From the thread off the list (from which I'm thread banned so I can't argue there and thought this warranted it's own thread).
Quote from: jhkim on June 22, 2024, 02:10:30 AMQuote from: Omega on June 22, 2024, 01:58:09 AMSaw this tossed out on a forum as "proof" Gygax was sexist. Think one of the woke members here parroted it too. But this does not sound like something Gygax would say. There were wimen playing from the start and women working on the game from the start. Art, editing, typesetting, modules.
I believe this is from 2005, with Gary posting as Col_Pladoh on the Dragonsfoot forums in the thread "Q&A With Gary Gygax, Part III".
QuoteThere were never many female gamers in our group. My daughter Elise was one of two original play-testers for the first draft of what became the D&D game, and both of her younger sisters played...and lost interest in a few months as she did.
In our campaign group that cycled through in a couple of years (74-75) something in the neighborhood of 100 or so different players, there were perhaps three females.
As a biological determinist, I am positive that most females do not play RPGs because of a difference in brain function. They can play as well as males, but they do not achieve the same sense of satisfaction from playing.
In short there is no special game that will attract females--other that LARPing, which is more csocialization and theatrics and gaming--and it is a waste of time and effort to attempt such a thing.
This calls to mind when Lionel made pastel colored trains and train cars to appeal to females. The effort bombed, the sets were recalled and re-dine as standard models, and those pastel ones that survived are rare collectors items.
https://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=12147&start=60
I'm not claiming anything about it - just giving the source and context.
I think it's safe from the words to assume it is indeed Gary.
I also think it proves quite the opposite of the sexist accusation:
QuoteAs a biological determinist, I am positive that most females do not play RPGs because of a difference in brain function. They can play as well as males, but they do not achieve the same sense of satisfaction from playing.
In short there is no special game that will attract females--other that LARPing, which is more csocialization and theatrics and gaming--and it is a waste of time and effort to attempt such a thing.
So, in his opinion as a biological determinist women can play as well as males, but they don't want to, because the game doesn't appeal to them as much as to males.
Now, you'll always find exceptions to the rule, and he didn't had the benefit of hindsight to know that if it became cool then more women would play, because peer pressure works more on females than in males.
The moment it stops being cool some of the current female players will drop out, if it becomes acceptable to bully those who play AGAIN then most female players will drop out, because they don't want to be outcasts among their female freenemies group.
Sadly, people are being 100% retarded because Gygax was right. The same kinds of moronic shitheads that will go on, ad nauseum, about how they 'support the science', except when it smacks them square in the face. And yes, it was on Dragonsfoot many, many moons ago.
I completely support and agree, with what Gary said. He pretty much said that based upon his own personal experience, women play RPG's just as well as men do; but they don't seem to enjoy it as much, long term. He had personal experience, and a good point of reference.
Surely, some women enjoy it much more. They'd make great DM's or players.
Is csocialization a typo?
Well, some would say that to be a biological determinist is to be a sexist, if "sexism" is defined as the belief that there are broad biologically-based neurological and psychological differences between men and women which social acculturation can only partially compensate for.
I think Gygax's personal sample set may have happened to skew low; I'd guess the proportion of long-term female players in the hobby is well over 3% these days. However, I would also not be at all surprised to find it falling well short of 50%, no matter how one construes the stats. I don't think biology is deterministic, but it's highly influential.
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on June 23, 2024, 04:33:27 PMI think Gygax's personal sample set may have happened to skew low; I'd guess the proportion of long-term female players in the hobby is well over 3% these days. However, I would also not be at all surprised to find it falling well short of 50%, no matter how one construes the stats. I don't think biology is deterministic, but it's highly influential.
I'm skeptical that women are biologically determined not to like RPGs. Gygax cites 3% women in his early games, but women were 19% of RPG players in 1999 according to the pre-3E survey of the time, and they were surveyed at 38% or so recently. If interest was biologically determined, then I wouldn't expect the numbers to change that much.
Some of that may be RPG design, but some may well be changes in the wider culture. For example, the nerd culture in Japan is significantly different than the U.S., with more of female-targeted ("shoujo") manga and anime. I don't know of any surveys with hard numbers, but I've heard that the Japanese RPG scene also has a lot of women - particularly in Call of Cthulhu (which is bigger than D&D in Japan).
Who cares? I sure don't
Quote from: jhkim on June 23, 2024, 05:43:01 PMI'm skeptical that women are biologically determined not to like RPGs. Gygax cites 3% women in his early games, but women were 19% of RPG players in 1999 according to the pre-3E survey of the time, and they were surveyed at 38% or so recently. If interest was biologically determined, then I wouldn't expect the numbers to change that much. Some of that may be RPG design....
To paraphrase Bilbo Baggins for a second, I'm more than half inclined to say more than half of it is game design. In my experience very few women tend to be the kind of math-focused detail junkies that first-gen old-school RPGs tended to be designed for and to reward; I would not be surprised to find that increase in female interest coincided with the change in design philosophy that focused on simpler, story-facilitating mechanics over gamist/simulationist systems.
I'd also want to know if those surveys document
long-term players, people who've been in the hobby for a minimum of five years, and preferably closer to ten; remember, Gygax didn't say that the women he'd played with weren't good players or didn't enjoy playing, merely that they tended to lose interest sooner.
I don't believe in biological determinism either, at least to the extent that I refuse to draw conclusions about any given individual based solely on the patterns of whatever groups that person may fall into. But if simply observing the existence of those group patterns is considered
ipso facto grounds for accusations of sexism, Gygax is never going to be considered innocent of such accusations.
Gary doesn't give two craps if somebody thinks he is a sexist right now. He is on to bigger and better things.
Also, if women make up 51 or 52% of the population and don't make up that much in TTRPGs, then yes, on the whole they do enjoy it less.
Edit: But I agree with Geeky, no evidence that he was sexist.
Gary was right.
Two minds: The cognitive differences between men and women (https://stanmed.stanford.edu/how-mens-and-womens-brains-are-different/)
Quote"In a study of 34 rhesus monkeys, for example, males strongly preferred toys with wheels over plush toys, whereas females found plush toys likable. It would be tough to argue that the monkeys' parents bought them sex-typed toys or that simian society encourages its male offspring to play more with trucks. A much more recent study established that boys and girls 9 to 17 months old — an age when children show few if any signs of recognizing either their own or other children's sex — nonetheless show marked differences in their preference for stereotypically male versus stereotypically female toys."
Quote from: jhkim on June 23, 2024, 05:43:01 PMI'm skeptical that women are biologically determined not to like RPGs. Gygax cites 3% women in his early games, but women were 19% of RPG players in 1999 according to the pre-3E survey of the time, and they were surveyed at 38% or so recently. If interest was biologically determined, then I wouldn't expect the numbers to change that much.
I think its believable that in his experience, that's what he got. How much effort did they actually make to market the game to girls during his time with TSR?
Quote from: jhkim on June 23, 2024, 05:43:01 PMSome of that may be RPG design, but some may well be changes in the wider culture. For example, the nerd culture in Japan is significantly different than the U.S., with more of female-targeted ("shoujo") manga and anime. I don't know of any surveys with hard numbers, but I've heard that the Japanese RPG scene also has a lot of women - particularly in Call of Cthulhu (which is bigger than D&D in Japan).
Manga and anime in Japan are just formats for delivery of content to specific groups. For example, I've seen old guys riding the subway reading golf manga that incorporates tips and techniques for improving their game, or manga that incorporates cooking and the like.
It wouldn't surprise me if CoC in Japan had a higher female ratio than in the USA. There are certain types of horror especially that attracts girls in Japan, which really has no equivalent here, like all the horror movies that involve cell phones. There is also original CoC content there including some less 20s focused stuff. My kid had a fantastic looking book on modern Japanese occupations in CoC.
Greetings!
Gary was right, as usual.
Certainly, there have always been women in gaming. There are more women gamers today, as well.
However, at the end of the day, women are not as attracted to traditional RPG's as men are. Obviously, more simulationist, rules, math=less women. More soap opera, drama, and sex=more women.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: jhkim on June 23, 2024, 05:43:01 PMI'm skeptical that women are biologically determined not to like RPGs.
And yet, people with XX chromosomes do not seem to like RPGs as much as those with XY. For a scientist, you sure do suck at actually making any sort of legitimate conclusion from real data. Even by your own statistics, men are way over-represented. Women were certainly never excluded from playing (anyone who says otherwise is full of shit), they just didn't fucking care. At all. When I played in high school, zero girls played RPGs with us. There was a gaming store I frequented that had two older female regulars out of probably 100 people. Every once in a while a dude would bring his girlfriend and sometimes the girl would seem to enjoy it, but they rarely lasted longer than a couple weeks.
