Is there any female here at all?

[Kingfish]

Doc,

You going to be around this evening for some extra turns, or are you pulling an all-nighter at the hospital?

[Freyland]

Hey good link Kingfish, I must have missed that one.

Hurry up and send a turn, willya? This round I make your girlie Amis run like, well, you know.....

Jonathan

{Freyland spreads on flame-retardant sunscreen liberally, hooks up the shades, and grits teeth}

[FutbolHead]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken:

Michael emrys wrote:

FutbolHead wrote:

> I would think that it's a fair bet, that if you polled all the women of the world, generally speaking most, if not the vast majority, don't play wargames or like war. In fact, I would say that goes for most men too.

(Please note FutbolHead, I'm using your comments as a starting point - I'm not arguing with you!)

There may be some biological characteristics of women which make them less interested in war. However, I think society's perceptions of what men should be like and what women should be like, have much more to do with how men and women turn out. I think a lot more women would be active war enthusiasts or war gamers, but they reckon that this is an unwomanlike thing to be doing - in the same way that a lot of men regard it as a manly thing to be doing. It should also be considered that most wargames simulate only men - up until recently, whether women wanted in or not, fighting has been a male pursuit - so this may make women less interested than if there were women soldiers in the game.

David<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wouldn't entirely disagree with you anyway. In fact, I think it's forthright of you to stick your neck out to suggest that biological differences may affect behavior. Many people have been ostracized or chastised for having voiced such opinions regardless of harmful intent.

However, it is a simple fact of life that society will deem things within the norm and outside the norm and develop perceptions based on those criteria. It is how "INDIVIDUALS" respond to such perception that determines whether they are offensive, rude, mean, hurtful, etc.

On the other hand, not everyone who tells an off-color joke or thoughtlessly makes an inappropriate comment believes the premise of what they said. It may simple mean that they find the different ironies of life humorous or they simply use bad judgement when opening their mouths.

We as humans have a very long history of men being the warriors, women being the domestic types. While times may have changed, I think the level of change is astounding in leiu of the short period of time in which the change has been demanded. To expect what may well be a primal instinct to be entirely eradicated from behavior in the span of 50-100 years is wholly unrealistic. However, I agree that we do owe it to all people to understand the nature of human emotion and courtesy.

[Freyland]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kingfish:

Doc,

You going to be around this evening for some extra turns, or are you pulling an all-nighter at the hospital?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope, home on vacation. I am your willing whipping boy. {oops, did it again}

Jonathan

[This message has been edited by Freyland (edited 08-04-2000).]

[FutbolHead]

This whole thread reminds me of the wisest saying to ever come out of my elementary school years. I believe that it must have been banished from school during more recent times.

"Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

Perhaps it's been updated as follows:

"A gun or a knife may take my life, but insensitive comments will cause me years of counseling, recovery, book writing, lobbying and eventual sainthood for the advancement of humanity."

I digress.

[This message has been edited by FutbolHead (edited 08-04-2000).]

[Kingfish]

Vacation!

Man, i'm stuck here at work with %#*@%! Windows NT.

BTW, re: our game, Tonight i'm going to church and there is nothing you or that Hummel can do to stop me.

[David Aitken]

Freyland wrote:

> This thread seems based on how we should not treat female wargamers any differently, and yet we have ~44 hellos. Just thought I would point that out.

Remember that this was not a "hello" thread. The thread was started on the subject of women, and then a couple showed up and said hello, so people have been saying hello back in the context of the thread, not just in the context of the "hello"s.

Rex wrote:

> the fact that the male posters on this board outnumber the female by a pretty significant amount just proves the point.

Like I said, this is not necessarily a barometer of female opinion. Baby boys are dressed in blue, and baby girls in pink. This is not because their parents think the colours are best in each case - it's because society regards blue as a boy colour and pink as a girl colour. Likewise, women who might grow up to be interested in war, are influenced by society's prevailing attitude that this is unfeminine.

