The Female Gaming Experience [Safe Space]

*wrong thread!"*

(This comment has been edited to reflect my inclusive intent and not sound accusatory or interrogative. The original language is quoted below by Sean.)

Polygon: Accusations of sexual harassment rock the board gaming community

First-hand reports from the Origins convention spark outcry

by Charlie Hall!

While it's dissatisfying that there's very little content to the article, I applaud Origins' organizers for apparently wanting to determine the facts before releasing names, as these kinds of things have sometimes turned into instant career-enders for the accused regardless of whether they were in fact at fault. It'll be interesting to see how this develops. It's also of course nice to see some more attention to the subject.

As someone who sometimes attends conventions and sometimes frequents a lot of meetin/meetup gaming nights, these stories and articles are a revelation. I (and I assume other men) really appreciate having light shed on these issues since, as a typical guy, I'm oblivious to it unless it's blatant and as such don't recall seeing any harassment at the events I've attended. Would anyone here please mind womansplaining how often this occurs? I am sorry if being asked about these issue is painful, but some of you who can explain more can help us recognize it immediately so we can cooperate in rectifying and/or preventing the offensive behavior immediately.

Keithustus wrote:

Would anyone here please mind womansplaining to what extent this is a real issue? At the few cons and many meetin/meetup gaming nights I've been to, I don't recall seeing any harassment, but as a typical guy I'm oblivious to it unless it's blatant.

jredgiant wrote:

This may be off-topic since it's not video games, but I'm always interested to hear women's experiences with this in public play space. At conventions and game stores, playing tabletop games, of whatever type - miniatures, CCG's, RPG's, and board games.

I have not done a lot of con-going or playing at my local game shop, but it's important to remember that it doesn't take a lot of harassment for it to effect people. Part of the reason I don't seek out those events is because, whenever I play with a new group, it's at the back of my mind. You have to go in to events with your armor up. I rehearse possible answers to sexist remarks. I'm aware of exits, both for the room and for conversations. And it's exhausting to be like that.

The point in the article about a perception of women not liking more difficult strategy based games stuck out to me. I would be hesitant to sit down and learn a complicated, crunchy game with a group of men I didn't know, because if I ask for an explanation, there's a good chance that I get a condescending response. And I feel that my performance at a game is a reflection of women as a whole, a phenomenon borne out again and again. It becomes, "Oh, it's alright. Women just don't understand this type of game."

So, have I personally experienced harassment at a group like this? Only once or twice, and all mild examples. But I write this to try to convey how exhausting it can be to be a woman in a male-dominated space, because it only takes one wangrod to ruin it, so you have to assume that anybody could be that guy.

Thank you. I hadn't considered the perpetual consequences of dread for those rare instances. I guess it's similar to my never worrying about walking alone outside at night.

Keithustus wrote:

Polygon: Accusations of sexual harassment rock the board gaming community

First-hand reports from the Origins convention spark outcry

by Charlie Hall!

While it's dissatisfying that there's very little content to the article, I applaud Origins' organizers for apparently wanting to determine the facts before releasing names, as these kinds of things have sometimes turned into instant career-enders for the accused regardless of whether they were in fact at fault. It'll be interesting to see how this develops. It's also of course nice to see some more attention to the subject. Would anyone here please mind womansplaining to what extent this is a real issue? At the few cons and many meetin/meetup gaming nights I've been to, I don't recall seeing any harassment, but as a typical guy I'm oblivious to it unless it's blatant.

mod
Reminder of the scope of the thread:

This thread is also primarily for people who identify as female to share their experiences. If you don't fit into that category please keep your contributions short and supportive.

Asking women to dredge up their painful experiences for your edification is way out of scope for this thread. You can read the backlog or do some research if you need that.

Please read the OP and be mindful before contributing to this discussion. Thanks!

No mini-modding please. - Certis

I couldn't find a more current thread regarding feminist issues so I figured I'd post my observation here.

After re-watching Deadpool 2, I noticed that Domino didn't shave her armpits. I don't know if that is a character choice or Zazie Beetz's choice, but I'm glad to see that the producers (or whomever) didn't impose their will of how a woman should look on her (at least in regards to that small thing).

Probably better to stick that in the general feminism thread in D&D I think. But always good to see some body positivity in media.

And my search-fu failed me. I'll cross-post it. Thanks!

So this story has been making the rounds but I’m still so incredibly angry about it.
Ninja defends his decision to avoid streaming with women (PC Gamer)

Fortnite-forged Twitch streamer Tyler "Ninja" Blevins recently stated that he avoids streaming with women on Twitch because he doesn't want to bring drama or gossip down on himself, his wife, or other women.