If it's not biological, then what is it? Why do boys like to play with tractors and girls like dolls? As the parent of a young girl and boy, I can assure you they have interests that are inherent to their being; anyone who claims otherwise is just pushing a horseshit agenda.
Quote from: Brad on June 24, 2024, 09:13:24 AMQuote from: jhkim on June 23, 2024, 05:43:01 PMI'm skeptical that women are biologically determined not to like RPGs.
And yet, people with XX chromosomes do not seem to like RPGs as much as those with XY. For a scientist, you sure do suck at actually making any sort of legitimate conclusion from real data. Even by your own statistics, men are way over-represented. Women were certainly never excluded from playing (anyone who says otherwise is full of shit), they just didn't fucking care. At all. When I played in high school, zero girls played RPGs with us. There was a gaming store I frequented that had two older female regulars out of probably 100 people. Every once in a while a dude would bring his girlfriend and sometimes the girl would seem to enjoy it, but they rarely lasted longer than a couple weeks.
If it's not biological, then what is it? Why do boys like to play with tractors and girls like dolls? As the parent of a young girl and boy, I can assure you they have interests that are inherent to their being; anyone who claims otherwise is just pushing a horseshit agenda.
It's funny how quickly "trust the science!" falls by the wayside when the "science" seems to say something lefties don't like. The biological differentiation of interests based on sex are very well known and well established, both in evolutionary biology and psychology. Evidence is overwhelming that, the more free the choice is, the more men and women tend to pick different things, whether it is hobbies, employment, entertainment, etc. This is one of the bedrock understandings of human behavior... except for the folks who are social constructionists (read "commies") and refuse to acknowledge it. Honestly, the whole "gender studies" disciplines (designed to obfuscate these differences) are less scientific than the creationists, yet far more acceptable to the left, somehow...
Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 09:51:48 AMIt's funny how quickly "trust the science!" falls by the wayside when the "science" seems to say something lefties don't like.
The irony is that very often the "science" says far less than the press releases
about the science claim it does, and it's the press releases that propagandists (of any stripe) are most concerned with.
As long as a game is designed to provide as much equal entertainment potential possible to any individual (or is at least honest about which individuals it's seeking to entertain), and as long as any given group is honest about its own participation requirements and gives any individual person the best shot possible at meeting them, I don't think anybody needs to worry about the "science". (Unless of course you work in a marketing department somewhere.)
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on June 23, 2024, 04:33:27 PMWell, some would say that to be a biological determinist is to be a sexist, if "sexism" is defined as the belief that there are broad biologically-based neurological and psychological differences between men and women which social acculturation can only partially compensate for.
I think Gygax's personal sample set may have happened to skew low; I'd guess the proportion of long-term female players in the hobby is well over 3% these days. However, I would also not be at all surprised to find it falling well short of 50%, no matter how one construes the stats. I don't think biology is deterministic, but it's highly influential.
"biological determinist" they mean genetics. Your genes denote who you are and what you can become. You might be able to bump your IQ up a few points with training, but you are not going to take a Jeremy Crawford (85 IQ) and get him to come up with the theory of relativity (Einstein 160 IQ). Hell Einstein would view Crawford as an ape.
Now, if you ever run into a leftist who uses biological essentialist/determinist ask them this:
Do you believe some people are better than others?
They will say no.
Follow up:
So with the same training as Usian bolt you can match his 100M dash?
If they say yes, ask them if they have the ACTN3 gene at the same level of expression as Usian.
They will say no, and you follow up so there are people better than you at least right?
Follow up next with the mental question:
With the same education as Einstein could you come up with the theory of relativity?
They will say yes, then you tell them Einstein was a mutant, he was missing grey matter that put two of his lobes closer than normal which gave him a different view on the world. You would never be an Einstein without that mutation.
You will not change a leftard, but you will cause them to experience extreme cognitive dissonance. I love doing that to them whenever I can.
Quote from: SHARK on June 24, 2024, 02:21:33 AMHowever, at the end of the day, women are not as attracted to traditional RPG's as men are. Obviously, more simulationist, rules, math=less women. More soap opera, drama, and sex=more women.
SHARK, your statement here directly contradicts Gygax's statements,
Quote from: Gary GygaxAs a biological determinist, I am positive that most females do not play RPGs because of a difference in brain function. They can play as well as males, but they do not achieve the same sense of satisfaction from playing.
In short there is no special game that will attract females--other that LARPing, which is more csocialization and theatrics and gaming--and it is a waste of time and effort to attempt such a thing.
I agree that different RPGs will have different appeal to men and women. There will always be population differences between men and women liking things, and the ratio won't be the same for every game.
Quote from: jhkim on June 24, 2024, 02:53:25 PMQuote from: SHARK on June 24, 2024, 02:21:33 AMHowever, at the end of the day, women are not as attracted to traditional RPG's as men are. Obviously, more simulationist, rules, math=less women. More soap opera, drama, and sex=more women.
SHARK, your statement here directly contradicts Gygax's statements,
Quote from: Gary GygaxAs a biological determinist, I am positive that most females do not play RPGs because of a difference in brain function. They can play as well as males, but they do not achieve the same sense of satisfaction from playing.
In short there is no special game that will attract females--other that LARPing, which is more csocialization and theatrics and gaming--and it is a waste of time and effort to attempt such a thing.
I agree that different RPGs will have different appeal to men and women. There will always be population differences between men and women liking things, and the ratio won't be the same for every game.
No, it doesn't. Gygax is referring to "role playing game" by his use of the term "game." And to him, a role playing game was simulationist, with lots of rules and math. It's what he wrote, played, and designed. Gary contrasting RPGs with LARPs is exactly the contrast SHARK is making. Which, if you weren't so disingenuous, you would easily admit.
Quote from: Brad on June 24, 2024, 09:13:24 AMQuote from: jhkim on June 23, 2024, 05:43:01 PMI'm skeptical that women are biologically determined not to like RPGs.
And yet, people with XX chromosomes do not seem to like RPGs as much as those with XY. For a scientist, you sure do suck at actually making any sort of legitimate conclusion from real data. Even by your own statistics, men are way over-represented. Women were certainly never excluded from playing (anyone who says otherwise is full of shit), they just didn't fucking care. At all. When I played in high school, zero girls played RPGs with us. There was a gaming store I frequented that had two older female regulars out of probably 100 people. Every once in a while a dude would bring his girlfriend and sometimes the girl would seem to enjoy it, but they rarely lasted longer than a couple weeks.
If it's not biological, then what is it? Why do boys like to play with tractors and girls like dolls? As the parent of a young girl and boy, I can assure you they have interests that are inherent to their being; anyone who claims otherwise is just pushing a horseshit agenda.
Patriarchy, silly! Evolution stopped at our necks, and everything is socially constructed. Men are horrible oppressors and the way to make things better is for women to act exactly like men.
My feminist tactic to get more girls and women playing is to force them like in that scene in Clockwork Orange.
[/s, of course]
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on June 24, 2024, 02:25:43 PMWith the same education as Einstein could you come up with the theory of relativity?
They will say yes, then you tell them Einstein was a mutant, he was missing grey matter that put two of his lobes closer than normal which gave him a different view on the world. You would never be an Einstein without that mutation.
ORLY? https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/a-few-historical-frauds/
Quote from: Hobo on June 24, 2024, 03:59:50 PMQuote from: honeydipperdavid on June 24, 2024, 02:25:43 PMWith the same education as Einstein could you come up with the theory of relativity?
They will say yes, then you tell them Einstein was a mutant, he was missing grey matter that put two of his lobes closer than normal which gave him a different view on the world. You would never be an Einstein without that mutation.
ORLY? https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/a-few-historical-frauds/
You are aware that there are direct appeals to anti-Semitic tropes in that piece (claims that Einstein was promoted by the "Jewish-controlled media", etc.)? Unless you were posting it as a joke, I wouldn't put to much faith in any of its conclusions...
Given the size of this hobby, the number of men who like playing tabletop RPGs is also a pretty small minority of the overall male demographic. Even today, "I play Dungeons and Dragons" isn't the recommended first answer for an attractive stranger in a bar asking you what you do for fun.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on June 24, 2024, 02:25:43 PMYou are aware that there are direct appeals to anti-Semitic tropes in that piece (claims that Einstein was promoted by the "Jewish-controlled media", etc.)? Unless you were posting it as a joke, I wouldn't put to much faith in any of its conclusions...
