The real question is not "are there sexist/racist/misogynistic/homophobic douchebags in wargaming."  Of course there are.

The question is "are they there in greater proportion than in the general population?"

Of course there are assholes in wargaming.  Any time you get a significant number of people together, you will get some assholes.  

One of the main problems with this sort of article is the way they people use terminology and build narratives.  They are full of indignant comments about misogyny, racism and homophobia but they apply those terms to a wide range of things that no reasonable person would ever apply them to.  From there they build a narrative where pervasive "misogyny" is supposedly a wide spread norm because behaviors and comments that no reasonable person would describe using that term are lumped in with the few behaviors or comments that a sane person would consider describing as indicating hatred of women.  The same goes for narratives about racism or homophobia or whatever other things they are trying to portray some group as being. There are assholes in wargaming and people say shitty things.  That's the case throughout society.  However, they misrepresent and distort to make it seem like some group has a particular problem with these things mostly by stretching the definition of terms like racism so far they become unrecognizable and doing the Battle of Roark's Drift becomes inexcusable KKK-esque racism calling for the murder of Africans or some absurd bullshit like that.

They also make these ridiculous assumptions about how people will react to things.  They basically assume that everyone will react to things in the same overwrought, overheated, hyperbolic and childish way they do.  The idea that a woman who is otherwise interested in a hobby will become so uncomfortable with someone looking at an image of a scantily clad woman that they will be excluded is utterly asinine.  Most women, or people in general, are just not that absurdly oversensitive and overwrought about stuff like that.  I don't know if this is just projection or deliberate bullshit to make their non-issues seem like real, weighty problems that matter to anyone but them.  This idea that women in general go around looking for things to be offended by and react to anything they find with a butthurt temper tantrum is more misogynist that anything I have ever heard any wargamer say.  

In my experience, men in male dominated hobbies are actually quite pleased when women take an interest in the hobby and want to participate.  Women who are interested in what people in the hobby are doing and who want to be a part of that activity and the subculture around it are welcomed.  This lasts right up until a relative handful of women start demanding that the space be changed to suit them and their sensibilities.  That's when the push back starts and it can catch other women who have been participating without a problem for a while before this.  It's not misogyny.  It's just people not wanting to be scolded and bullied in their own space.  Most of the women don't like it any better than the men. They are there because they like and want to participate in what everyone was doing and they don't want to be dictated to by scolds any more than the men do.

Welcome to the site and please keep on being honest because you nailed it in the head.

I actually can be honest here.

One thing I agree with this person on is that miniatures wargamers, particularly historical miniatures players, tend to lean more to the right politically than, say, role-play gamers.  We differ in how we think this should be responded to.  He seems to think that people being allowed to express political opinions to the right of the Huffington Post is some sort of dire problem that needs to be corrected and I think that is self-righteous bullshit.  He thinks that people who express political opinions he doesn't approve of should be cast out and I think that's a totalitarian, bullying mentality that should not be indulged.

The rest of his supposed points are just bullshit.  People who get into the hobby of historical wargaming are likely to be much more interested in military history than most people *Gasp*  Shocking.  Next you will be telling me that people who are big into crafting hobbies are likely to be people who enjoy making things more than most people.  He tries to make something obvious and mundane like people who are in a hobby being interested in the thing the hobby is about sound dire by calling it "fetishism".  He acts like every player who plays Germans in a WW2 game goosesteps in wearing a full SS uniform and carrying a Nazi flag, does a Heil Hitler salute and shoots a Jew before every game or something.  It's just hysterical bullshit.

Quote from: yosemitemike;866362I actually can be honest here.

One thing I agree with this person on is that miniatures wargamers, particularly historical miniatures players, tend to lean more to the right politically than, say, role-play gamers.  We differ in how we think this should be responded to.  He seems to think that people being allowed to express political opinions to the right of the Huffington Post is some sort of dire problem that needs to be corrected and I think that is self-righteous bullshit.  He thinks that people who express political opinions he doesn't approve of should be cast out and I think that's a totalitarian, bullying mentality that should not be indulged.

The rest of his supposed points are just bullshit.  People who get into the hobby of historical wargaming are likely to be much more interested in military history than most people *Gasp*  Shocking.  Next you will be telling me that people who are big into crafting hobbies are likely to be people who enjoy making things more than most people.  He tries to make something obvious and mundane like people who are in a hobby being interested in the thing the hobby is about sound dire by calling it "fetishism".  He acts like every player who plays Germans in a WW2 game goosesteps in wearing a full SS uniform and carrying a Nazi flag, does a Heil Hitler salute and shoots a Jew before every game or something.  It's just hysterical bullshit.

I'd be hard pressed to find an article condemning those "evil gamers" that wasn't bullshit.

It's a pry bar that gets used to beat gamers with to score points with their progressive brethren.

Quote from: yosemitemike;866352In my experience, men in male dominated hobbies are actually quite pleased when women take an interest in the hobby and want to participate.  Women who are interested in what people in the hobby are doing and who want to be a part of that activity and the subculture around it are welcomed.

