D
Deleted member 126221
Unconfirmed Member
...?????
The Game Awards jury lists only 2 women out of 32 jurors (sites selected jurors)
- Thread starter Lime
- Start date
...?????
I don't know for sure and I obviously don't have enough information to say anything for sure, but I'd imagine the different outlets picked based on availability, seniority, and some other random factors, but I wouldn't expect them to just try to "make themselves look good" or something.
It's a complicated issue, but if each outlet picked people independently...I don't see how a ratio would come from that. There's a series of factors that would go into this that don't directly have to do with gender.
It's a complicated issue, but if each outlet picked people independently...I don't see how a ratio would come from that. There's a series of factors that would go into this that don't directly have to do with gender.
Atomic Playboy
Member
Everyone knows the ability to objectively critique video games is directly proportional to the length of one's penis. That's just science.
/s
mentallyinept
Banned
Now this is actually an interesting thought exercise.
If the point of the panel is to send nothing but the most qualified people possible to weigh in on this years crop of games, then the man in this scenario should go.
If the point of the panel is to bring together a wide range of people from differing backgrounds and perspectives to weigh in on this years crop of games, then given the ratio, everyone screwed up and should reconsider their nominations, and the woman from this particular organization should go.
Ninja Scooter
Member
People getting defensive (not you specifically)about something they don't even understand is also pretty weird.
I'll have to check real quick if Vice really doesn't have female editors writing about games.
igordennis
Member
And you agree that men and women have hugely different experiences right? Then we are in agreement.
Gotdatmoney
Member
I love it. Everything is a coincidence. Always is.
You misread the post.
That are on permanent payroll? I'd be surprised.
Oh my fucking goodness. You're the one who keeps saying that sexism can't exist without malice because you can't bring a lawsuit without showing malice but you just have no idea what you're talking about.
Coffee Dog
Banned
See? Nobody's saying that the types of games people enjoy are 100% related to their sexual organs, it's just much more likely to the point that it justifies making sweeping generalizations.
Which is why I don't get the people boycotting the Game Awards as listed by the OP.
Yeah, I think we are in agreement.
This is really the issue. This award show is just a symptom of the larger overall problem. You can try a number of ways with varying success to try and fix a jury from being overwhelmingly male and white but that isn't going to fix why that happened.
It's unfortunate that the award show is this way but the real problem is with the publications and the staff they've hired. That is what needs to be looked at an addressed more than anything. We need to look past the jury and see the reason why.
it's about analysis and writing/conveyance. Then the user feedback of any review/article (....engagement). That's how you assess who the most qualified person is on subjective matter/material.
Ninja Scooter
Member
To bring attention to the issue.
If one of these publications just sent out a tweet saying "hey we really have to do something about female representation in games journalism" do you think there'd be a 15 page GAF thread on it?
Yeah, that's a bad play.
Unless you're talking about the people that receded their participation, they're using their position to shine a light on the issue. That happens all the time and we're usually better off for it when it does. Remember the 76 Olympics? Same deal on a much smaller scale.
D
Deleted member 126221
Unconfirmed Member
You'll have to be more precise then that because I'm not sure I get it.
How do you objectively judge "analysis and writing/conveyance" (and what does it mean exactly)?
And engagement... You mean having lots of pageviews/comments?
uh
No. I don't know why you're asking me if I was 'saying' something I blatantly was not saying, and you're being very obtuse. A white guy and an Asian girl might both like big-budget RPGs. The differences in how they were raised under society's expectations for them and their cultural and ethnic backgrounds affect what they might see in the those games, and what's important for them and what these games do right or wrong. When you're deciding something by a collective vote, these sorts of distinctions become important for moderating and challenging an otherwise homogenized perspective. Diverse backgrounds inform diverse and more representative opinions and priorities. I don't think I sound particularly radical here.
I never said white dudes would never vote for Her Story, but by and large their reasons aren't coming from the exact same space as a woman might, so I don't know what the heck you're freaking out about.
What a shame.
Hm, it seems there at least 3 women who have been writing for them lately...
Slappers Only
Junior Member
As long as the people who are judging the games actually played them and want to be part of the panel who votes, I don't care who it is.
This whole thing isn't a question of which games are the objective best. Results from this are a direct reflection of the process, who's measuring and how. Do you want to know what 32 "gamer dudes" really liked from this year? Okay. How about gamer women instead? Sure. Do you want to know what a the feelings of a "balanced" group of people from all over the place average out too? That's okay too.