You are aware that Ron Unz, the editor and host of the site is Jewish, right? And the irony of appealing to "tropes" and ignoring the sources and referenced data in a thread where you literally just accused someone else of ignoring data on another issue?
Unless your point was that everyone has blind spots where no matter what the evidence says, they will absolutely never admit it has any validity if it violates a sacred cow of their personal view of the world.
Quote from: Hobo on June 24, 2024, 06:37:58 PMQuote from: honeydipperdavid on June 24, 2024, 02:25:43 PMYou are aware that there are direct appeals to anti-Semitic tropes in that piece (claims that Einstein was promoted by the "Jewish-controlled media", etc.)? Unless you were posting it as a joke, I wouldn't put to much faith in any of its conclusions...
You are aware that Ron Unz, the editor and host of the site is Jewish, right? And the irony of appealing to "tropes" and ignoring the sources and referenced data in a thread where you literally just accused someone else of ignoring data on another issue?
Unless your point was that everyone has blind spots where no matter what the evidence says, they will absolutely never admit it has any validity if it violates a sacred cow of their personal view of the world.
You are aware that the ethnic background of a person does not immunize them from spreading racist statements.
So, do you agree with the following statement from the article (which has no linked sources or citations):
QuoteEinstein was Jewish and had the support of the Jewish-controlled media who conspired to create yet another historical myth.
Yes or no? I'm sure Pundit will also be very interested in your answer...
Quote from: jhkim on June 24, 2024, 02:53:25 PMQuote from: SHARK on June 24, 2024, 02:21:33 AMHowever, at the end of the day, women are not as attracted to traditional RPG's as men are. Obviously, more simulationist, rules, math=less women. More soap opera, drama, and sex=more women.
SHARK, your statement here directly contradicts Gygax's statements,
Quote from: Gary GygaxAs a biological determinist, I am positive that most females do not play RPGs because of a difference in brain function. They can play as well as males, but they do not achieve the same sense of satisfaction from playing.
In short there is no special game that will attract females--other that LARPing, which is more csocialization and theatrics and gaming--and it is a waste of time and effort to attempt such a thing.
I agree that different RPGs will have different appeal to men and women. There will always be population differences between men and women liking things, and the ratio won't be the same for every game.
Greetings!
Well, as for *contradicting* the Great Gygax, that may be, or rather, I am merely observing dynamics that reached into the future that Gygax may have been unfamiliar with.
VAMPIRE THE MASQUERADE.
Beyond that particular game--any D&D game, or other RPG, that leans more into drama, soap operas, and sex, will assuredly attract more women. I have personally witnessed this dynamic in action myself, with women players.
Men, on the other hand, are more drawn to math, simulationism, and action.
In addition, the growth of 5E D&D also supports my statement forcefully.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 03:10:22 PMQuote from: jhkim on June 24, 2024, 02:53:25 PMQuote from: SHARK on June 24, 2024, 02:21:33 AMHowever, at the end of the day, women are not as attracted to traditional RPG's as men are. Obviously, more simulationist, rules, math=less women. More soap opera, drama, and sex=more women.
SHARK, your statement here directly contradicts Gygax's statements,
Quote from: Gary GygaxAs a biological determinist, I am positive that most females do not play RPGs because of a difference in brain function. They can play as well as males, but they do not achieve the same sense of satisfaction from playing.
In short there is no special game that will attract females--other that LARPing, which is more csocialization and theatrics and gaming--and it is a waste of time and effort to attempt such a thing.
I agree that different RPGs will have different appeal to men and women. There will always be population differences between men and women liking things, and the ratio won't be the same for every game.
No, it doesn't. Gygax is referring to "role playing game" by his use of the term "game." And to him, a role playing game was simulationist, with lots of rules and math. It's what he wrote, played, and designed. Gary contrasting RPGs with LARPs is exactly the contrast SHARK is making. Which, if you weren't so disingenuous, you would easily admit.
Greetings!
EXACTLY! Thank you, my friend!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 07:06:47 PMYou are aware that the ethnic background of a person does not immunize them from spreading racist statements.
So, do you agree with the following statement from the article (which has no linked sources or citations):
QuoteEinstein was Jewish and had the support of the Jewish-controlled media who conspired to create yet another historical myth.
Yes or no? I'm sure Pundit will also be very interested in your answer...
Typical. "I found one offhand statement I didn't like which isn't sourced, so I dismiss the entire article AND it's extensive sourced links full of primary sources, AND assume a smug moral high ground position from which to posture and appeal to an assumptive friendly authority to protect myself from being challenged."
Real strong-looking position you're taking there.
Quote from: Hobo on June 25, 2024, 07:56:30 AMQuote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 07:06:47 PMYou are aware that the ethnic background of a person does not immunize them from spreading racist statements.
So, do you agree with the following statement from the article (which has no linked sources or citations):
QuoteEinstein was Jewish and had the support of the Jewish-controlled media who conspired to create yet another historical myth.
Yes or no? I'm sure Pundit will also be very interested in your answer...
Typical. "I found one offhand statement I didn't like which isn't sourced, so I dismiss the entire article AND it's extensive sourced links full of primary sources, AND assume a smug moral high ground position from which to posture and appeal to an assumptive friendly authority to protect myself from being challenged."
Real strong-looking position you're taking there.
When you add shit to an ice cream sundae, the shit ruins the sundae; the sundae doesn't make the shit better. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.
Now answer the question: do you agree with the quote from the article?
I never cared if Gary was sexist or not. He wrote the game I play and love.
Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 25, 2024, 08:45:38 AMWhen you add shit to an ice cream sundae, the shit ruins the sundae; the sundae doesn't make the shit better. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.
No, that's not how it works. You're taking a cowardly SJW tactic of "scan for some offhand comment buried in a link I can pretend to be offended by" followed by "dismiss everything factual that I don't want to face because of said offhand comment" combined with "attempt to cancel the person who I'm pretending to be offended by so I never have to face the sources that I don't want to see ever again."
That makes you a liar and a bad faith actor.
QuoteNow answer the question: do you agree with the quote from the article?
I don't owe any answers to liars and bad faith actors, especially about off topic non sequiturs.
Quote from: Hobo on June 25, 2024, 03:53:03 PMQuote from: Eirikrautha on June 25, 2024, 08:45:38 AMWhen you add shit to an ice cream sundae, the shit ruins the sundae; the sundae doesn't make the shit better. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.
No, that's not how it works. You're taking a cowardly SJW tactic of "scan for some offhand comment buried in a link I can pretend to be offended by" followed by "dismiss everything factual that I don't want to face because of said offhand comment" combined with "attempt to cancel the person who I'm pretending to be offended by so I never have to face the sources that I don't want to see ever again."
That makes you a liar and a bad faith actor.
QuoteNow answer the question: do you agree with the quote from the article?
I don't owe any answers to liars and bad faith actors, especially about off topic non sequiturs.
Hey, Pundit, looks like GenCon doesn't have a monopoly on the anti-Semites...
Quote from: Hobo on June 24, 2024, 03:59:50 PMQuote from: honeydipperdavid on June 24, 2024, 02:25:43 PMWith the same education as Einstein could you come up with the theory of relativity?
They will say yes, then you tell them Einstein was a mutant, he was missing grey matter that put two of his lobes closer than normal which gave him a different view on the world. You would never be an Einstein without that mutation.
ORLY? https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/a-few-historical-frauds/
As a physicist, I'd like to comment on the substance of the claim, which is:
QuoteEinstein's papers, theories, mathematics, documentation, were almost 100% plagiarised from others. He combined the prior published works of several people into one paper and claimed ownership of all of it. His so-called theories were nothing more than a composition encompassing the prior work of men like James Maxwell, Hendrik Lorentz, Joseph Larmor, Olinto De Pretto, Robert Brown, Ludwig Boltzmann, Friedrich Hasenöhrl, and many more.
In a paper he wrote in 1907, in part responding to (already-virulent) accusations of plagiarism, Einstein declared that plagiarism was perfectly acceptable as a form of ethical research, stating "... the nature [of physics is] that what follows has already been partly solved by other authors. I am [therefore] entitled to leave out a thoroughly pedantic survey of the literature..."
This requires that not just the popular press be in on the conspiracy, but also the Nobel Prize committee (which takes attribution very seriously) as well as all of the mainstream biographers and historians of science.