David

[Freyland]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kingfish:

BTW, re: our game, Tonight i'm going to church and there is nothing you or that Hummel can do to stop me.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What if you are not the same denomination? What if that church is filled with rabid parishoners who like my Nazi oppression? What if they are all women who like wargames? Then you will be in trouble... you will take the church and someone will post an 8 page thread about how sexist you are! Please note, I will add to that post just to demoralize your troops. Oh, and no more "my wife is on the computer", or "the baby is hungry". Come get your formula-soddened rice cereal like a man! Or is your 6 1/2 month old leading the troops again? I have to say, that would really explain the score of our last battle

Jonathan

[Fionn]

Jonathan said " Ahh, Fionn, ever ready to comment on someone else's valid and harmless opinion. And you loudly wonder why someone is always on your case."

Jesus Christ Jonathan I SIMPLY said that if he thought women only got hit on, verbally abused and generally subject to moronic comments due to their personalities then he mustn't have been present in online gaming much.

Sure assholes bug everyone including women BUT when women decloak a good portion of the people who seem reasonable become slavering assholes to the women.

And lastly, Hmm, could it be that the reason people get on my case is that a**holes like you follow me around from thread to thread looking to make big issues out of little comments I make? Hmm, I think so.

Let's face it. You weren't even referred to here yet you chose to stick your snout in. Still, at least you're staying true to your pattern.

As for FutbolHead,

Ok, fair enough. I would agree that there are loads of ****heads out there who are just mean to everyone in general BUT I think that in online games normally ok males often become raging assholes .

The meanies are always going to be mean BUT I think that when a woman decloaks on a lot of online fora she also becomes a target for lots of people who are usually OK enough.

Anyways, that's my experience. If yours differs then you've probably been lucky enough to come across some halfway reasonable young males on online games. Lucky you .

[Kingfish]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What if you are not the same denomination?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then i will show them the light

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What if that church is filled with rabid parishoners who like my Nazi oppression?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I hope they also like the roof collapsing in on them.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What if they are all women who like wargames?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you telling me the church is empty?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Or is your 6 1/2 month old leading the troops again? I have to say, that would really explain the score of our last battle

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

He didn't have any trouble with your Shermans in team Desobry. How many did he kill - 6? 7? He would have gotten more in our second game but you chose to avoid battle. I see you're using the same tactic in our current game

[chaos]

As to the A$$hole issue:

It would seem to me that it's all about anonymity. Human nature acts much differently when not tethered by the possibility of consequences and repercussions.

chaos

[Freyland]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fionn:

And lastly, Hmm, could it be that the reason people get on my case is that a**holes like you follow me around from thread to thread looking to make big issues out of little comments I make? Hmm, I think so.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have to know, Fionn, where do you keep the aircompressor when you travel? *Something* has to keep that HUMONGUS ego inflated. As for my "interference" in this thread, who died and made you in charge of who can post and about what? Oh, that's right. Your ego is so big you cannot see past it. Its funny though: with all that inflation, it should be thin enough for you to see through. I know we all can.

As for you, Kingfish, I would not step there.. Cowpies are not the only thing in that field! Why do you think I lured your entire Company out there? If you stand reeeeaally still, I might just disarm you, including the kid's pacifier (no Fionn, you cannot have it) and let you go.

Jonathan

[Kingfish]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Freyland:

As for you, Kingfish, I would not step there.. Cowpies are not the only thing in that field!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought those "Pies" were left by your troops as they retreated in panic.

[Freyland]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kingfish:

I thought those "Pies" were left by your troops as they retreated in panic. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, okay, so there are more piles than there should be (whoever thought one Hvy MG squad could be so full of ****? Oh, his name was Lt. Fionn. Never mind). But they are sound-muffling, so that you have misID'd my Hotchkiss as a Hummel. I am sure you were cowering for a minute. Wait... like Nathan knows a Hotchkiss from a Chafee. In fact, all I have to do is put gates in front of that treeline and your troops will be boxed in. Now why didn't Steve and Charles include Child-proofing devices as part of the fortifications? Damn, Damn, Damn!

Jonathan

[Fionn]

Sheesh Jonathan you're just spoiling for a fight today aren't you?

Listen, I didn't try to tell anyone what to post. I merely disagreed with Futbolhead. It seems to have escaped your attentiont that he and I have discussed and explained our views more and seem to have reached a pretty much common ground.

The only person here stirring up trouble etc is you. I haven't told anyone not to say certain things etc etc. I've just disagreed with a couple of people. Honestly, if disagreeing with someone is evil then God help the world.