"If I have one conversation with one female streamer where we’re playing with one another, and even if there’s a hint of flirting, that is going to be taken and going to be put on every single video and be clickbait forever," Blevins told Polygon, adding that "the only way to avoid that [gossip] is to not play with them at all."

So basically, your solution is to just not play with half of the gaming population? Just ostracize them? Not standing with the harassed women? Not ban the harassers? Not try to change the “vile temptress” image that’s being projected?
I gotta say, I give that marriage six months tops, if this is his outlook on women. Unbelievable.

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised when the US Vice President kinda does the same thing...

Immediately thought of Pence. Who are these man-babies?

Good luck to his (totally equal, strong, reciprocal, and respect-based) marriage.

"the only way to avoid that [gossip] is to not play with them at all."

Not to mention that women who stream don't get the luxury of avoiding this nonsense.

Edit: Not the appropriate thread. I'll take this post to instead recognize that women's mere existence in a gaming space does not and should not threaten other streamers (or their relationships).

See, if he said "many of my fans are immature sh*theads who cannot be trusted to not harass any women they see and I don't want to expose anyone to that, but I still want the money their subscription brings in so I won't ban them" I'd have bought that. It's still be sticking his head in the sand instead of trying to fix the problem, but at least that way it would be as victim blaming.

Edit - An especially disappointing part of this is that many of his viewers are young kids and this is going to influence how they interact with their female peers.

ActualDragon wrote:
"the only way to avoid that [gossip] is to not play with them at all."

Not to mention that women who stream don't get the luxury of avoiding this nonsense.

I don’t get much traffic but I did get one major troll. A troll who got a warning, a ban, and then came back with another account (similar spelling, one or two letters). I don’t care about traffic because I’m not getting any revenue from my channel (yet? Insert shameless plug asking for your Twitch Prime subscriptions here). So I have zero qualms about quashing these lowlives. But yeah. As Stengah put it, he’d probably have to ban a third of his viewership, so it’s clearly about money. Still, it’s repulsive.

I reported his channel for sexism, and I encourage you all to do the same. And I’m willing to bet it’s only the first of other sins, like transphobia. *cough*TB*cough*

I'm pretty upset about the "solution" for griefers in Fallout 76. I'm equally upset that all of the coverage of it so far has been really supportive.

If you haven't followed along with that game, Bethesda's solution to PvP griefers showing up and killing you randomly is to make PvP quasi-opt-in. Anyone can attack you, but they deal minimal damage unless you attack them back. If they kill you with that minimal damage, they get marked as a murderer and there's a bounty put on their head for other players to track them down. If you attack them, it's handled as a normal PvP situation.

I hate this. I hate it so much. It's one of the most common forms of harassment in games codified as a gameplay mechanic.

I'd say that most of the online harassment I've experienced has followed a pattern like that: a protracted series of small, grating aggressions in an attempt to bait me into responding. If I responded, then whatever they had done was "fair". I've seen toxic players harass people in small ways (spamming emotes, that kind of thing) until the person tells them to f*ck off, at which point the toxic player reports them and votes to kick them, if they're able to.

Bethesda's solution for PvP in Fallout 76 is just a formal structure around that same behavior. I suspect we'll see a lot of trolls following players around interminably, dealing piddling amounts of damage, talking sh*t in chat, and innocently claiming that they're just trying to initiate PvP. Responding to a player doing that will get you killed because you've now "opted-in" to PvP, and not responding to a player doing that will... get you killed eventually, or you'll quit.

I'd love to be surprised by this for a change, but I suspect that openly female players (especially streamers) are going to get swarmed by these gnat flies who are harassing people in exactly the way Bethesda has told them to do. I'm flabbergasted that anyone thought this was a solution of any kind.

Eleima wrote:

I reported his channel for sexism, and I encourage you all to do the same.

Sounds fun. Since I don't follow streaming at all, took me a bit to find that it was on twitch and exactly where. For anyone else in that position, here you go:

https://www.twitch.tv/ninja

To report, click the three vertical dots under and the right of the main video that plays when he is live. After that, there's a long tree of options. I selected that his channel is the source of the violation, he's being offensive, and offensive or bullying, at which point an open text field appears.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

I'm pretty upset about the "solution" for griefers in Fallout 76. I'm equally upset that all of the coverage of it so far has been really supportive.

If you haven't followed along with that game, Bethesda's solution to PvP griefers showing up and killing you randomly is to make PvP quasi-opt-in. Anyone can attack you, but they deal minimal damage unless you attack them back. If they kill you with that minimal damage, they get marked as a murderer and there's a bounty put on their head for other players to track them down. If you attack them, it's handled as a normal PvP situation.

I hate this. I hate it so much. It's one of the most common forms of harassment in games codified as a gameplay mechanic.

