John Kowalski
Banned
I would hope so, that's what makes us different from other great apes!
The Game Awards jury lists only 2 women out of 32 jurors (sites selected jurors)
- Thread starter Lime
- Start date
I would hope so, that's what makes us different from other great apes!
Gotdatmoney
Member
Speciesist
It really is sad considering so many women are playing and actually reviewing games and everything...
This is exactly what i'm saying.
Normally - you elect a juror who you think will benefit your side. At least in law this is how it works. Trust me on this one.
mentallyinept
Banned
I agree wholeheartedly.
My response was simply to talk about what the intent of the panel was supposed to be. In the same way that phrasing in polls can influence the decision making of the respondents, the way the question was asked to the various outlets can influence their selections.
If the game awards said, "Send your most experienced/qualified member of your staff", then the choice is very simple, and in many ways the choice is already made for them.
However, if the game awards said, "We are building a panel of experts from all major video games news outlets and want to bring in people with a wide range of perspectives. Please nominate someone that will add an experienced, unique perspective to the panel", the choice becomes much less clear, and the nominee pool widens greatly.
SolidSnakex
Member
Here are the gender breakdowns for each site (at least of those I can find)
AusGamers - 12 men/1 woman
Electric Playground - 6 men/2 women
Game Informer - 16 men/1 woman
Gamespot - 29 men/10 women
Gamesradar - 15 men/6 women
GiantBomb - 9 men/0 women
IGN - 62 men/9 women
PC Gamer - 13 men/0 women
Polygon - 17 men/5 women
US Gamer - 6 men/1 woman
AusGamers - 12 men/1 woman
Electric Playground - 6 men/2 women
Game Informer - 16 men/1 woman
Gamespot - 29 men/10 women
Gamesradar - 15 men/6 women
GiantBomb - 9 men/0 women
IGN - 62 men/9 women
PC Gamer - 13 men/0 women
Polygon - 17 men/5 women
US Gamer - 6 men/1 woman
Not to disagree with the spirit of your post, but the crux of the current situation is that it actually doesn't. Even if sites tried this would be a predominantly white and male panel.
Is this all editors? I only really know Giantbomb intimately and as far as i know not all 9 of the guys write reviews.
BlastProcessing
Member
History vehemently disagrees with you.
mentallyinept
Banned
Yeah, I just saw SolidSnake's post above... it seems that it wouldn't have mattered much anyway because the selection pool is not diverse at all.
Sad state of affairs.
viveks86
Member
Geoff isn't putting together a jury to benefit any side, so I'm not sure what you are trying to say in the context of game critics. The point is to get diverse opinions, not the other way around.
Reverse sexism is still sexism. It's kind of an insult to both men and women to lower the bar. The pool should be expanded to cover professional writers outside of video game. Widen the qualifications for the pool but don't lower it based in gender. There are qualified critics in other topics (film, comic books, etc).
autoduelist
Member
Well, absolutely. But that just brings us full circle... we have more men pursing game related fields in school. We have more male graduates in gaming related fields.
According to wikipedia, we've got "fewer than 12% of Computer Science bachelor's degrees were awarded to women at U.S. PhD-granting institutions in 2010-11."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_computing#Statistics_in_education
So by definition we have a bigger male hiring pool. Now why is that? How far back to we need to keep peeling the onion layers? Is it based on early developmental gendering where we give boys blue toys and fake guns and girls pink dolls and baking sets? Are there distinct differences in genders that cause some to pursue certain fields more than others?
I'm not about to answer that, because, like most honest people, I know it's a seriously complex issue with no easy answer. But how is it fixed without force?
My use of 'force' essentially is a political one; that is, any rule or law is 'force' backed by whatever governing offices instituted that rule or law. If you can't smoke outside a restaurant, that is based on force -- the threat of fines or police action. If you must hire a certain quota or be fined, that is also force. I am against authoritarianism in all its forms, and generally do not believe problems should be solved by force unless there is imminent danger.
For example, an alternative solution -- if the issue is that we do not have enough females graduating from CS related fields, then individuals or groups of individuals [not through taxation] in a position to make change should set up scholarships to change that. There is no force involved in that, only individuals freely choosing how to spend their money. Using a government or institution to force 50/50 gender splits in every school, however, would be an absolutely horrific solution to the problem.
For example, creating a Neogaf scholarship to which any member can contribute dedicated to putting a female through college in a CS related field is far more productive [and newsworthy] than all the internet debate in the world.
Ghandi supposedly said: "Be the change that you wish to see in the world.” Well. Be it. Not through legislation or institutionalized rules enforcing your will on others. But by truly pushing forward what you want to see w/o force. Others will be far more responsive.
That's a bad call.
BlastProcessing
Member
I don't get your point here. Could you help me out?
Are you doing a bit? This would be a lot easier to understand if I knew you were doing a bit. What side do we need to benefit here? Why should I trust you? This has to be a bit.
Now take that and see how many of those women work in an editorial/print coverage factor, and that number probably goes to 0 for most of those.
Delusibeta
Banned
Prediction: SXSW Games Awards will be first to this. Hell, they've gotten very popular YouTubers hosting, I wouldn't be too surprised they've already done this.
Who was Killscreen originally having act as a juror in the game awards? They did a good job making the issue be all about TGA not having enough women jurors when really Killscreen is in a tighter spot: Either they were sending a man and were part of the problem they're railing against now or they were sending a woman and by pulling her out they've made the awards even less diverse than they would have been.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
That sort of just pushes the problem back on the outlets though since it then becomes even more obvious that they're lacking in women on their staff
Games radar actually does have a female global EIC
http://www.gamesradar.com/about-gamesradar/
but I agree that it's very rare.