[Freyland]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fionn:

Sheesh Jonathan you're just spoiling for a fight today aren't you?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Probably. I am normally a nice guy, as hopefully many will attest. I just have only so much patience. Perhaps you and I can chat someday.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> ....God help the world.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Amen to that.

Jonathan

Hmm. little trouble with the editing tools

[This message has been edited by Freyland (edited 08-04-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Freyland (edited 08-04-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Freyland (edited 08-04-2000).]

[Freyland]

Fixed it!

[Maastrictian]

Rex wrote:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Sorry to change the subject here, but I thought we were trying to guess the origin of Lorak's mysterious handle. If I remember the Saturday mornings of my childhood correctly, wasn't Lorak one of Space Ghost's arch enemies.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was actually Zorak, but who's counting.

--Chris

[Shrapnel]

My word, you leave a thread for five minutes....!

Seriously, I think that a lot of thoughtful and intelligent comments have been made, and I can't pretend to respond to them all (and I don't think anyone would read through the whole damn thing if I did!). There are just a couple of things I wanted to say:

First of all, I want to apologize to Zaffod. I didn't realize that what I originally mentioned could be read as "Zaffod, that misogynistic jerk" -- it was intended only as an example of the sort of comment that *keeps* women believing that war games are just not for them. I was pointing out a problem, not criticizing Zaffod, if that makes sense to anyone.

Part of the reason it's so important to me to point out comments like these is because people learn what they should be from other people. Harassment issues aside, if all women hear (especially from gamers!) is that women aren't interested in war games, then that's what they'll assume *should* be. Only women who have an inherent interest in war games AND have the ability to ignore what society says they should be -- which is not as easy as one might think! -- are going to end up interested in war games and such, especially since women are generally steered away from these interests starting at a very young age.

On another topic, I definitely think that there are biological differences between men and women -- but with several caveats. Experiments done at Cambridge University show that the differences seem to be in certain kinds of cognitive tasks, such as finding 'embedded figures' in geometric shapes. These are not differences that determine whether someone will like war games -- it's merely a difference in cognitive ability *on the average* with significantly more difference between individuals of the same gender than between the averages of the two. I think that society's gender roles determine a lot of the *expression* of those differences. Very few activities call explicitly on the skills where there is any *demonstrated* difference between male and female brains. Most of the other claims to biological difference are sociobiological 'storytelling' explanations with no experimental basis, though I am certainly open to the idea that such basis may (or may not!) be found -- my point is that it hasn't been yet.

As far as people being asses to women who play games, I can unfortunately vouch that this is true, both in war games and in other gaming circles. For many women, a few bad experiences may be enough to drive them away - this is all supposed to be *fun*, and being hassled isn't.

The overall point I'm trying to make is that women certainly can be interested in war and war games, and not just as a tiny minority of the gaming population either. But society will have to change in ways that make it more comfortable for women to have and express these interests for that to happen -- I for one would like to see the day!

-Jessica

[FutbolHead]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fionn:

[snip]

As for FutbolHead,

Ok, fair enough. I would agree that there are loads of ****heads out there who are just mean to everyone in general BUT I think that in online games normally ok males often become raging assholes .

The meanies are always going to be mean BUT I think that when a woman decloaks on a lot of online fora she also becomes a target for lots of people who are usually OK enough.

Anyways, that's my experience. If yours differs then you've probably been lucky enough to come across some halfway reasonable young males on online games. Lucky you .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In so much as I could hazard to guess the ages of other online opponents (sometimes difficult, sometimes not), I would say that a fair lot of them were not very nice. The ones that I would guess were younger would want the game conditions a certain way, or they would get mad, and "take their ball and go home." Rebellion was a prime example in my experience. I could not play the game fast enough for lots of people. I always thought they must be on speed. Rebellion has adjustable time lengths for turns so that you can take more time during the more strategic elements or busier parts. I'm guessing they wanted to play it more like an RTS. At any rate, when you didn't play like they wanted, they got bent out of shape.

I would also agree with another poster who stated that the anonimity provided by the online experience tends to bring out behavior that would not normally be present in face to face encounters. The only addendum I would add would be that it is more and more common for people to be "in your face" these days. The cyber-experience may be eroding people's real life inhibitions. People who tend to push the limits of the rules, usually continue to do so when reinforced by desirable results versus consequence.

