc). And maybe Flash Point? Battlestar Galactica definitely has. The Resistance games and Coup do, as does Love Letter. Lords of Waterdeep has one Lady (but she's a random draw), though I think women show up on the cards a fair bit. Terra Mystica and Eclipse has them in the race pictures, X-Wing has some female pilots, 7 Wonders has female Leaders and they're on some other cards. I don't think any of those are objectified or weak or whatever.
I'm not exactly having difficulty coming up with games that you could be playing if you want stronger female representation here (and that's just looking at the games on my shelves here).
I am quite sure that publishers are perfectly able to put female characters in games in a non-objectifying way. There's a difference between a sexy dress and a chainmail bikini. I've seen it done. It can be done and it's absolutely wonderful when it does. That's a bit of a thin argument.
ReplyDeleteOh yes, I will be certainly looking at what games I'll be showing to any kids I'm teaching. At least we can add the new characters to Citadels now.
Battlestar Galactica, Coup... mmm thanks but no, wait a few years before we go into traitor games with them I think, they're not particularly to my taste anyway and I don't own those ones. Then they will, hopefully be of an age where they won't automatically reject a game out of hand because it only has male characters, and we'll have more scope.
Lords of Waterdeep I don't know but have heard good things generally about it. I would need to know more - hey if you could answer the questions in the geek list for it, and anything else you'd like to demo, that'd be wonderful.
I will save Terra Mystica for when they're a bit older but it's something to look forward to.
Thanks for the suggestions, though, and I'd be interested to see how Lords of Waterdeep stacks up, if you have the time to answer the questions. It would probably be an interesting exercise for you - and for us to hear the results of - to hear how your favourite games stack up against the questions. I'm certainly going to do it with mine and submit it.
There's going to be some hard data there - does this game have female characters is pretty much a straight yes or no question, it's not really subjective.
Here's the format, quoting from the original geeklist https://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/170291/are-there-women-game-geeklist
"
• How much gender does the game have? Do the players pick a gendered character to represent them?
• Are there female characters, and how many?
- None.
- Token female characters. ('The woman' is a character trait the way 'the tough one' is.)
- Several/substantial female presence.
- Half or more of characters are female.
• Are the female characters' looks or abilities dictated by gender roles? (This one is very subjective.)
- Female characters are all stereotypes. No character is female without a 'reason'.
- Some variation in gender roles.
- Gender roles varied, though some patterns remain.
- No particular gender roles.
N/A - No characters, or so few that 'variation' is meaningless.
(I have yet to run into a game that has strict gender roles for men but not for women. I will try to comment on how tightly controlled male characters are when it's salient, even if it's not part of the rating..)
• Does the game treat its players as all male in rulebook text, in game text, in examples...?
• How do I feel about this game when I put my gender hat on? (This is extra subjective and is not a summary of the other questions. Sometimes a game just feels okay or not okay to me.)
I don't think I've run into any game characters who fall outside the gender binary, so this list is in terms of "male" and "female". Real people's gender is more complicated than that."
you need to demonstrate that the inequalities you claim are there are preventing people from entering the hobby
ReplyDeleteWhen you're asking people to labor for you, it often works better to use phrases like "would you please" in place of "you need to". And it is worth noting that, in fact, no one does need to.
The other thing, do you believe for a second that the toy industry doesn't have statistics and "evidence" to back up the obvious differences in the way they market toys to girls and boys? Have you never noted the phenomenon where boys don't want to play with girl toys and girls don't want to play with boys'? What would possibly make you think the same trends that govern the toys to which children are attracted wouldn't govern the hobbies that appeal to them?
And finally, my daughter is disinterested in board games, though she plays a few, and has explained it by expressing the perception that they are for boys and referring to box art. So there! Unless you posit that I am simply lying, there is your evidence that girls are less interested in entering our hobby because of seemingly trivial stuff like box art.
Wow the sealioning is still rolling? Astonishing.
ReplyDeleteI was told perpetual motion was impossible, but I guess not!
Ooh, thank you Paul Beakley I had to go look that up, I hadn't heard the term before. But there have been useful things along the way.
ReplyDeleteI can't keep up with the new slang these days, I thought sealioning was when someone couldn't provide evidence for their claims...I guess that is not the case. I'm old...I still use skater slang that died out in the mid-nineties...
ReplyDeleteI think it's kinda pathetic when someone I've blocked is still managing to find ways to insult me - particularly when the term "Sealioning" is usually applied to Gamergaters (a group that I loathe) by SJWs (who I also loathe - personally I wish that both groups would spontaneously combust and leave the rest of us in peace).
ReplyDeleteBut you know what? I come here to hear about and talk about cool board game experiences and rules, not to put up with people who want to use this group as a soapbox for their outrage about social issues. Leave all the social discussion for other forums, eh?
Well, nice to see you've simply resorted to telling people to shut-up. You're a real pillar of the community for sure.
ReplyDeleteEnough of that folks.
ReplyDeleteI've submitted an entry for The Great Dalmuti, which I'm pleased to report has over half female depictions. Still not sure about one of the jesters! Looks kind of androgynous to me. They're in typical gender roles but pretty tasteful costume and some in definite positions of authority. The manual used he/she "his or her" which was cool.
I might do Cornish Smuggler next, when I have the time.
Alicia Smith Sorry, didn't mean to bring that here..just got irritated.
ReplyDeleteYou're a Mice & Mystics fan, Clinton Coddington - if you have the rules available how do they deal with he's and she's?
ReplyDeleteAlicia Smith Oh, the avatar is actually from the comic Mouse Guard, I do want Mice and Mystics, but I don't have it yet.
ReplyDeleteAnd here I've been thinking for all this time it was from M&M :-) Oh well, if you have a random set of rules near you for anything, what do they say?
ReplyDeleteEveryone can have a shot of this, actually. Let's generate actual data.
thinking I guess I could make a google doc or graph or something? Maybe? Maybe not clog this already huge thread with responses. That seems like a better idea.
ReplyDeleteAlicia Smith I just read through the Mice and Mystics rule book. people are referred too as the player/people or the mouse/mice. The only time gender is mentioned is when they are talking about a male cat that stalks the mice. 2 out of 6 characters are female, the archer and the healer and in my opinion, they are tastefully done, but they are also mice, so there is that.
ReplyDeleteExcellent, very interesting, and thank you!
ReplyDeletehttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17bz99TsrnJG9ac9CYfbdjab1mG5dDadNhPiFvCe8WCM/edit?usp=sharing I hope
ReplyDeletehttps://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/191907/games-awesome-picturesillustrations-female-charact
ReplyDeletePretty good followup thread to the first one!
Those comments tho. :(
I know I know, rule 1 of internetting.
...and alas, the further down the thread you go the faster it devolves.
ReplyDeleteThink I'll not take that step.
ReplyDelete