What Einstein says about plagiarism in math is essentially correct. An accusation of plagiarizing math is very different from plagiarizing creative writing. In the math of a theoretical physics papers, you're always going to be using many equations written by other people in addition to your own. Math isn't creative writing, and no one writes their math equations full of attribution footnotes. Here's a paper in particular refuting the accursation that he plagiarized Poincare.
https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Essays/View/4137
Einstein did use other people's math, but he added his own and came to unique conclusions from it, for which he has been praised by all sorts of scientists and scientific organizations, Jewish and non-Jewish. I wouldn't call it a mutation because it's not clear what part of his insights came from genetics and what part came from environment. (There's more to environment than just education.) But however he came by it, Einstein was a genius.
Reddit at it again. I have a feeling thats a rebuttal to this very thread.
D&D Co-Creator Gary Gygax was Sexist. Talking About it is Key to Preserving his Legacy.
https://new.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1dy6sia/dd_cocreator_gary_gygax_was_sexist_talking_about/ (https://new.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1dy6sia/dd_cocreator_gary_gygax_was_sexist_talking_about/)
Quote from: Omega on July 08, 2024, 03:54:43 PMReddit at it again. I have a feeling thats a rebuttal to this very thread.
D&D Co-Creator Gary Gygax was Sexist. Talking About it is Key to Preserving his Legacy.
https://new.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1dy6sia/dd_cocreator_gary_gygax_was_sexist_talking_about/ (https://new.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1dy6sia/dd_cocreator_gary_gygax_was_sexist_talking_about/)
LOL at that Gygax quote. Sounds like he was just pissed off about some pandering bullshit, but since it was given absolutely no context, of course they will take it as uncharitably as possible.
Quote from: Omega on July 08, 2024, 03:54:43 PMReddit at it again. I have a feeling thats a rebuttal to this very thread.
D&D Co-Creator Gary Gygax was Sexist. Talking About it is Key to Preserving his Legacy.
https://new.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1dy6sia/dd_cocreator_gary_gygax_was_sexist_talking_about/ (https://new.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1dy6sia/dd_cocreator_gary_gygax_was_sexist_talking_about/)
I LOLed at the idiots comparing Mercer to Gygax...
Quote from: Brad on July 08, 2024, 04:47:54 PMQuote from: Omega on July 08, 2024, 03:54:43 PMhttps://new.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1dy6sia/dd_cocreator_gary_gygax_was_sexist_talking_about/ (https://new.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1dy6sia/dd_cocreator_gary_gygax_was_sexist_talking_about/)
LOL at that Gygax quote. Sounds like he was just pissed off about some pandering bullshit, but since it was given absolutely no context, of course they will take it as uncharitably as possible.
I presume you're talking about the snippet at the top? They give the full quote later in the article.
QuoteWriting in EUROPA, a European fanzine, Gygax said,
"I have been accused of being a nasty old sexist-male-Chauvinist-pig, for the wording in D&D isn't what it should be. There should be more emphasis on the female role, more non-gendered names, and so forth. I thought perhaps these folks were right and considered adding women in the 'Raping and Pillaging['] section, in the 'Whores and Tavern Wenches' chapter, the special magical part dealing with 'Hags and Crones', and thought perhaps of adding an appendix on 'Medieval Harems, Slave Girls, and Going Viking'. Damn right I am sexist. It doesn't matter to me if women get paid as much as men, get jobs traditionally male, and shower in the men's locker room. They can jolly well stay away from wargaming in droves for all I care. I've seen many a good wargame and wargamer spoiled thanks to the fair sex. I'll detail that if anyone wishes."
I can't find the complete Europa 10-11 online, but I found #6-8 which also has some comments by Gygax.
https://whiningkentpigs.com/DW/oldzines/europa6-8.pdf
It's what we've been saying all along. Even Gary saw it back in the 70's/80's.
Anyone who wants to play is welcome. Radical ideologues who want to change the whole hobby to conform to their specific ideas of isms are missing the forest for the trees. They're bad faith actors and should be avoided if you want to play your game, much less retain your sanity.
Quote from: jhkim on July 08, 2024, 05:17:03 PMQuote from: Brad on July 08, 2024, 04:47:54 PMQuote from: Omega on July 08, 2024, 03:54:43 PMhttps://new.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1dy6sia/dd_cocreator_gary_gygax_was_sexist_talking_about/ (https://new.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1dy6sia/dd_cocreator_gary_gygax_was_sexist_talking_about/)
LOL at that Gygax quote. Sounds like he was just pissed off about some pandering bullshit, but since it was given absolutely no context, of course they will take it as uncharitably as possible.
I presume you're talking about the snippet at the top? They give the full quote later in the article.
QuoteWriting in EUROPA, a European fanzine, Gygax said,
"I have been accused of being a nasty old sexist-male-Chauvinist-pig, for the wording in D&D isn't what it should be. There should be more emphasis on the female role, more non-gendered names, and so forth. I thought perhaps these folks were right and considered adding women in the 'Raping and Pillaging['] section, in the 'Whores and Tavern Wenches' chapter, the special magical part dealing with 'Hags and Crones', and thought perhaps of adding an appendix on 'Medieval Harems, Slave Girls, and Going Viking'. Damn right I am sexist. It doesn't matter to me if women get paid as much as men, get jobs traditionally male, and shower in the men's locker room. They can jolly well stay away from wargaming in droves for all I care. I've seen many a good wargame and wargamer spoiled thanks to the fair sex. I'll detail that if anyone wishes."
I can't find the complete Europa 10-11 online, but I found #6-8 which also has some comments by Gygax.
https://whiningkentpigs.com/DW/oldzines/europa6-8.pdf
So he WAS pissed off about some pandering or the Feminyds trying to infiltrate the game...
But you (and the whole woke cult) will ignore the part I bolded, his prior comments elsewhere to pillory him.
Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 08, 2024, 05:38:16 PMIt's what we've been saying all along. Even Gary saw it back in the 70's/80's.
Anyone who wants to play is welcome. Radical ideologues who want to change the whole hobby to conform to their specific ideas of isms are missing the forest for the trees. They're bad faith actors and should be avoided if you want to play your game, much less retain your sanity.
Gary's only mistake was to use their terminology as if it was legitimate. The left uses "sexist" to mean anyone who holds a scientific view of human sexes that recognizes their differences in biology, social interactions, and preferences. Just like someone in favor of controlled, legal immigration is now a "xenophobe" or "white nationalist." The left labels with slander to try and denigrate ideas they don't like.
I've never been a great fan of Gygax, but I think he and I would probably have much more common ground than either of us would with WotC's Church of Asmodeus. :)
Quote from: Eirikrautha on July 08, 2024, 07:25:55 PMQuote from: Ratman_tf on July 08, 2024, 05:38:16 PMIt's what we've been saying all along. Even Gary saw it back in the 70's/80's.
Anyone who wants to play is welcome. Radical ideologues who want to change the whole hobby to conform to their specific ideas of isms are missing the forest for the trees. They're bad faith actors and should be avoided if you want to play your game, much less retain your sanity.
Gary's only mistake was to use their terminology as if it was legitimate. The left uses "sexist" to mean anyone who holds a scientific view of human sexes that recognizes their differences in biology, social interactions, and preferences. Just like someone in favor of controlled, legal immigration is now a "xenophobe" or "white nationalist." The left labels with slander to try and denigrate ideas they don't like.
Yep. They use such word games because they work.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 08, 2024, 06:54:48 PMSo he WAS pissed off about some pandering or the Feminyds trying to infiltrate the game...
But you (and the whole woke cult) will ignore the part I bolded, his prior comments elsewhere to pillory him.
Probably the same sort of crap that has gone on since time immemorial: some dude tries to hook up with a girl by placating her in some fashion. The girl you wanna date hates wargames because they're too violent and/or complicated? Why not add some rainbows and unicorns and get rid of all those pesky combat tables! Yeah, never works...look at the state of D&D now. Endless stupidity to attract a segment of the population that only cares about being the center of attention and won't spend any money on the product.
I hate the woke deconstruction take on well, everything. I just have a hard time making an issue out of what some random Internet person reads into a few sentences from an interview done fifty years ago in 1975. WotC and their minions have demonstrated an overwhelming derision for the originators of D&D even though they use the IP to make money, so this just looks like more rage click bait advertising from them.
Quote from: Brad on July 08, 2024, 10:40:36 PMQuote from: GeekyBugle on July 08, 2024, 06:54:48 PMSo he WAS pissed off about some pandering or the Feminyds trying to infiltrate the game...
But you (and the whole woke cult) will ignore the part I bolded, his prior comments elsewhere to pillory him.
