Larian Studios Forums Divinity: Original Sin 2 Divinity - Original Sin 2 - General Swen a reply to Where are the women? Post

You are totally missing the point, though. The problem is the ingrained stereotypes in society. Monkeys don't prefer anything, seriously. That was one test on *human* babies and it was so controversial it got shot down pretty fast. Monkeys and babies don't even have a concept of "trucks" and "dolls" to prefer one or the other. Gender Dysphoria can only ever exist in a society with gender stereotypes. Yes, I am saying that Gender Dysphoria is caused by society. That one guy who was raised as a girl? He didn't feel comfortable in a female stereotype and that is a form of gender confusion. Though not from his side, but from the side of society. You are shifting the blame here, the problem isn't people who don't conform to societal expectations, but those societal expectations themselves.

There are "proven differences", but not the ones you think. It has nothing to do with women preferring pink and the Sims, and men preferring blue and Gears of War. Neurodevelopmental disorders like autism and the like have NOTHING to do with this. Have you heard of a "Strawman" and "False analogy"? Yeah, that.

Sex differences in rhesus monkey toy preferences parallel those of children

Born This Way? Gender-Based Toy Preferences in Primates



Toddlers do, and can choose one over the other without their parents or society deciding which they should like.

Males "spent more time" (I.e. in no way conscious preference) with the wheeled toys (which are absurdly marked as "masculine" and not something that isn't full of baggage like "practical") and females showed no preference one way or the other. This somehow translates to Women = Sims, Men = Gears of War.

"Sex differences in stick-carrying are related to a greater female interest in infant care, with stick-carrying being a form of play-mothering". Which is exactly what we've been saying about the innate biological differences from the beginning. "Also, the researchers suggested a social rather than biological basis for the behavior. " DUUUUH.

"One rhesus monkey study positing a biological and hormonal basis for gender-specific play, and another chimpanzee study emphasizing social learning" Translates to DEFINITE BIOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES THAT FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE BEHAVIOURS OF MEN AND WOMEN. Ok. I'll definitely keep that in mind when studying hermeneutics of scientific literature.

It's really not. Would I have gone through years of extremely intrusive and insensitive assessments, potential danger, a very risky operation and spent ｣20,000 of my own cash on medical treatment if it was just a matter of ignoring barriers? Absolutely not. I'm not the sort of person who likes to put herself through gruelling, difficult, painful and unpleasant situations unless there is absolutely no other way, and neither are the vast majority of people with gender dysphoria or whatever it's called this week. Although I was being somewhat facetious about playing The Sims, and its relevance may be rather dubious anyway, innate gender identity is certainly a thing. I accept it's perhaps difficult to understand for people who don't have that particular incongruity to deal with, but I would add that those who've never had the need to understand it should be thankful rather than judgemental.

I realise I've slightly painted myself into a corner with the "but girls often like guy stuff too!" comment, and it may not have been the most sensible idea to bring up the matter of gender identity in that context as it's its own thing, but it's a lot more than upbringing and societal expectations.

I do not mean to offend you in any way. You can't simply "ignore the barriers" and that's the whole point. It's so deeply ingrained in our subconscious that it's as real as it can get. Gender Dysphoria IS real, but it is a product of societal stereotypes and in a society with no gender specific stereotypes, Gender Dysphoria wouldn't make sense and it's my thinking that it wouldn't manifest. Why? Because there are many "feminine" men and "masculine" women that aren't trans. That means it's not due to gender expression. There are also intersex people who are neither. You can't change your chromosomes but GD is treated by SRS and when you transition, so it's definitely not physiological. HRT would help only you, but not stop a cis person from feeling that they are cis. Gender stereotypes are the only category left when we exclude gender expression, sex (since you can be a man without a penis) , hormonal differences and a physiological basis. Transitioning is nothing more than you changing the way you view *yourself* in relation to society.

Have I even mentioned either game, let alone tried to make that connection? You do know what a strawman argument is, right?

Since the whole point of this thread is the relation between gender and video games, what connection do you want me to make? It IS a strawman, but this whole thread is full of strawmen. Also I wasn't accusing you specifically. Maybe you are making assumptions that simply aren't there. These studies prove nothing we didn't already know, though I haven't seen them before, they were an interesting read.