I'd say that most of the online harassment I've experienced has followed a pattern like that: a protracted series of small, grating aggressions in an attempt to bait me into responding. If I responded, then whatever they had done was "fair". I've seen toxic players harass people in small ways (spamming emotes, that kind of thing) until the person tells them to f*ck off, at which point the toxic player reports them and votes to kick them, if they're able to.

Bethesda's solution for PvP in Fallout 76 is just a formal structure around that same behavior. I suspect we'll see a lot of trolls following players around interminably, dealing piddling amounts of damage, talking sh*t in chat, and innocently claiming that they're just trying to initiate PvP. Responding to a player doing that will get you killed because you've now "opted-in" to PvP, and not responding to a player doing that will... get you killed eventually, or you'll quit.

I'd love to be surprised by this for a change, but I suspect that openly female players (especially streamers) are going to get swarmed by these gnat flies who are harassing people in exactly the way Bethesda has told them to do. I'm flabbergasted that anyone thought this was a solution of any kind.

I think it's getting praise because there's two levels of opting in. There's an option to set yourself as a "pacifist" which turns off PVP for you entirely (your bullets can't hurt others and theirs can't hurt you). If you don't have pacifist turned on you're saying you're at least open to PVP, but a high-level griefer still can't ambush and one-shot you.
If it weren't for the pacifist option, I'd be unimpressed with their "solution" to greifers too.
They also said you can ignore specific players, which hides you from each other (I only saw that it means you're hidden on each others maps but hopefully you won't be able to see or talk to each other in the world either).

I was under the impression that the “Pacifist” setting only stops your own damage output, to prevent you from accidentally initiating a pvp slap, but that others could still try to initiate.

EDIT: sorry, I had multiple tabs open and just noticed this was the female safe space thread I had posted to. I’ll show myself out.

ruhk wrote:

I was under the impression that the “Pacifist” setting only stops your own damage output, to prevent you from accidentally initiating a pvp slap, but that others could still try to initiate.

That's how I read it, which, to me, is kind of crappy. If you opt out, you should be isolated from all of it.

Correct pacifist doesn’t stop the harassment.

I'd almost be ok with it if after a player started with the minimal damage hits, you had the option to press a button to go into invulnerable/pacifist mode. A 'no thank you' option.

IGN's understanding of pacifist mode is that it's only to prevent starting PvP accidentally.

Players will also have the ability to declare themselves as a “pacifist,” meaning their attacks won’t start PvP at all -- this is to prevent players jumping in front of someone's bullet to start a fight.
Mermaidpirate wrote:

I'd almost be ok with it if after a player started with the minimal damage hits, you had the option to press a button to go into invulnerable/pacifist mode. A 'no thank you' option.

I'd like them to go one step further and give pacifists the ability to kick people who attack them. "No, thank you" and "goodbye".

Eleima wrote:

So this story has been making the rounds but I’m still so incredibly angry about it.
Ninja defends his decision to avoid streaming with women (PC Gamer)

Fortnite-forged Twitch streamer Tyler "Ninja" Blevins recently stated that he avoids streaming with women on Twitch because he doesn't want to bring drama or gossip down on himself, his wife, or other women.

"If I have one conversation with one female streamer where we’re playing with one another, and even if there’s a hint of flirting, that is going to be taken and going to be put on every single video and be clickbait forever," Blevins told Polygon, adding that "the only way to avoid that [gossip] is to not play with them at all."

So basically, your solution is to just not play with half of the gaming population? Just ostracize them? Not standing with the harassed women? Not ban the harassers? Not try to change the “vile temptress” image that’s being projected?
I gotta say, I give that marriage six months tops, if this is his outlook on women. Unbelievable.

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised when the US Vice President kinda does the same thing...

I haven't specifically read his words on the matter, but is the majority of his concern for himself or for the women he is trying to limit harassment of? I have a pretty healthy relationship with my wife, but I don't think she would want to have to deal with that sh*tstorm. Seems a bit premature to judge the nature of their relationship. Yeah, it sucks that they would have to put up with all of that, but it's also understandable that they'd want to avoid it, too. It's not like you can say, "Hey, my wife is off limits" and the Internet will listen. And even if he bans people from his Twitch channel, they will find alternate means to be awful to him and his wife. I feel like he's between a rock and a hard place and people are mad that he's not choosing to be a culture warrior, and we shouldn't expect people to be one if they don't want to,

I mean, if I asked my wife, is it ok to invite internet harassment of her by having completely innocent interactions with other women online, she would be well within her right to say, no someone else can be the MLK of video game sexism, and it wouldn't be a bad reflection on our marriage.

Maybe I am missing some vital component in the situation, but I don't begrudge someone trying to limit Internet harassment of their family. It is not his job to fix the Internet. I wish that he would stand up and try, sure. But I don't think he should be forced to.

The vital component you are missing is your gender. There's a separate topic for males to discuss these issues.