Probably the same sort of crap that has gone on since time immemorial: some dude tries to hook up with a girl by placating her in some fashion. The girl you wanna date hates wargames because they're too violent and/or complicated? Why not add some rainbows and unicorns and get rid of all those pesky combat tables! Yeah, never works...look at the state of D&D now. Endless stupidity to attract a segment of the population that only cares about being the center of attention and won't spend any money on the product.
Greetings!
YEAH! That's what we need more of--"Rainbows and Unicorns!" *Laughing*
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: jhkim on July 08, 2024, 05:17:03 PMI presume you're talking about the snippet at the top? They give the full quote later in the article.
QuoteWriting in EUROPA, a European fanzine, Gygax said,
"I have been accused of being a nasty old sexist-male-Chauvinist-pig, for the wording in D&D isn't what it should be. There should be more emphasis on the female role, more non-gendered names, and so forth. I thought perhaps these folks were right and considered adding women in the 'Raping and Pillaging['] section, in the 'Whores and Tavern Wenches' chapter, the special magical part dealing with 'Hags and Crones', and thought perhaps of adding an appendix on 'Medieval Harems, Slave Girls, and Going Viking'. Damn right I am sexist. It doesn't matter to me if women get paid as much as men, get jobs traditionally male, and shower in the men's locker room. They can jolly well stay away from wargaming in droves for all I care. I've seen many a good wargame and wargamer spoiled thanks to the fair sex. I'll detail that if anyone wishes."
Honestly, that's just funny.
Absent context I couldn't say for sure, but it does read like a response someone might give if they're sick of addressing the same accusation over and over again.
I don't much care whether Gygax was a sexist or not. I'm neither a Gygax hater nor a Gygax worshipper. With all due respect to the man and his work, I kind of regard him as the slightly kooky grandpa of the roleplaying hobby.
Anyway, "sexist" is much like "racist", in that the term has enough variable meanings that just saying the label could be applied to someone doesn't say anything substantive about their character.
Quote from: jeff37923 on July 08, 2024, 11:08:36 PMI hate the woke deconstruction take on well, everything. I just have a hard time making an issue out of what some random Internet person reads into a few sentences from an interview done fifty years ago in 1975. WotC and their minions have demonstrated an overwhelming derision for the originators of D&D even though they use the IP to make money, so this just looks like more rage click bait advertising from them.
The problem is this can and will propigate and spread. As that thrad title saus. The sociopaths want to preserve these lies as Gygax's "Legacy".
This has exploded over on ENWorld. I think the EUROPA quote reads most naturally as a mix of frustration, sarcasm, and hyperbole. But even stipulating that Gygax was as sexist as his detractors make out, it still doesn't compare on my moral scale to things like Jonathan Tweet raising money for Planned Parenthood, or WotC's whole corporate culture. :)
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on July 10, 2024, 08:24:58 AMThis has exploded over on ENWorld. I think the EUROPA quote reads most naturally as a mix of frustration, sarcasm, and hyperbole. But even stipulating that Gygax was as sexist as his detractors make out, it still doesn't compare on my moral scale to things like Jonathan Tweet raising money for Planned Parenthood, or WotC's whole corporate culture. :)
That's because ENWorld is a heavily controlled forum, made to look like a place where ideas can be shared for the ignorant rubes. The forum rules are explicitly woke, and the moderation allows dogpiling of unpopular comments (but not the other way) up until the person attacked makes an irrefutable point, which is when the moderators step in with punishment. The owner and mods like to think of themselves as intelligent, but I've never seen an interaction with any of them that would even suggest a room-temperature IQ (and that's in their metric system). So, no surprise that they have a "two minutes of EGG hate" thread on their boards. Neither Morrus nor any of his sycophants are worthy to carry EGG's jock strap, faults and all, and he knows it...
Oh, and another thing. This is a quote used to "prove" Gary was a sexist:
QuoteAs I have often said, I am a biological determinist, and there is no question that male and female brains are different. It is apparent to me that by and large females do not derrive the same inner satisfaction from playing games as a hobby that males do. It isn't that females can't play games well, it is just that it isn't a compelling activity to them as is the case for males.
Gygax, 2004.
So, as you can see, scientific
reality is sexist. No wonder they've made themselves an echo chamber. Between that and the assertion that EGG chose Tiamat (a Babylonian goddess of chaos) to be a principle goddess of chaos in D&D because of sexism, it's descending into absolute stupidity. Once you have a hammer...
Quote from: Gary GygaxAs I have often said, I am a biological determinist, and there is no question that male and female brains are different. It is apparent to me that by and large females do not derrive the same inner satisfaction from playing games as a hobby that males do. It isn't that females can't play games well, it is just that it isn't a compelling activity to them as is the case for males.
Gygax, 2004.
It doesn't prove sexism, but I think this is wrong.
The data shows a massive difference in female participation in RPGs between the 1970s, 1999, and the 2020s. Gygax cited only 3% women in his 1970s games, but in 1999 they were surveyed at 19% participation, and in the 2020s at 39%. Since women's genetics didn't change during that time, that shows that clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors, not genetics.
There are genetic differences between men and women, but that doesn't mean that any given social difference is genetic. Women have longer hair than men in Western society, but that doesn't mean there is a genetic trait that programs their hair to be longer. Assuming that it comes from genetics is an obvious fallacy.
Quote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 11:32:28 AMThe data shows a massive difference in female participation in RPGs between the 1970s, 1999, and the 2020s. Gygax cited only 3% women in his 1970s games, but in 1999 they were surveyed at 19% participation, and in the 2020s at 39%. Since women's genetics didn't change during that time, that shows that clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors, not genetics.
One other factor: The
game changed substantially over that time frame. And that's assuming the stats are for D&D itself, not the TTRPG hobby overall.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on July 10, 2024, 11:46:03 AMQuote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 11:32:28 AMThe data shows a massive difference in female participation in RPGs between the 1970s, 1999, and the 2020s. Gygax cited only 3% women in his 1970s games, but in 1999 they were surveyed at 19% participation, and in the 2020s at 39%. Since women's genetics didn't change during that time, that shows that clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors, not genetics.
One other factor: The game changed substantially over that time frame. And that's assuming the stats are for D&D itself, not the TTRPG hobby overall.
By Gary's quote, that would be irrelevant. He says "playing games as a hobby" not "playing [the current version of] D&D."
Quote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 11:32:28 AMQuote from: Gary GygaxAs I have often said, I am a biological determinist, and there is no question that male and female brains are different. It is apparent to me that by and large females do not derrive the same inner satisfaction from playing games as a hobby that males do. It isn't that females can't play games well, it is just that it isn't a compelling activity to them as is the case for males.
Gygax, 2004.
It doesn't prove sexism, but I think this is wrong.
The data shows a massive difference in female participation in RPGs between the 1970s, 1999, and the 2020s. Gygax cited only 3% women in his 1970s games, but in 1999 they were surveyed at 19% participation, and in the 2020s at 39%. Since women's genetics didn't change during that time, that shows that clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors, not genetics.
There are genetic differences between men and women, but that doesn't mean that any given social difference is genetic. Women have longer hair than men in Western society, but that doesn't mean there is a genetic trait that programs their hair to be longer. Assuming that it comes from genetics is an obvious fallacy.
Oh really?
Assuming the 2020's data isn't manipulated, what could explain such a change?
1.- Playing RPGs as a hobby isn't the same as playing RPGs
2.- The social stigma against such pastimes was already going away
3.- Games other than D&D
Those just from the top of my head and assuming the data isn't manipulated (which I doubt)
Your next "argument" is a false equivalence, and you know it. But even if it wasn't several studies have been done (one famously with baby chimps), that clearly demonstrate there's a sexual difference between boys and girls regarding styles of play. Including one by Lego who successfully created a girls line without destroying their boys line.
But your cult "follows teh Science! tm" until it's inconvenient, evolution doesn't stop at the neck.
Quote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 11:32:28 AMThere are genetic differences between men and women, but that doesn't mean that any given social difference is genetic.
It also doesn't mean any given social difference ISN'T genetic.
As I already stated before, you suck as a fucking scientist. You inject your personal biases into EVERY possible interpretation of data, disregarding actual statistics and the hard reality of real life whenever it doesn't suit your Marxist agenda.
Patiently waiting for the anecdotes about your furry lesbian quadraphonic transllama friend who disproves the general consensus...
EDIT: Gary had three daughters, all of whom he spoke highly of and directly involved in his life, even having them run PCs in his D&D games. For such a "sexist" he certainly seemed to be a good father and treated his daughters well. "Sexism", as already stated, is fucking meaningless now. It used to imply you had some sort of irrational aversion to women in some capacity, now it means if you say anything like "women on average tend to be physically weaker than men based on numerous scientific studies" you are a horrible, horrible sexist asshole.
