Lupingosei
Banned
There was a new study about the topic and again of course it somehow proved the notion about toxic masculinity in gaming. However, it seems the study was nowhere close to academic standards and people start to calling it out.
There was an article in Psychology Today about it.
www.psychologytoday.com
But that is not all. The author highlights the worst parts of the study quite accurately.
Games media probably will not care, neither the people on Twitter who even sometimes claim we have to "follow the science". But maybe it is good to know, not everybody in science shares the same opinions.
There was an article in Psychology Today about it.

Video Games and Masculinity
A new report argues that sexualization and violence in video games are harming players—particularly boys. But is the evidence on their side?
I can recommend this article just because of gems like this alone
- There is little evidence linking video games to "toxic masculinity" or sexism toward women.
- Moral panics and prejudice toward gaming communities remain common.
- A new report repeats familiar patterns of moral panic and misinformation about games and gamers.
- Advocating for egalitarian representations of women in games is a worthwhile cause, but it must be undertaken honestly.
The authors try to assess toxic masculinity with a measure of unknown validity and imply games reinforce toxic masculinity because, in action games, many male characters act tough, express anger, or take risks. Some negative statistics appear overdramatized: for instance, claiming that female characters were 35 times more likely to be sexualized than male characters, despite that sexualizing of either was remarkably low (3.5 percent vs. .01 percent). Results for revealing clothing were more convincing (24.6 percent v 2.3 percent) but still suggest that even revealing clothing for female characters is less common than most people likely expect.
But that is not all. The author highlights the worst parts of the study quite accurately.
There’s also a survey of boys, which seems more a missed opportunity than anything else. No validated scales are employed, nor were there checks for unreliable or mischievous responses (when, for example, participants give extreme answers to be funny). Thus, we don’t know how much of the data is accurate and how much is misleading.
Experiences of bullying appeared to be relatively uncommon (14-27 percent across ages and types). Nonetheless, the authors employ hyperbole, claiming, “Indeed, these [gaming] spaces are rife with identity-based harassment and bullying that reinforce elements of toxic masculinity.” Any bullying is bad, but the report provides no evidence that gaming spaces are more toxic than anything else online, ranging from meltdowns among young adult fiction writers, online knitting communities, or even among scholars who study video games. Some people (male and female) behave badly online, with no evidence that their behavior is linked specifically to video games.
Unfortunately, anti-media pressure groups have a long history of dubious claims trying to tie video games to societal ills. With this report, in my view, the Geena Davis Institute harms its own credibility by indulging its own prejudices of the gaming community. There’s nothing to see here, and we can all move along.
Games media probably will not care, neither the people on Twitter who even sometimes claim we have to "follow the science". But maybe it is good to know, not everybody in science shares the same opinions.