That statement can't be proved, and actually it's the opposite. A girl baby usually ends up with plenty of pink clothes (while still unborn), and a boy ends up with blue. Same with toys, virtually no one offers a doll to a one year old boy (while my daughter already has one and she isn't one year old yet).

So society and parents do influence toddlers.

I'm a monster that has been experiencing with his own child, I've managed a few times to make her use some toys instead of others, just by handling some toys more than others (or playing back).
Smartphones are apparently the Best-Toy-Ever, she'd spend more time with it (turned off, and if I let her) than with toys that make noise and lights, just because she sees her parents handling it often.

I like how nobody said anything about what people should or shouldn't like, and merely what what the different sexes *tend* to like, and this is being intentionally twisted into something like we're saying something about what people should like. In fact, you've twisted people's words into something so sinister, I can only imagine this is a subtle intentional smear.

Of course, it doesn't really matter what musings you have. The psychological science is clear; sex differences are real and innate and extend beyond cultural or societal influences.

The idea that sex differences don't extend to brain and thus behavior is simply ideology. It is not a very popular position in the psychological or biological sciences, and it's being asserted here simply due to ideology, nothing more. The fact that people are feigning that anyone here was shaming people for their preferences or acting as if they should adhere to tastes more in line with general tendencies is a pretty strong indication of that.

If you want me to take this seriously and want me to think you're not just ignoring the established behavioral science on this matter in favor of personal ideology you'll have to show us where people are criticizing other people's preferences here, because all I see is explanations and not any normative statements.

If I seem crabby, it's because I am. I don't like people trying to smear me in this manner, where one creatively interprets one's post to bias other people against them. This is absolutely a type of smear, disguised to appear not only civil but morally superior to one's opponent and to stay within the rules of discourse on a forum. But I'm going to call it out here and now because that's a pretty disgusting rhetorical technique and I'm sick of seeing it used.

Yeah, but the science seems to show that socialization either isn't all or even the most important aspect:

http://www.livescience.com/22677-girls-dolls-boys-toy-trucks.html

I seem to have managed to take both sides in this nature-vs-nurture discussion because my train of thought seems to meander about rather erratically. :p To clarify, I do tend to react a bit to the "women prefer such-and-such" because women prefer lots of things; but I'm certainly not denying that men and women tend to have their own in-built preferences. It's just that obviously those preferences aren't absolute or guaranteed.


I can't speak for the science as the broader subject isn't one I've spent any time studying, though I know from personal experience that being raised as the "wrong" gender didn't really change my own in-built traits and interests which seemed to come more from my personality than my environment. I did pick up a few interests in the process that I may not have otherwise been exposed to, but generally speaking I am somewhat stereotypical in a way that couldn't have originated from socialisation. Seems the same is true for most others I know who've found themselves in the same situation.

Long topics branch off from the original point, and will eventually go off topic completely.
I replied specifically to a comment about all non-physiological differences between men and woman being entirely due to society, saying that physiology has an effect beyond purely biological processes. There was no connection to make; I was stating that there are innate differences between men and woman.
If you want to know how I think that relates to gaming: it may, directly or indirectly, explain some of the difference between the number of men and women playing particular types of games. It says nothing about any particular individual (statistics or generalities never automatically do).




Yes, it can. Anecdotal evidence is sufficient to prove that something can happen.
If that 'usually' happens, it means the opposite 'can' happen. Some parents specifically avoid gender stereotypes with toys and colour schemes.


Boys don't get dolls, they get action figures.


Of course. Toddlers mimic lots of things, that's why younger siblings can be so annoying when you are a kid. I didn't claim they couldn't be influenced, I said they can like things without being told what to like.
Tomboys have grown up being constantly told to act like a lady, and effeminate boys have grown up being told to 'be a man', without that effecting the things that they like (except maybe the people doing the telling, if they are authoritarian about it).


From what I hear, there may be a period in about a year when that may not work as well.




Well, a lot of things are going to be a mix of the two, and even if general trends indicate one or the other is dominant, there can always be individual exceptions.