Quote from: HappyDaze on July 10, 2024, 11:54:29 AMQuote from: Armchair Gamer on July 10, 2024, 11:46:03 AMOne other factor: The game changed substantially over that time frame. And that's assuming the stats are for D&D itself, not the TTRPG hobby overall.
By Gary's quote, that would be irrelevant. He says "playing games as a hobby" not "playing [the current version of] D&D."
Thanks, HappyDaze. This is also more explicit in the full quote from the OP. Adding in the next sentence, this reads:
Quote from: Gary GygaxAs a biological determinist, I am positive that most females do not play RPGs because of a difference in brain function. They can play as well as males, but they do not achieve the same sense of satisfaction from playing.
In short there is no special game that will attract females--other that LARPing, which is more csocialization and theatrics and gaming--and it is a waste of time and effort to attempt such a thing.
I tend to agree with Armchair Gamer's implication that women will (on average) prefer different RPGs to men. Regardless of the genetic component, women have different cultural interests, so it makes sense that they'd have different preferences on average. Likewise, Japanese gamers have different preferences from American ones, as shown how Call of Cthulhu is the dominant game in Japan (not D&D).
Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 10, 2024, 12:09:46 PMAssuming the 2020's data isn't manipulated, what could explain such a change?
1.- Playing RPGs as a hobby isn't the same as playing RPGs
2.- The social stigma against such pastimes was already going away
3.- Games other than D&D
I don't see how that disagrees with me. Social stigma and non-D&D game design are environmental/cultural factors.
This all underlies the issue that hobbies and entertainment (and a shitton of other things) skew towards certain sexes because of their preferences being influenced by their sex. Activist types come in and make the observation that the demographic disparity must be caused by sexism. So thing X needs to change to make women (never the reverse, never men) more welcomed.
But the changes usually are incredibly stupid and misguided attempts at making the thing inclusive. Fundamentally changing what fans (men and women) found interesting about the thing in the first place.
Like cutting down a forest to save it from a fire.
We see it in 40k in the attempts to shoehorn women into the "boys clubs" factions of 40k, when there already are women characters in the lore. Or the ridiculous attempts to put "safety features" into RPGs. Etc, etc, we have discussed the specifics to death and back again.
Gary's rant about women in the hobby comes across to me as pushback against these activist types, who have been around for a long time, but only lately have become so vocal and unhinged about their views and have managed to get into positions of creative and administrative power.
Quote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 11:32:28 AMIt doesn't prove sexism, but I think this is wrong.
The data shows a massive difference in female participation in RPGs between the 1970s, 1999, and the 2020s. Gygax cited only 3% women in his 1970s games, but in 1999 they were surveyed at 19% participation, and in the 2020s at 39%. Since women's genetics didn't change during that time, that shows that clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors, not genetics.
First, what data? What surveys were there in 1978 compared with 2018? The change in survey responses may show a greater reach in surveys, not a change in the popularity. Do you have evidence (not personal anecdotes) that these numbers are accurate? You don't, because no one does. So any conclusion about participation rates based solely on those surveys is completely unwarranted. Your certainty can only be based in your own biases.
Secondly, even taking these numbers at face value, you still can't draw those conclusions. Is occupational preference biologically influence by sex? Every reputable social study says, "yes." So why are there different occupational participation rates in Sweden compared with Iran? Well, it turns out that as economic security and personal freedom increases, women select more radically different occupations than they do when in poor or repressive societies. So a biological impetus may be masked by social or economic realities, but it does not prove the biology is not still there and active (or even most important, such as in discretionary expenditures like entertainment). So even if we accept the numbers, it still doesn't prove that "clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors."
Brad is right; you are a terrible scientist.
BTW, we've already addressed the Gygax quote about women not liking the hobby. When EGG speaks of the "hobby," he is referring to the D&D-derived roleplaying games that he played and wrote. Which were all derived from wargaming and had lots of fiddly math and such. This is why he contrasts it with LARPing, a far more social and woman-friendly endeavor. This has already been explained to you in a previous thread. Color me surprised that you would ignore that and attempt to use that line of justification again. I don't expect a smooth-brained apologist like HappyDerp to get this, but you pretend to be intelligent...
Oh, and remember when I accused you a while back of carefully parsing the terminology of those you disagree with ("hobby"), but demanding others interpret your exact terms ("clearly," "dominated," etc.) as broadly as possible to serve your point? Try not to prove me right, again...
Quote from: Eirikrautha on July 10, 2024, 04:19:24 PMQuote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 11:32:28 AMIt doesn't prove sexism, but I think this is wrong.
The data shows a massive difference in female participation in RPGs between the 1970s, 1999, and the 2020s. Gygax cited only 3% women in his 1970s games, but in 1999 they were surveyed at 19% participation, and in the 2020s at 39%. Since women's genetics didn't change during that time, that shows that clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors, not genetics.
First, what data? What surveys were there in 1978 compared with 2018? The change in survey responses may show a greater reach in surveys, not a change in the popularity. Do you have evidence (not personal anecdotes) that these numbers are accurate? You don't, because no one does. So any conclusion about participation rates based solely on those surveys is completely unwarranted. Your certainty can only be based in your own biases.
Secondly, even taking these numbers at face value, you still can't draw those conclusions. Is occupational preference biologically influence by sex? Every reputable social study says, "yes." So why are there different occupational participation rates in Sweden compared with Iran? Well, it turns out that as economic security and personal freedom increases, women select more radically different occupations than they do when in poor or repressive societies. So a biological impetus may be masked by social or economic realities, but it does not prove the biology is not still there and active (or even most important, such as in discretionary expenditures like entertainment). So even if we accept the numbers, it still doesn't prove that "clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors."
Brad is right; you are a terrible scientist.
BTW, we've already addressed the Gygax quote about women not liking the hobby. When EGG speaks of the "hobby," he is referring to the D&D-derived roleplaying games that he played and wrote. Which were all derived from wargaming and had lots of fiddly math and such. This is why he contrasts it with LARPing, a far more social and woman-friendly endeavor. This has already been explained to you in a previous thread. Color me surprised that you would ignore that and attempt to use that line of justification again. I don't expect a smooth-brained apologist like HappyDerp to get this, but you pretend to be intelligent...
Oh, and remember when I accused you a while back of carefully parsing the terminology of those you disagree with ("hobby"), but demanding others interpret your exact terms ("clearly," "dominated," etc.) as broadly as possible to serve your point? Try not to prove me right, again...
Greetings!
*Laughing* Such an absolute, ruthless savage!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: Eirikrautha on July 10, 2024, 09:36:24 AMQuote from: Armchair Gamer on July 10, 2024, 08:24:58 AMThis has exploded over on ENWorld. I think the EUROPA quote reads most naturally as a mix of frustration, sarcasm, and hyperbole. But even stipulating that Gygax was as sexist as his detractors make out, it still doesn't compare on my moral scale to things like Jonathan Tweet raising money for Planned Parenthood, or WotC's whole corporate culture. :)
That's because ENWorld is a heavily controlled forum, made to look like a place where ideas can be shared for the ignorant rubes. The forum rules are explicitly woke, and the moderation allows dogpiling of unpopular comments (but not the other way) up until the person attacked makes an irrefutable point, which is when the moderators step in with punishment. The owner and mods like to think of themselves as intelligent, but I've never seen an interaction with any of them that would even suggest a room-temperature IQ (and that's in their metric system). So, no surprise that they have a "two minutes of EGG hate" thread on their boards. Neither Morrus nor any of his sycophants are worthy to carry EGG's jock strap, faults and all, and he knows it...
The mods there are absolute bitches. Low IQ people thinking being a mod on a big D&D forum means they have KEWL points.
Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 10, 2024, 03:17:19 PMThis all underlies the issue that hobbies and entertainment (and a shitton of other things) skew towards certain sexes because of their preferences being influenced by their sex. Activist types come in and make the observation that the demographic disparity must be caused by sexism.
Claiming that all gender disparity
must be cause by sexism is just as baseless as claiming that all gender disparity
must be caused by genetics. That someone claims the former doesn't mean that the latter is also right.