Those "raging hormones" tend to make them as aggressive and competitive (chest beating) when dealing with guys as it does make them "wanting" of the female persausion. I would suggest adolescent years tend to offer a period of time at which the behavior and character of people tend to tested a little more (by biological means over which no one has real control). This offers no real excuse for bad behavior, at least in my opinion, because in the end, in a civilized society one is still subject to the consequence of choices they make and the resultant actions they take.

I might suggest that we may have different tolerance levels of what we consider "reasonable" behavior amongst these young males. Maybe not, but I wouldn't consider my exposure to the "reasonable" ones within the realm of a plethora.

I am strongly of the opinion that common courtesy amongst strangers is the hallmark of civilized society. Please note that I don't use the word "respect" in any way synonomous with the word "courtesy". Many people whine about wanting "respect". Respect is an earned quality which (IMHO) no one has earned by default on first meeting. However, they do deserve courtesy until their behavior dictates otherwise.

As a another issue of thought, in as much as we would like this to be as free a society as possible, I believe people in general have to accept some responsibility for the situations they place themselves in. As an example, if a female walks into a strip club, she has to expect that she will raise the attention (probably undesireable attention) of the patrons. In an ideal world, it would be great if she could walk in without problems. Likewise, if a guy walks into a meeting full of feminists, he may not be the most welcome person either.

A particular case in point was a nice couple who had a very nice house built in a really bad neighborhood. After they moved in, they complained about how bad the neighborhood was. A little diligence and research on their part, would have easily revealed the status of the said neighborhood before they "leaped".

At any rate, when all is said and done, I hope the women in this forum are treated fairly, but in kind, they need to act the same.

[Dick Reece]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FutbolHead:

In so much as I could hazard to guess the ages of other online opponents (sometimes difficult, sometimes not), I would say that a fair lot of them were not very nice. The ones that I would guess were younger would want the game conditions a certain way, or they would get mad, and "take their ball and go home." Rebellion was a prime example in my experience. I could not play the game fast enough for lots of people. I always thought they must be on speed. Rebellion has adjustable time lengths for turns so that you can take more time during the more strategic elements or busier parts. I'm guessing they wanted to play it more like an RTS. At any rate, when you didn't play like they wanted, they got bent out of shape.

I would also agree with another poster who stated that the anonimity provided by the online experience tends to bring out behavior that would not normally be present in face to face encounters. The only addendum I would add would be that it is more and more common for people to be "in your face" these days. The cyber-experience may be eroding people's real life inhibitions. People who tend to push the limits of the rules, usually continue to do so when reinforced by desirable results versus consequence.

Those "raging hormones" tend to make them as aggressive and competitive (chest beating) when dealing with guys as it does make them "wanting" of the female persausion. I would suggest adolescent years tend to offer a period of time at which the behavior and character of people tend to tested a little more (by biological means over which no one has real control). This offers no real excuse for bad behavior, at least in my opinion, because in the end, in a civilized society one is still subject to the consequence of choices they make and the resultant actions they take.

I might suggest that we may have different tolerance levels of what we consider "reasonable" behavior amongst these young males. Maybe not, but I wouldn't consider my exposure to the "reasonable" ones within the realm of a plethora.

I am strongly of the opinion that common courtesy amongst strangers is the hallmark of civilized society. Please note that I don't use the word "respect" in any way synonomous with the word "courtesy". Many people whine about wanting "respect". Respect is an earned quality which (IMHO) no one has earned by default on first meeting. However, they do deserve courtesy until their behavior dictates otherwise.

As a another issue of thought, in as much as we would like this to be as free a society as possible, I believe people in general have to accept some responsibility for the situations they place themselves in. As an example, if a female walks into a strip club, she has to expect that she will raise the attention (probably undesireable attention) of the patrons. In an ideal world, it would be great if she could walk in without problems. Likewise, if a guy walks into a meeting full of feminists, he may not be the most welcome person either.

A particular case in point was a nice couple who had a very nice house built in a really bad neighborhood. After they moved in, they complained about how bad the neighborhood was. A little diligence and research on their part, would have easily revealed the status of the said neighborhood before they "leaped".