Sounds about right.
Honestly I'm upset about this entire issue not because of the women. But because everyone is going to try to just fix these problems, these little unimportant in the face of the bigger issue problem. So then we basically get a tiny band aid on the bigger series of problems. That breakdown of employees by gender illustrates that problem.
Anything like fixing this panel, or putting a women in the limelight for two seconds is nothing but a token effort until the incredibly uneven ratio of female to men in this industry is fixed. I almost feel like the reactions of Polygon are just efforts to make themselves feel proactive because in the long run they really aren't doing everything they have the power to do. They too are a part of the problem.
Gotdatmoney
Member
There is no such thing as reverse sexism for one. Its just sexism. And allowing women the ability to have opportunities that they have been shown over and over and over again not to get is not sexist. Its literally a push for equality and breaking a cycle of male dominance that they have shown have zero desire to deal with themselves.
The example I gave is literally why women should not feel ashamed for getting hired over men. They were hired because they are women AND qualified and it has been shown they will continue to not get the job if nothing occurs.
If this is correct then what is the issue? 6% here are women. 6% of the judges are women.
Do people want women to be vastly over represented for the sake of meeting a quota?
This is very sad state of affair.
It's unfortunate, but honestly nothing to do with GA. Blame the game publications/websites.
...Isn't Ludwig Kietzmann EIC according to this?
...really?
Because one is an award show that is ultimately meaningless. And the other is a fair representation of THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY. 6% female population for an entire industry is not a good thing dude.
QuantumBro
Banned
Did you support them last year? They had two women on the jury last year as well and (based on a Google search) no one brought it up as an issue then.
Best course of action if you want this to be changed is to mention the issue if they ask for feedback on this years show and make sure to talk about this issue when the 2016 game awards are announced.
It's too late to change it for this year, but if they repeat it again in 2016 they deserve all the shit you can throw at them.
This
if they can play video games, and can write and talk about games, which I would think if they work for a game site, that alone should make them qualified.
We are not asking them if they can build a spaceship
Its all subjective anyways, and these awards needs different viewpoints
Architechnophile
Member
RichyDevil
Member
Wow. Looks like a big problem lies at the feet of mainstream gaming media.
I think people are making something from a non-issue (in this case specifically).
The "point of a jury" reply was about semantics.
BlastProcessing
Member
I think most people would like to see both numbers go up. And to do that you need to point it out. The argument is that women are dramatically underrepresented in games media set against the amount of women who play games.
My mistake, she's actually global editor in chief, don't know if there's a difference between that and normal Eic. I'd assume she's in charge of the UK site and whatever else gamesradar has.
That's a separate issue though. Has nothing to do with this awards show. Seems that people are attacking a symptom of the problem, not the actual issue.
If I've learned anything about this industry, it's that you need to be blunt as fucking possible or people will not get it/let it slide.
Hmm...I'm not sure either.
But I'll take it.
EXACTLY! That's the stuff.
I struggle to blame even them too much.
Let's go through this list an look which site recently had lay-offs and which site has hired.
Unless traditional gaming journalism gets a resurgence (lol) this is going to be it for the next few years.
On the other hand it's easier than ever to change this (unlike the low % of women in stem fields) - just hit the subscribe button of your favorite youtuber and tell all your friends to do it too!
It's shitty that the demographic that makes up the majority of video game players is barely represented on this jury, but it's based on a far deeper rooted imbalance at the heart of the industry itself.
There are a lot of old boy's clubs in the world, but video games are very much a new boy's club.
Hopefully the spotlight being shone on this will lead to some positive change and greater diversity in the future.
There are a lot of old boy's clubs in the world, but video games are very much a new boy's club.
Hopefully the spotlight being shone on this will lead to some positive change and greater diversity in the future.
too busy working on a real game to care.
BlastProcessing
Member
If you want to get semantic then you need to acknowledge that the word "jury" has multiple semantic indications.
Also when you are talking about something like a social equality, it's sort of quantum locked. Every individual instance can be dismissed as a non-issue when viewed in isolation. It's funny that way.
You have to point out multiple instances and show a pattern. This is one instance. There are plenty of ways that you can try to dismiss it, many of which are already on display in this thread, but that doesn't make it a non-issue.
Delusibeta
Banned
Considering that GamesRadar has two sides (UK and US), I think that means she's the biggest cheese.
See, everytime issues like these are brought up, I'm quick to realize that most people aren't actually berating the root of the problem and are just too focused on the most superficial immediate scar. I imagine most outfits quickly nominated their most senior staff and those are most assuredly men. That's not really a fault of the outlets specifically and to throw out criticisms of sexism seems very narrow minded. This is a systemic issue and it is an issue that inherently isn't fixed overnight. Problem is most people seem to treat it like it can be and I feel that hurts the cause much more than it helps.
RichyDevil
Member
The more I look at this the worse it gets. How do these places get away with this?
62/9? 16/1?
I mean, sheesh. Even if you don't consider yourself particularly fervent about this issue, some of these numbers are frightening.
I'm surprised this hasn't become its own thread and some of these outlets made to explain themselves.
Architechnophile
Member
You're not wrong.
There was never a harder time to justify yourself as a white male than now.
Haha.
I am rooting for a mexican somewhere! Someone get the female version of Michael Pena.
Gamesradar has grown into being pretty diverse gender-wise over the last couple of years.
Or I should say more so than the egregious sausage fest it used to be before Sophia took over.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
The thing that surprised me is them having Breitbart on the eSports advisory board.
Next year Enquirer?
Next year Enquirer?