Quote from: Eirikrautha on July 10, 2024, 04:19:24 PMSecondly, even taking these numbers at face value, you still can't draw those conclusions. Is occupational preference biologically influence by sex? Every reputable social study says, "yes." So why are there different occupational participation rates in Sweden compared with Iran? Well, it turns out that as economic security and personal freedom increases, women select more radically different occupations than they do when in poor or repressive societies. So a biological impetus may be masked by social or economic realities, but it does not prove the biology is not still there and active (or even most important, such as in discretionary expenditures like entertainment). So even if we accept the numbers, it still doesn't prove that "clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors."
Gygax claimed that women's low participation in RPGs was "biologically determined". If even modest environmental/social changes shift the ratio from 3% to 39%, then that ratio clearly isn't biologically
determined.
There may be some biological
influence, but that influence is masked by the other factors, just as you say in the bolded section. That's essentially the same thing that I'm saying. For example, it could be that genetically, men have a mild tendency to prefer physical sports and women have a mild tendency to prefer verbally-driven social games like TTRPGs. Or maybe verbally-driven social games are also skew male. It's not a given.
Looking at the ratios only in the U.S. isn't going to tell us pure genetics. In the 2050s, maybe D&D will still be dominant and the gender ratio will have gone back down to 30%. Or maybe some other game is dominant and the players are 55% female. Or tons of other possibilities. I don't think we can know, let alone for the 2100s or beyond.
Quote from: Eirikrautha on July 10, 2024, 04:19:24 PMBTW, we've already addressed the Gygax quote about women not liking the hobby. When EGG speaks of the "hobby," he is referring to the D&D-derived roleplaying games that he played and wrote. Which were all derived from wargaming and had lots of fiddly math and such. This is why he contrasts it with LARPing, a far more social and woman-friendly endeavor.
You use "hobby" in quotes, but in the interview, Gygax never uses the term "hobby". He refers to "RPGs" (i.e. "most females do not play RPGs"), and this is in 2005. In 2005, I think it was clear that the term "RPGs" did not just refer to D&D-derived games that he played and wrote.
Now some of the village idiots have taken to calling Gygax a "sex pest"
Whats next? I am sure they can dig themselves deeper.
Quote from: Omega on July 11, 2024, 12:14:55 AMNow some of the village idiots have taken to calling Gygax a "sex pest"
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/97/a0/e6/97a0e65111eac725944a75638384a9d6.gif)
Why does everyone believe Ben Riggs blog post about the interview of Gary Gygax?
I grew up in the seventies (in Europe but still) and the text does not strike me to be from '75. It reads very much as something a woke from the 2020s would like to read.
1) "nasty old sexist-male-Chauvinist-pig": He was 37. Sorry, but since when are people in their 30s called old? Sure from the view of a child maybe but otherwise?
2) He talks about "more non-gender names". In the seventies? Wow, how progessiv he must have been. Most people at that time wouldn't understand the meaning of it.
3) The seventies were all about dirty sex. Seriously. Porn movies were open topic, Emmanuelle and other, the sex tourism to east asia started. Not enough female representation in a game which was still new and at that time only played by a few thousand most of them males from his own peer group would never incur much critisim. Feminists at that time had other problems than to harass the creator of a game they wouldn't even know about.
And than the "picture". Not only is the citation worthless (missing page number) but the picture shows only the citated text, nothing more. What was the question Gary Gygax reacted to? What was the reaction of the one conducting the interview? There is no context at all to understand the answer.
User jhkim posted a link to an older edition of the Europa magazine. The text from the "picture" looks much more refined than anything from an actual edition of said magazine. But both are from '75.
Why did Ben Riggs not upload the whole page the exerpt is from? We can't check if this is actually an excerpt from a magazine or not. As it stands I'm not sure I can believe anything from this Ben Riggs.
I'm not an english native speaker but I hope you can still read this post without any problems.
Quote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 06:18:31 PMGygax claimed that women's low participation in RPGs was "biologically determined". If even modest environmental/social changes shift the ratio from 3% to 39%, then that ratio clearly isn't biologically determined.
I went and told you how you were going to distort the argument, and you did it anyway! OK, I'm beginning to think you really aren't that intelligent. You attack the word "determined," yet you said:
Quote... clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors, not genetics.
where both "clearly" and "dominated" are both not established by some questionable surveys. It is not "clear" at all what those surveys show and why they show it (and you never addressed the surveys themselves, which was my very first point), nor is "dominated" expressive of a
still-male dominated hobby, as even shown by those same surveys you cite. That the number of females increases does not affect the contention that males will be more interested in playing, especially when the overall number of players increase. This isn't hard to understand, if you understand statistics at all.
Quote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 06:18:31 PMThere may be some biological influence, but that influence is masked by the other factors...
No, you said "dominated," not influenced. You don't get the benefit of the doubt on your phrasing, when you immediately follow with:
Quote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 06:18:31 PMYou use "hobby" in quotes, but in the interview, Gygax never uses the term "hobby". He refers to "RPGs"...
Even when you are told exactly what you are going to do to distort the argument in advance, you still can't help doing it. Not only are you a lousy scientist, you are a lousy arguer as well...
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on June 24, 2024, 02:25:43 PMThey will say yes, then you tell them Einstein was a mutant, he was missing grey matter that put two of his lobes closer than normal which gave him a different view on the world. You would never be an Einstein without that mutation.
Maybe, but correlation does not equal causation. However trends do seem to indicate that most genius is due to random abnormalities and not a consistent hereditary trait.
Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 04:23:55 PMQuote from: Hobo on June 24, 2024, 03:59:50 PMORLY? https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/a-few-historical-frauds/
You are aware that there are direct appeals to anti-Semitic tropes in that piece (claims that Einstein was promoted by the "Jewish-controlled media", etc.)? Unless you were posting it as a joke, I wouldn't put to much faith in any of its conclusions...
Ah shit, here we go again.
Quote from: Hobo on June 24, 2024, 06:37:58 PMYou are aware that Ron Unz, the editor and host of the site is Jewish, right?
An Antisemetic Jew. What a time to be alive.
Quote from: Hobo on June 25, 2024, 03:53:03 PMYou're taking a cowardly SJW tactic of "scan for some offhand comment buried in a link I can pretend to be offended by" followed by "dismiss everything factual that I don't want to face because of said offhand comment" combined with "attempt to cancel the person who I'm pretending to be offended by so I never have to face the sources that I don't want to see ever again."
Well there's also all those other articles on the site which don't exactly take a lot of fishing to find.
Quote from: Hobo on June 25, 2024, 03:53:03 PMI don't owe any answers to liars and bad faith actors, especially about off topic non sequiturs.
Talk about taking a cowardly SJW tactic.
Quote from: jhkim on June 25, 2024, 07:06:50 PMThis requires that not just the popular press be in on the conspiracy, but also the Nobel Prize committee (which takes attribution very seriously) as well as all of the mainstream biographers and historians of science.
A trivial matter when you control the very laws of physics!
Quote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 11:32:28 AMThe data shows a massive difference in female participation in RPGs between the 1970s, 1999, and the 2020s. Gygax cited only 3% women in his 1970s games, but in 1999 they were surveyed at 19% participation, and in the 2020s at 39%. Since women's genetics didn't change during that time, that shows that clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors, not genetics.
Yes, it
was a cultural shift, in that RPGs were starting to be designed in ways which appealed to women. However it did not
change what they wanted. And the most popular to date is still the one about playing murderous sexual predators with consent violating powers.
Quote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 11:32:28 AMWomen have longer hair than men in Western society, but that doesn't mean there is a genetic trait that programs their hair to be longer. Assuming that it comes from genetics is an obvious fallacy.
Oof, bad example, because there
are biological reasons women have longer hair, don't lose their hair later in life, and don't grow facial hair.
Quote from: SeekerOfTruth on July 11, 2024, 05:44:03 AMWhy does everyone believe Ben Riggs blog post about the interview of Gary Gygax?
I gave up on having any meaningful discussion about this over on the thread on enworld, since their terms of service there for the most part, forbid talking about things which are essential for addressing presentism (as it isn't 'inclusive') and that he was a man of his time.
Reading that interview, it leads me to think that GG wasn't really taking it seriously, and that ultimately, he doesn't want to engage with it and just wants to play and enjoy, and wasn't worried about offending anyone.
Greetings!
I just love all the shrieking Woke morons crying about Gygax being sexist and misogynistic.
Whaa! Whaa! Yes, Gygax was a traditional, patriarchal monster. Good! These Woke morons can cry and jerk themselves.
Whatever the real feelings of Gygax is irrelevant. The Woke Commissars have decreed that Gygax was a terrible monster--just like everyone else that refuses to suck down Woke jello.