I guess I just don't like resorting to scientific explanationswhen it comes to explaining differences between people. It's a very different topic, sure, but I feel like some ill-intentionned people could ( and have ) used science to pressure their peers into twisted thinkings. This may range from a mere "we do not like the same thing" to a widly more dangerous "you are inferior" because "science told us that".
Actually I don't 100% trust science to give answers on such a specific domain as the brain inner workings. Biologically, yes, sure. Psychologically though, that's why we have various theoretical sciences but no actual science ( that I know of ). Creating a purely neutral, unaltered, uninfluenced environment to be able to study a person is impossible ( and quite unethical ) - you'd have to literally isolate a baby from birth, and then even what he/she will be subjected to to survive may have an influence on him/her. Myth of the cavern after all. And that's not taking into account the genetic memory theory which may add another layer of discreet influence on a toddler's mind ( even if it is more generally accepted that genetic memory is more like instinct than experience ).

I do not have the ressources nor the vocabulary to be able to follow this topic in the depths it went to, so I have to admit when I'm bested =)
My ultimate point is only that obviously, segregating people based on a physiological OR cultural difference is plain wrong, and claiming they can't have shared center of interests and should catter to their own pre-programmed likings isn't even something that should be considered.
When I claimed this was all cultural rather than physiological, I meant that anyone, man, woman, transgender, black, white, old, young, have the right to like whatever they want with no intervention from the exterior world, but some are led, if not forced, to like something else because of the exterior world. Some are even shuned or shutdown because they refuse to conform themselves to what the "good" society dictates as the right way. Some may adapt, some may live a terrible life.

In regard with the OP, "where are the women?" in the world of videogames, well... Videogames weren't supposed to be a girl thing for many years. Things are starting to change, and women actually are pouring in that little world. And they can be found in many genre ; versus fighting, mmos, rts, fps... Even at high-level of competition. Doesn't that mean that nature never pre-disposed them against playing videogames ? Or are girls playing Counterstrike in tournaments "abnormal" ?

Of course. I completely agree.


Nature can influence what types of games women tend to prefer, but that doesn't eliminate the effects of nurture, or account for variations among individuals and their experiences.

@Lacrymas
You were quite fast insulting others about their intentions of a distortion of your post... but you're quite got at that yourself... so I can just advise you to read my post again, taking all parts into account. (and a lot of other posts in this thread)

@Dr Koin
Generally I agree with you, up to this point:


I know where you are aiming at (and agree with that), but that's nonetheless a very worrying thing to say, as ignorance is always the beginning of the end. ACCEPTING and UNDERSTANDING the existance of differences is the key, as they can enrich each other.


And I think that's the misunderstanding, I (and I guess the others too) did not say this can't be. It's not about a seperating limitation because of that it's about an integration WITH that. Keyword: Intersection. Even if the overlap is 99%.

So what is the point of this discussion if we all agree that all genders can and do like the same things? Since I'm "obviously" distorting all your points to suit my agenda and there is no issue here?

There's a famous example used in psych classes of an individual born with ambiguous... parts, and the doctor basically made a call to assign them as female. They had huge difficulties because the doctor made a mistake, and that individual eventually committed suicide later in life.

The question was a question of "why," which has an explanation, based on empirical data and observation. Stating a reason why something may be does not say anything about what *should* be.

Again, if you want to pretend that you weren't trying some subtle attack on the image of people that disagree with you, I'd like you to point out where anyone said that female gamers shouldn't like gaming, or certain types of games. I've been on the internet long enough and seen enough trolling to know when someone is saying things in bad faith.

There is no such data, get over yourselves. Male monkeys spending more time with wheeled toys is hardly empirical evidence for *why* women "tend" to play certain genres.



I'm not attacking anyone and I haven't said anything bad directed at anyone specific, neither am I trolling. If I was directly insulting anyone Raze would've told me and edited my post. I gain nothing by insulting people.

Oh ! Yes, indeed. Somehow I think that accepting, however, is kind of the opposite of focusing :p As in, focusing on differences is giving the wrong kind of attention to them ( too good OR too bad ). Accepting and understanding sounds more neutral, you know? Like differences are okay.

This is purely semantics though =)

Nice thread, by the way, and I'm not being ironic. Some conversations are worth the invested time.