What I got out of this: too many fake chess girls.
>.>
<.<
Okay,. my sense of humour sucks.
But seriously, I get why they want to be seen as legitimate. I bet the idea of a "pro gamer" is still a mid-thirties man-child in his mom's basement as far as the public goes. I've never been a fan of calling competitive gaming sport (or even e-sport), but I get why they do it.
What I don't get is why that leads to the exclusion of women. As you point out, there are physiological arguments for sports. Those don't carry over.
>.>
<.<
Okay,. my sense of humour sucks.
I wouldn't say "just as culpable." They do have the capacity to alter such things, but it's not exactly the normal state of affairs to be that intrusive. The concept comes off as overreach, regardless of how I feel about the issue specifically.SurfKansas said:It's easy to point the finger at IeSF here, but there is another silent party just as culpable. The game publishers could very easily adjust their terms of use to prevent this from happening by inserting a clause that prohibits use of IP in for-profit tournaments that segregate based on gender.
Is this going to happen? Nope. Too much money on the line to risk by doing the right thing.
*rimshot*RatRace123 said:They wanted to make it more "legitimate," presumably because the MLB was tired of being known as the sport with the fattest players.
But seriously, I get why they want to be seen as legitimate. I bet the idea of a "pro gamer" is still a mid-thirties man-child in his mom's basement as far as the public goes. I've never been a fan of calling competitive gaming sport (or even e-sport), but I get why they do it.
What I don't get is why that leads to the exclusion of women. As you point out, there are physiological arguments for sports. Those don't carry over.
Sexism is, evidently, like Jell-O. There's always room for more.StriderShinryu said:As if we needed more reasons for gaming to be considered sexist and/or misogynist. Good show.