Poring over brief writings, snippets of interviews, stridently or desperately seeking to "prove" one thing or another--to the Woke, TRUTH does not matter. Everyone must bow down to their fucking Communist tyranny.
Just tell them they are weak fucking Commie pussies. Mock them. Laugh at them. Woke morons hate being laughed at and mocked.
Someday here soon will arrive the time to feed the alligators. We aren't quite there yet. Still, when the time comes, the alligators will be very well fed! *Laughing*
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: SeekerOfTruth on July 11, 2024, 05:44:03 AMWhy does everyone believe Ben Riggs blog post about the interview of Gary Gygax?
I grew up in the seventies (in Europe but still) and the text does not strike me to be from '75. It reads very much as something a woke from the 2020s would like to read.
1) "nasty old sexist-male-Chauvinist-pig": He was 37. Sorry, but since when are people in their 30s called old? Sure from the view of a child maybe but otherwise?
2) He talks about "more non-gender names". In the seventies? Wow, how progessiv he must have been. Most people at that time wouldn't understand the meaning of it.
3) The seventies were all about dirty sex. Seriously. Porn movies were open topic, Emmanuelle and other, the sex tourism to east asia started. Not enough female representation in a game which was still new and at that time only played by a few thousand most of them males from his own peer group would never incur much critisim. Feminists at that time had other problems than to harass the creator of a game they wouldn't even know about.
And than the "picture". Not only is the citation worthless (missing page number) but the picture shows only the citated text, nothing more. What was the question Gary Gygax reacted to? What was the reaction of the one conducting the interview? There is no context at all to understand the answer.
User jhkim posted a link to an older edition of the Europa magazine. The text from the "picture" looks much more refined than anything from an actual edition of said magazine. But both are from '75.
Why did Ben Riggs not upload the whole page the exerpt is from? We can't check if this is actually an excerpt from a magazine or not. As it stands I'm not sure I can believe anything from this Ben Riggs.
I'm not an english native speaker but I hope you can still read this post without any problems.
You did fine. Better than some native english speakers.
And you bring up some good points about the authenticity of the quote source.
I wonder why people don't trust studies, statistics, etc by woketards...
Diversity Was Supposed to Make Us Rich. Not So Much. (https://archive.ph/woefd)
Relevant as to why we dismiss Jhkim's "statistics" and his claims about what they show out of hand.
Hence why in the other thread I questioned the veracity of that article as it does not sound like things Gary would say.
It's a good question. Gygax's articles in Europa 6-8 and 12-13 have been talked about; can anyone find any references to this before Riggs posts it?
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on July 12, 2024, 09:04:28 AMIt's a good question. Gygax's articles in Europa 6-8 and 12-13 have been talked about; can anyone find any references to this before Riggs posts it?
If it helps anyone's searches, Europa was a fanzine published by Walter Luc Haas in Switzerland - unrelated to the GDW magazine "Europa" published by GDW from 1987, and unrelated to Lucas Haas the actor. I have a Facebook friend who apparently has copies, though, so I might be able to get them in a few days.
Quote from: Anon Adderlan on July 11, 2024, 12:08:57 PMQuote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 11:32:28 AMThe data shows a massive difference in female participation in RPGs between the 1970s, 1999, and the 2020s. Gygax cited only 3% women in his 1970s games, but in 1999 they were surveyed at 19% participation, and in the 2020s at 39%. Since women's genetics didn't change during that time, that shows that clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors, not genetics.
Yes, it was a cultural shift, in that RPGs were starting to be designed in ways which appealed to women. However it did not change what they wanted. And the most popular to date is still the one about playing murderous sexual predators with consent violating powers.
Sure.
Different demographics of all sorts will have different preferences in gaming. Japanese RPG players have different (but overlapping) preferences with American RPG players. Older (55+) gamers have different but overlapping preferences from teenage gamers. Female preferences have different but overlapping preferences than male players. etc.
It's fine to produce a game that appeals more to male players - like say a Conan RPG. It's also fine to produce a game that appeals more to female players, like say the Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG.
I don't agree with left-leaning claims that every RPG must have a balanced appeal to all demographics. However, I also think there's nothing wrong with producing RPG books that have different appeals.
Quote from: jhkim on July 12, 2024, 04:34:51 PMQuote from: Armchair Gamer on July 12, 2024, 09:04:28 AMIt's a good question. Gygax's articles in Europa 6-8 and 12-13 have been talked about; can anyone find any references to this before Riggs posts it?
If it helps anyone's searches, Europa was a fanzine published by Walter Luc Haas in Switzerland - unrelated to the GDW magazine "Europa" published by GDW from 1987, and unrelated to Lucas Haas the actor. I have a Facebook friend who apparently has copies, though, so I might be able to get them in a few days.
Quote from: Anon Adderlan on July 11, 2024, 12:08:57 PMQuote from: jhkim on July 10, 2024, 11:32:28 AMThe data shows a massive difference in female participation in RPGs between the 1970s, 1999, and the 2020s. Gygax cited only 3% women in his 1970s games, but in 1999 they were surveyed at 19% participation, and in the 2020s at 39%. Since women's genetics didn't change during that time, that shows that clearly their participation rates are dominated by environmental and/or cultural factors, not genetics.
Yes, it was a cultural shift, in that RPGs were starting to be designed in ways which appealed to women. However it did not change what they wanted. And the most popular to date is still the one about playing murderous sexual predators with consent violating powers.
Sure.
Different demographics of all sorts will have different preferences in gaming. Japanese RPG players have different (but overlapping) preferences with American RPG players. Older (55+) gamers have different but overlapping preferences from teenage gamers. Female preferences have different but overlapping preferences than male players. etc.
It's fine to produce a game that appeals more to male players - like say a Conan RPG. It's also fine to produce a game that appeals more to female players, like say the Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG.
I don't agree with left-leaning claims that every RPG must have a balanced appeal to all demographics. However, I also think there's nothing wrong with producing RPG books that have different appeals.
Greetings!
Jhkim, pour yourself some fresh coffee!
I agree with your statement here.
There are different market demographics, wanting some things in common, but also having very distinct and different desires and preferences for their games.
It is also good for different companies, producing whatever, to seek to produce weird books that cater to normal people, or Hummy Bears Walking with Mommy.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: SHARK on July 12, 2024, 06:12:34 PMQuote from: jhkim on July 12, 2024, 04:34:51 PMIt's fine to produce a game that appeals more to male players - like say a Conan RPG. It's also fine to produce a game that appeals more to female players, like say the Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG.
I don't agree with left-leaning claims that every RPG must have a balanced appeal to all demographics. However, I also think there's nothing wrong with producing RPG books that have different appeals.
Jhkim, pour yourself some fresh coffee!
I agree with your statement here.
Thanks, SHARK.
Also, I got a copy of Europa 10-11 and put it up on archive.org. The quote appears to be genuine and complete. The context is a section on "Women and Wargaming" from pages 86-94, with a series of quotes from 30 different people: Ellie Nye, Linda Mosca, Karen Berg, Jim Dunnigan, et al. Gygax's quote comes on page 92. Here's the link for the full issues:
https://archive.org/details/europa-10-11
EDITED TO ADD: I'm adding in more issues of EUROPA as well. The list is collected here -
https://archive.org/search?query=creator%3A%22Walter+Luc+Haas%22
Thanks jhkim for putting those up on Archive.org - a genuine service in getting that zine up.
The other comments in that section of Europa remind me of Marc Miller of Traveller (and the other Europa) fame saying that he was disturbed about the tendency of some war gamers in the late 60s and early 70s to turn up in full Nazi uniforms and role play Nazi commanders at cons.
You wouldn't get that today, but I am sure those players went home and were perfectly decent after the con. Its not like pushing toy soldiers around a sandbox led to organised chapters of the Schutzstaffel growing in the US.
Thanks, jhkim. It appears from some of the other comments that this was part of an ongoing conversation, and some of them suggest that the opening from "Mr. Greene's lady friend" wasn't exactly complimentary to wargamers. I unfortunately don't have time right now to delve into this, but it seems to suggest my initial assessment--this was Gygax being defensive and nastily sarcastic--was right about the first part of his reply, although he comes across as more hostile to 'women in gaming' due to bad personal experiences in the second part of it.
Quote from: El-V on July 15, 2024, 06:40:13 AMYou wouldn't get that today, but I am sure those players went home and were perfectly decent after the con. Its not like pushing toy soldiers around a sandbox led to organised chapters of the Schutzstaffel growing in the US.
The current wave of Moral Guardians push that playing as something really does make you that thing. These nutcases can not tell reality from fantasy.