Yeah, but this can also lead to problems when the welcome is a little too friendly, in an "I want to touch your boobies" kind of way.  Fortunately, most of us learn how to behave in mixed company by the time we get out of our teens or thereabouts, but there do seem to be some guys who continue to react that way for their entire lives and it tends to put women off pretty badly.

Of course, this isn't nearly as common as the hand-wringers like to portray it as being.

Quote from: nDervish;866373Yeah, but this can also lead to problems when the welcome is a little too friendly, in an "I want to touch your boobies" kind of way.  Fortunately, most of us learn how to behave in mixed company by the time we get out of our teens or thereabouts, but there do seem to be some guys who continue to react that way for their entire lives and it tends to put women off pretty badly.

Of course, this isn't nearly as common as the hand-wringers like to portray it as being.

You can find any sort of bad behavior in any group with any significant number of people in it.  That doesn't mean such behavior is more prevalent in that group than it is in the population at large.  You get together enough people and you will get some assholes.  I have been in and around wargaming circles since the 80s and I can count the number of times I have seen that on one hand with fingers left over.  I can only really think of one circumstance where a player was a little too interested in the underage daughter of another player and this behavior wasn't well received.

They want to pretend that this is some widespread and accepted thing among wargamers and it just isn't.

Of couse war gaming as a hobby has a huge problem with homophobia, racism and sexism.
It is dominated by teenage boys and old men.

However, that is still doing all the normal wargamers a disservice. Not everyone who owns a WW2 german army is a Nazi.

@scantily dressed women in illustration:
I have more of a problem with this than my wife. I see boobplate and go immediately "fuck you, I am not going to be manipulated into buying your shit because you put a pair of tits on the cover".
My wife on the other hand usually is fine with it and just rolls her eyes a little. For her pose of the female character is more important than what the character wears.

Even if wargamers are on the conservative side, what do people expect? Its about history (sometimes) tactics war and conquest and victory, that is going to attract pretty Right wing people.

Gaming and Wargaming aren't tools to teach cultural Marxism or whatever Left   values set is in vogue. They are hobbies.

Most of the ones I've met are polite, historical gamers being a bit standoffish and more modern gamers (warhammer and such) being quite friendly

However such games  aren't that hard to learn and play so if people are unhappy with the current scene they should create  a separate one instead of trying to infiltrate the existing one.

I'd suggest  a few starter boxes or whatever minis game interests you, put up an add and maybe a  sign with buzz words you need (progressive, inclusive, diverse,whatever)   than snag a table at the FLGS or somebodies house.

Play.

Easy peasey,

Of course most of this has diddly to do with The Hobby, its more the Left especially the SJW's totalitarian impulse, there can't be hobbies they don't control.

I only play historicals at conventions, not at home, so my experience is with strangers gathering in public.

The big difference I find with historical players vs. 40kers is there is an expectation that you know your history trivia, and that can lead to ostracizing of younger players.

Maybe its just my experience, but at the Bay Area cons, there was always some historical gamers who hosted newbie events to get young people interested in their hobby. Those gamers just cared about what you were planning to do with your tanks and your infantry, and they skip over the part of the game where everyone fantasizes about sucking Rommel's cock.

But hey I'm not a history guy so Rommel's cock may have been totally awesomely tasty so who am I to point fingers?

Quote from: 5 Stone Games;866570Even if wargamers are on the conservative side, what do people expect? Its about history (sometimes) tactics war and conquest and victory, that is going to attract pretty Right wing people.

It's a salient point to make, although it's curious that the 'touchy-feely, pseudo-hippy' roleplaying hobby grew out of the wargaming hobby.

For me, I guess I am more on the left-hand side of the political spectrum - which may be unusual in gaming, possibly, but I don't think so - and the general unspoken rule in most games I participate in is 'no religion, no politics'. If you are gaming in groups who know each other more, then the context may change and discussion may be more free. And of course, there are always times when you just HAVE to express a point as some things are important to your own values.
I respect that, and if other people are willing to at least tolerantly engage in discussion/debate with others who may have differing points of view then things can operate. It's when people aren't that things break down. For me, I tend to differentiate between expressed views of political preference eg. "I don't like President Obama because of X, Y and Z" and those that are designed to persecute "eg I hate gays" and so on. The former is fine by me, the latter not.

Quote from: TrippyHippy;866877It's a salient point to make, although it's curious that the 'touchy-feely, pseudo-hippy' roleplaying hobby grew out of the wargaming hobby.

For me, I guess I am more on the left-hand side of the political spectrum - which may be unusual in gaming, possibly, but I don't think so - and the general unspoken rule in most games I participate in is 'no religion, no politics'. If you are gaming in groups who know each other more, then the context may change and discussion may be more free. And of course, there are always times when you just HAVE to express a point as some things are important to your own values.
I respect that, and if other people are willing to at least tolerantly engage in discussion/debate with others who may have differing points of view then things can operate. It's when people aren't that things break down. For me, I tend to differentiate between expressed views of political preference eg. "I don't like President Obama because of X, Y and Z" and those that are designed to persecute "eg I hate gays" and so on. The former is fine by me, the latter not.