Mixolyde wrote:

I haven't specifically read his words on the matter,

Well there's your problem.

...

...

His concern is that if he streams with ladies, then the internet will think he's cheating on his wife.

That's it.

It sounds batsh*t from my comfortable perspective. It sounds like one or both members of that marriage are waving big 'ole red flags.

On the flip side, I have no idea what it's like to live under the microscope as a high-profile Youtuber on a day-to-day basis, to have every word I say during my day job to be dissected by the mob. Maybe I'd make the exact same decision in his shoes because who needs that noise in their home-life?

ClockworkHouse wrote:

I'd like them to go one step further and give pacifists the ability to kick people who attack them. "No, thank you" and "goodbye".

I really want to know why they just didn't make PvP 100% opt-in and leave it at that. That eliminates the entire possibility of this kind of griefing, and other rules like personal only loot and shared tagging of mobs eliminates the vast majority of systems-based griefing. Basically every other mass market MMO does that, so I don't see why Fallout needs to be different.

It just sounds like Bethesda wanted to make a Fallout game that's basically an old school PvP everywhere MMO. But nobody actually likes games with those rules(especially when other players can take your stuff), so to sell the game, they had to figure out some way to soften the blow while keeping the rather idiotic requirement of ALWAYS PVP in the game. It'd be better if they just stated unequivocally that it's always full PvP and that's the only option.

Mixolyde wrote:
Eleima wrote:

So this story has been making the rounds but I’m still so incredibly angry about it.
Ninja defends his decision to avoid streaming with women (PC Gamer)

Fortnite-forged Twitch streamer Tyler "Ninja" Blevins recently stated that he avoids streaming with women on Twitch because he doesn't want to bring drama or gossip down on himself, his wife, or other women.

"If I have one conversation with one female streamer where we’re playing with one another, and even if there’s a hint of flirting, that is going to be taken and going to be put on every single video and be clickbait forever," Blevins told Polygon, adding that "the only way to avoid that [gossip] is to not play with them at all."

So basically, your solution is to just not play with half of the gaming population? Just ostracize them? Not standing with the harassed women? Not ban the harassers? Not try to change the “vile temptress” image that’s being projected?
I gotta say, I give that marriage six months tops, if this is his outlook on women. Unbelievable.

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised when the US Vice President kinda does the same thing...

I haven't specifically read his words on the matter, but is the majority of his concern for himself or for the women he is trying to limit harassment of? I have a pretty healthy relationship with my wife, but I don't think she would want to have to deal with that sh*tstorm. Seems a bit premature to judge the nature of their relationship. Yeah, it sucks that they would have to put up with all of that, but it's also understandable that they'd want to avoid it, too. It's not like you can say, "Hey, my wife is off limits" and the Internet will listen. And even if he bans people from his Twitch channel, they will find alternate means to be awful to him and his wife. I feel like he's between a rock and a hard place and people are mad that he's not choosing to be a culture warrior, and we shouldn't expect people to be one if they don't want to,

I mean, if I asked my wife, is it ok to invite internet harassment of her by having completely innocent interactions with other women online, she would be well within her right to say, no someone else can be the MLK of video game sexism, and it wouldn't be a bad reflection on our marriage.

Maybe I am missing some vital component in the situation, but I don't begrudge someone trying to limit Internet harassment of their family. It is not his job to fix the Internet. I wish that he would stand up and try, sure. But I don't think he should be forced to.

I think Jonman perfectly encapsulated the issue here (perhaos you should actually read before commenting), but I’m specifically addressing the issue her as a woman in games, per the thread’s scope. It’s hard enough gaming when you’re a woman. You get harassed. You get talked down to. You get ignored. You get dismissed. You can even be threatened with rape and/or murder.
This guy’s concern is that his mariage might be in danger if there’s even a hint of flirtatious behavior (from him) picked up during a stream and reblogged, reposted ad nauseam. Instead of, oh I don’t know, not flirting, he decides to cease all interaction with women gamers. Not gay, male gamers though. But all women. Let’s not pretend this is anything else but sexism at work here.
And yes, it’s nit his job to fix the internet but he’s contributing to the systematic sexism that constantly oppress women. Instead of setting a good example and showing that not all interactions between men and women have to be sexual/romantic (I know, what a revolutionary concept), he’s leaning in.

And this is a white dude streamer, called Ninja, who adds racial slurs into raps songs on stream, then claims 'misunderstanding.' He deserves no benefit of the doubt.

MrDeVil909 wrote:

And this is a white dude streamer, called Ninja, who adds racial slurs into raps songs on stream, then claims 'misunderstanding.' He deserves no benefit of the doubt.

Called it.

Eleima wrote:

And I’m willing to bet it’s only the first of other sins, like transphobia. *cough*TB*cough*