This whole thing isn't a question of which games are the objective best. Results from this are a direct reflection of the process, who's measuring and how. Do you want to know what 32 "gamer dudes" really liked from this year? Okay. How about gamer women instead? Sure. Do you want to know what a the feelings of a "balanced" group of people from all over the place average out too? That's okay too.
viveks86
Member
How else do you raise awareness? Boycotting and hating are two very different things. It's the best way to put a spotlight on the issue and get people to talk about it and hopefully find ways to improve the situation over time
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
but she isn't less qualified, she specifically meets the qualifications. At worst she's less experienced.
Probably freelance.
It's kind of crazy, the women with the most powerful voices and the most pointed views towards video games are all freelance. It's actually incredibly difficult to come up with a short list of people who work in games journalism full time, on payroll, in an editorial fashion. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there's ever, in the history of modern video games, been a female EIC in games journo.
Isn't the "game awards" mostly an advertising event and the sites picked are simply the big mainstream sites (who then send a senior editor / EIC)?
Completely unsurprising result.
Am i underestimating the importance of these awards or is this a case of wishing this show was actually about gaming as a whole?
Completely unsurprising result.
Am i underestimating the importance of these awards or is this a case of wishing this show was actually about gaming as a whole?
Gotdatmoney
Member
She is the candidated with the lesser of the qualifications among the available candidates. That is the literal definition of being less qualified. Your qualifications are in comparison to your competition.
I'm not saying that sexism "can't exist" - I am completely aware that it does exist as does every type of discrimination. But just because there are no women in the Game Awards Judges panel - it doesn't mean that any woman was discriminated against because of her gender. No woman has even complained about this (as far as we know). Again - where is the issue here SPECIFICALLY talking about the Game Awards panel? All i see is a manufactured issue.
Not hard to understand at all, really.
Architechnophile
Member
What you've just described is a purely subjective method of assessing a journalist's qualifications.
For better or for worse, The Game Awards are the most visible game award event of the year, and very much in a position to affect and pioneer change.
If you review material - how well do you understand the topic. How well do you prove your points. How do readers react to your work.
Gotdatmoney
Member
The general idea of this is to point out that if they give a position to the woman over the man it doesnt imply they settled or a lack of competency. It doesnt even imply she will do a worse job. Its a pointless distinction made by people. Qualifications are established to estimate a required competency to do a job. If you meet the base qualification there is no reason you should feel like getting picked was a handout. They arent going to pick you period if they dont feel you can do the job.
autoduelist
Member
But how can we know that a group of 50, or even 100 males [or females, or race/ethnicity] are 'like minded'? The assumption there is just as wrong as any perceived issue with lack of diversity.
You can not enforce gender quota without force. You 'must' do this, you 'must' do that. Force is not the solution.
Furthermore, the rabbit hole of equality is deep. Let's say we get 50/50 gender split, and now notice there are only 3 minorities on the panel. So we kick some males and females off the list and fix that. And now we notice there are no Buddhists on the panel, so we kick some Christians off and we fix that. Then we realize there are no Chinese on the panel, despite them representing 20% of the world's population. So now we need to kick 20% of the panel off and fix that. And now...
We can chase the dream of equal representation forever, and at each turn, we forcefully remove others. It's a goal that is practically dictated by force and nobody seems bothered that we're ultimatley requiring this person over that person for purely physical reasons. And no, I'm not saying there isn't a problem with 'how it is'... there is. But it's not a one sided issue, and it's far more complex than many here want to make it. There is no easy fix, and any fix implemented is, if instituted at a procedural level, one of force.
I'm not saying diversity is bad, or that we shouldn't strive for it where possible. But lack of diversity isn't inherently bad either. Many hobbies are gendered -- we can talk or argue or debate to the moon why more men don't pick up, say, quilting, and perhaps it's only because of centuries of cultural force... but at the end of the day, we still have a lack of diversity. And that's okay. We don't need to force it everywhere.
I'm certainly not opposed to more equality in this or any panel, really. But it can't be accomplished through force. And if a bunch of independent entities ended up with an unbalanced jury, the only way to fix it would be through force. And that too, is unacceptable.
Which, in this specific case, is almost immaterial, because honestly, who gives a fuck about written reviews anymore?
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
Then it's pointless to even have a cutoff.
If you require specific qualifications, everyone who meets them is equally qualified at that point. If upon further examination no choice can be made you can call upon them again.
viveks86
Member
So you are saying if women aren't explicitly being discriminated against, then there is no issue? Do you understand what the point of a jury is? It's to get diverse opinions. So don't you think it's important to get the opinion of people representing near 50% of the gaming population? Otherwise why even bother having a jury? Might as well let Geoff send out awards to his favorite games, right?
SoraNoKuni
Member
I don't really see a problem if the selection was based on the contribution and "skill" of the individual, it could be 32 women as well.
Just adding an individual in a certain position (regardless of gender) just cause "that's how it's supposed to be" while dismissing skill/experience is wrong IMO, it's unfair for those left out for such a reason.