As I understand it there was back in the very early days some stoner culture crossover (late 70's very early 80's) however  D&D isn't really a hippie thing.

Gary and Dave were both devout Christians FWIW and the RPG is originally made was just a "play one guy" wargame.

Most RPG's even now are about people  out  reaving, tomb robbing and killing

Not exactly SJW turf

Softer games din't exists much till the 90's anyway  . Vampire the Masquerade was probably the first  big one with Werewolf the Apocalypse being one of the the most political games I've see.

 I think it would be a trip to play WTA with a bunch of eco-freak types but these days that's probably unwise,  here  "free American" and I don't need the agro or guilt by association or some idiot thinking our game session is a "planning session" or hell worse finding out it really is.

I've read a lot of  of the stuff  in Appendix N  and   Tolkien and Howard were quite Conservative . Other writers had difference views but very little in Appendix N was remotely political and none of it was Leftist  in tone, even Andrea Norton's work.

Quote from: 5 Stone Games;866894As I understand it there was back in the very early days some stoner culture crossover (late 70's very early 80's) however  D&D isn't really a hippie thing.

Not really what I'm trying to say.  What I was suggesting is that if we define the traits of gamers by the traits of the games they choose to play, then the strategist/conquest aspect of wargaming (nominally a right wing trait), could be countered by the collaborative, creative imagination aspects of RPGs which I'd nominate as more 'lefty' in effect.

In terms of the games and designers themselves, I've always considered that many of the first wave of RPGs (maybe those that were more directly evolved from wargames, perhaps) had slight right wing themes, but later alternative games progressed to more left wing world views.

D&D, for example, could be argued as being vaguely right wing because the characters are directly rewarded for their conquests of killing things and taking their stuff. The aim of the game is essentially capitalist, as is Traveller. If you compare this with later successful games, in their respective genres, then RuneQuest is less interested in conquest and more about spiritual ascension and cultural duality. Paranoia and Cyberpunk are, broadly, left wing satires.

Similarly, the early horror Call of Cthulhu RPG represents a fearful paradigm that desperately fears science and progression (as well as being xenophobic, racist, etc), whereas the later Vampire: The Masquerade generally tends to pit newly embraced vampires against elder, conservatives.

All of this may be nuanced and personal perspective, but hopefully you see what I mean!

Quote from: TrippyHippy;867004Not really what I'm trying to say.  What I was suggesting is that if we define the traits of gamers by the traits of the games they choose to play, then the strategist/conquest aspect of wargaming (nominally a right wing trait), could be countered by the collaborative, creative imagination aspects of RPGs which I'd nominate as more 'lefty' in effect.

In terms of the games and designers themselves, I've always considered that many of the first wave of RPGs (maybe those that were more directly evolved from wargames, perhaps) had slight right wing themes, but later alternative games progressed to more left wing world views.

D&D, for example, could be argued as being vaguely right wing because the characters are directly rewarded for their conquests of killing things and taking their stuff. The aim of the game is essentially capitalist, as is Traveller. If you compare this with later successful games, in their respective genres, then RuneQuest is less interested in conquest and more about spiritual ascension and cultural duality. Paranoia and Cyberpunk are, broadly, left wing satires.

Similarly, the early horror Call of Cthulhu RPG represents a fearful paradigm that desperately fears science and progression (as well as being xenophobic, racist, etc), whereas the later Vampire: The Masquerade generally tends to pit newly embraced vampires against elder, conservatives.

All of this may be nuanced and personal perspective, but hopefully you see what I mean!

I do and its actually a pretty interesting perspective. I would say though that while some games do have alternate designs most of them end up played much like D&D is.

Traveller is something of an exception but Mercantilism and Scouting twp of the main activities  are also  traditionally conservative ideas in the US . heck Noble is a character background !

I also slightly disagree with you on the issue of Cyberpunk. Its was a broad and gamable interpretation of the genre but never came off as satire. I've read most of the seminal books and they fit the CP2020 ethos well enough. Its ramped up to 11 in the game but theya re clearly close kin.

Also though most people haven't read it, the Land of the Free/Home of Brave supplements for the game were really good post-apoc also. Its a well developed, rational game world .

Heck played with limited cyberware its a very fine game.

The sense of satire comes from the amount of Min-Maxing . As you probably know the amount of bionics you can have is controlled by a stat called Empathy. The more bionics you have the crazier you get and combat PC's start with an Empathy that of Mr. Rodgers.

That was a dumb rule.

Bill Willington (IIRC) Underground however was pure satire, Tatsee Ghoul (a cannibal fast food chain) replace McDonalds that kind of thing

Sounds like a good blog to ignore and not read.