At any rate, when all is said and done, I hope the women in this forum are treated fairly, but in kind, they need to act the same.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

FutBolhead!!! ,

I have to tell you, this is the best thread I've read on this forum to date, mainly due to [iMHO]and thanks to your contributions as well as a few others [ Fionn,etc.].Very interesting, enlightening reading, and I see many of my own ideas and thoughts expressed in your words.Thanks for the good read.

I would,however,like to expand upon one comment which I agree with:

<I could give a rat's behind what other's expectations of me are, I have to live with my conscience and what I do. Their hangups are their problems.>

I agree with this totally.The problem then boils down to values and morals within ourselves.I used to wonder quite often how in the world people could shoot others in cold blood while robbing them for 2 dollars and 20 cents,or how they could con old people for a living? It finally dawned on me [ so I'm slow, so what ]that these people have no morals or values, or at least not a valid set, and that's why they're able to do what they do.They have no conscience they must listen to, no inner voice other than one continually spurring them on [ Bill Gates comes to mind, or some of the Talonsoft "brains" behind the resale campaign series "add-ons" ] to do whatever it takes to "get ahead".They answer to "self", just as we do,only there "self" has no checks and balances, no roadmap of morals or values.

And how was our conscience first formed? By others [parents,relatives,teachers,friends] who explained there "expectations" of us, to us.They also taught us what society expects.The problem is, many weren't taught, and many who were had no guiding inner voice willing to listen,or taught themselves to deny it's existence and obtain there goals by any road possible.The cyber experience is making this much worse I believe, for the reasons you've stated so well in all your prior posts above.

Anyhow,again, thanks for a good read .

Dick

[Dick Reece]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dick Reece:

I would,however,like to expand upon one comment which I agree with:

I could give a rat's behind what other's expectations of me are, I have to live with my conscience and what I do. Their hangups are their problems.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is the quote I was referring to, don't know why it didn't cut and paste the first time.

Dick

[killmore]

Ok - Lets have a qiuck Poll - How many of you think Fionn is a woman that does not want to declock?

(No insult intended toward Fionn !)

[Dick Reece]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by killmore:

Ok - Lets have a qiuck Poll - How many of you think Fionn is a woman that does not want to declock?

(No insult intended toward Fionn !)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No way Fionn's a woman, he talks too much like a marine !

[Fionn]

Believe it or not Jonathan I'm a relatively nice guy too ( with the mind of a ruthless dictator and the mouth of a marine ) AND, if you notice, we do have some PBEM opponents in common.

I think, maybe, you might chat with some of them sometime and then drop me an email. I certainly want to stop this sniping but I fear certain misconceptions on your part may need to be dispelled first.

Now, as for the rest of the thread, I definitely want to second Jessica's statements about the differences between the genders being less than the differences within each gender. Countless studies have shown this to be true.

Odds are that if you meet a female wargamer she's probably as into wargames as any guy because whilst society might look a little askew at a male wargamer it positively thinks female wargamers are from another planet ( and the first guy to say women are from venus and men are from mars should be taken out back and shot ... repeatedly. )

FutbolHead,

Good points all round in your post. Impressive work and something I could 99% agree with.

Ps. I HAVE been that guy at the feminist meeting. Oh Jesus.. Unfortunately for me it wasn't so much a feminist meeting ( which is AOK in my book) but a "Gees, guys are assholes, let's attack the nearest one." Guess who that happened to be? ).

Dick,

I think societys all over the world are failing their youngsters ( gees I sound like one of you old fogies now ). Whether it be due to a lack of a male role-model in so many homes, the rampant breakdown of the previous societal norms and the family groups/tribes/small communities which made sure that any youngster who transgressed would be caught and punished etc is kind of immaterial for our purposes ( and would just start another huge fight in any case ) BUT it is happening and is resulting in an alarming ( to me at least) decrease in proper courtesy AND an inability to respect laudable people and goals and, instead, respect the drug dealer down the street more than the youngster who gets a good grade.

Now, as for Killmore

I think you're thinking of Fiona ( ask some of Matt's chat homies what I'm referring to there ).

Ps. I'm taking bets on how long it'll take Lusername to post to the thread now that this particular "re-interpretation" of my gender has occured . I'm betting within 12 hours. Any takers?