I don't really know how the selection is done, though the fact is that males were dominating the "gaming" scene for a lot of years and based on STATISTICS there are more males with more EXPERIENCE than females, so if their main criteria are years/experience I can see why it's like this(they should really change their criteria), but on the other hand the ratio is outrageous unfair, I am pretty sure there are more women who deserve a spot.
Just adding an individual in a certain position (regardless of gender) just cause "that's how it's supposed to be" while dismissing skill/experience is wrong IMO, it's unfair for those left out for such a reason.
I don't really know how the selection is done, though the fact is that males were dominating the "gaming" scene for a lot of years and based on STATISTICS there are more males with more EXPERIENCE than females, so if their main criteria are years/experience I can see why it's like this(they should really change their criteria), but on the other hand the ratio is outrageous unfair, I am pretty sure there are more women who deserve a spot.
Usually when the product created or the agenda acheived only benefits on specific type of person, often to the point of excluding anyone else who could have otherwise been interested.
This is true. When you have Betty the security guard on the panel because she's literally the only woman that works in your office, you are not helping things. But again, your question should be, "why is Betty the only woman that works in this office?"
Gotdatmoney
Member
I don't really give a shit about what the proper barometer is because a) people were arguing that they were sending their most senior member implying that that they made them more qualified and b) its an example specific to show more qualified can mean anything and its a pointless metric. It says nothing about core competency of anyone to do a job just because "more" qualified individuals exist.
To be fair, that's a shrinking list that isn't very long even if you include the men. One of the biggest reason new blood, that would undoubtedly be more diverse than the old guard, has trouble breaking through is because there are very few traditional gaming sites employing new people.
There are few jobs for the young hopeful upstart, you are literally better off going on youtube/twitch.
It'll be interesting when the first of these mainstream shows has to start picking big youtubers as judges simply because there aren't that many traditional sites left.
Atomic Playboy
Member
What do you mean by force? The awards show being more deliberate in who they specifically asked to serve as judges doesn't strike me as enforcing diversity in an offensive way.
YURP! Which makes it kind of even crazier.
I would not be surprised if this time next year, people like Egorapter and the Two best friends are judges. The relevancy of the large brick and mortar review system is lessening as the days go on. The smart ones are preparing for it. The not so smart ones...well...
If you wanna be in games journalism going forward, you need to learn how to talk in front of a camera.
Architechnophile
Member
My bad--thread is moving fast and I didn't catch the irony. Will delete that.
Now now, let's not start slinging mud. There isn't anything wrong with the people currently on this panel. They're probably all very nice upstanding members of society.
Could you elaborate on that?(I looked in the nominations thread but you don't bring it up there)
When you ignore the "Best indie game" and "Games for change" categories, you still have at least one Indie game present in 9 out of 14 categories.
Gotdatmoney
Member
No, qualifications are established so that they can define skills that best described possible candidates. They set a minimum (or a cutoff) to attract people and have proper criteria to weed out those without the desired competency. Just because you are qualified for a job it does not mean there never exists someone who is more qualified.
And again. The example is to show that more qualifications and experience does not imply others lack the required competency. So all this pick the most qualified individual is just bullshit. Many people including women are qualified to be on this panel even if they are not the most qualified individual.
ClayKavalier
Banned
The Killscreen response is ridiculous if outlets chose their jurors.
Polygon's response seems disingenuous too. They'll send a woman to a reward show when equity concerns are brought up, but how often do they publish reviews of AAA games written by their female staff? Even games like Bayonetta and the Witcher that the site criticizes for their portrayal of women are reviewed by men.
I imagine it doesn't feel great to be chosen like this. "Hey Megan, you clearly weren't our first choice, but people are having a field day over the gender ratio at this award show so congrats, you're representing us."
It's great the panel will end up being more diverse, but if these sites are supposedly making representation a priority they need to show it by hiring women and letting them write reviews for big games. Calling it a day after letting a woman review Yokai Watch and backing someone who writes essays about gender portrayal in games on Patreon leads to moments like this where everyone has egg on their face.
Polygon's response seems disingenuous too. They'll send a woman to a reward show when equity concerns are brought up, but how often do they publish reviews of AAA games written by their female staff? Even games like Bayonetta and the Witcher that the site criticizes for their portrayal of women are reviewed by men.
I imagine it doesn't feel great to be chosen like this. "Hey Megan, you clearly weren't our first choice, but people are having a field day over the gender ratio at this award show so congrats, you're representing us."
It's great the panel will end up being more diverse, but if these sites are supposedly making representation a priority they need to show it by hiring women and letting them write reviews for big games. Calling it a day after letting a woman review Yokai Watch and backing someone who writes essays about gender portrayal in games on Patreon leads to moments like this where everyone has egg on their face.