Getting More Women to Work in Games Is Easy

[ForumSafari]

ICT sounds like maintenance work and infrastructure, while game development has psychological studies and a wide range of art design, on top of actual programming.

IT is the UK term for what the US calls 'computing'. Since neither of you are from those countries I imagine it changes regionally in other countries as well.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

Y'know what, I want to extend that apology to everybody. I'm not trying to be an ass, it just comes out that way sometimes.

This is obviously something that I see as a problem that needs to be fixed. I think that the games industry can be great. I think that there are many imaginative ways that it can be (and has been) used to solve real world problems, to help educate kids, and to do all kinds of wonderful stuff. And I think that one of the factors preventing it from reaching the heights that it might be capable of reaching is that its core products tend to be produced by a less-than-representative group of people.

I don't want to give the impression that I don't respect these people. (In my own amateur way I'm one of them.) I don't want to disparage the efforts they've put into this industry that has produced such great results already.

Obviously it annoys me when I see what seem to be "knee-jerk" reactions to opinions such as Sampan's. But that's no excuse for my being judgemental, or for ignoring the fact that other people have different experiences to my own that their opinions might be based on. So I apologise for that.

 

[Saetha]

Snip

Perhaps there is a "lack of interest" from females because they've grown up being expected to not find technology interesting, or not like or play video games, or play with dolls instead of playing with computers? I think this socialization is a lot more damaging than just a lack of representation of women in the games industry. We're implicitly telling women that they shouldn't pursue the kind of high-tech jobs that there is actually a shortage of in North America and Europe. That's not just bad for society, it's bad for the economy.

And I don't know why a recruiting company would decline a perfectly competent applicant based on their gender, but they do. Statistic after statistic after study after study shows that women are still at a massive disadvantage in the workplace simply from statistical discrimination. The amount of studies which have handed managers the exact same CV except for gender of applicant and found that significantly more men get hired or promoted than women should be a testament to that, but some people don't understand.

Women face a double-edged sword in the world today. When they do have all the right credentials, they receive a lower wage, and lower chance of being hired or promoted. And women being brought up see the lack of female representation in some sectors or communities, and decide they are unwelcome. And then you get people telling women it's their fault, and it was obvious that women are welcome in an industry which is overwhelmingly composed of men, in whose community women commonly get harassed and objectified.

Straight white male, for disclosure. I'm sick of this sort of logic being used to justify why we apparently have gender equality when we so clearly do not.

You know, I really despise the notion that the reason women chose less tech-savvy careers is because society tells them not to. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, but I think that's just irrelevant - society can influence all it wants, but it's ultimately the woman's choice to not go into game development - and you can't blame that bogeyman Patriarchy for the choices women consciously make. Women who don't like tech, don't like tech. They won't be happy there. Maybe that's society's fault, but there it is. Why force them into a career they probably won't enjoy just so you can have some more equal statistics?

Secondly, that often-touted wage gap isn't what you think it is (And I really wish everyone would stop brandying it about. Funny how the "Wage discrimination" myth spread like wildfire, but the actual truth behind the income gap still seems like news to everyone. Almost like people are trying to find things to be offended over) A woman in the same job as a man, with the same benefits, same experience, same everything, will earn just as much as him. It's only when you compare the national average income of men and women that you find a gap - and even then, that doesn't apply to all groups. Hell, when comparing the average income of women and men fresh out of college, they found that women earn four cents more. I guess that's discrimination against men, right? Since the reverse is obviously sexism, too.

Thirdly, in my experience (Which is all anyone seems to be going off of in this topic) no, women are not the target of anymore discrimination than men in traditionally male-dominated professions or educational courses. I would know, having been in computer programming, wood working, and theater tech courses - most of the students were men, to be sure, but the few women were far from hated. Perhaps, decades ago, even just a few years ago, women were targeted and discriminated against. But in my fairly recent experience, no, we get treated just like everyone else. I actually made a post about this somewhere before.

Straight white female, for disclosure. And I'm sick of a bunch of men telling me society's victimized and oppressed me when I've never felt like anything but equal to them.

 

[Robert Marrs]

"Your company has to grow," she said. "What would our companies look like if we judged growth of companies in other ways?" What if growth meant becoming more well-rounded and full of happy, productive, diverse employees instead of just more rich? The horror!

Right here is the crux of the problem. It's reminiscent of a quote from a Penny Arcade comic (sorry, I'm not looking it up for an image):

For me to get everything I want you're going to have to give up some things.

I want devoted driven employees? No I shouldn't want that. I want profits? Nope, that shouldn't be what I want. I should want want someone else wants, and re-tailor my entire business to do just that because "reasons". Even putting aside the childishness of the attitude, I have to ask how, as an employer, I'd have to respond to such a position. If you're complaining about my culture being to harsh now, what happens with something like deadlines or productions standards? Will you complain the work is too hard and I should make it easier to be more inclusive? Will you think a bad performance review is based purely on your gender and make no efforts to improve? Will you similarly expect policies and procedures to change on your whims? Want to tell me who I can and can't do business with as well while you're at it?It just isn't an attitude any employer wants, and making the argument that to get more women in, we have to lower the bars and make sacrifices for their benefit isn't going to make them any more open. It just encourages the attitude of "kids today don't want to do hard work."

Getting more women working in games is not about demanding it be more accessible, but giving reasons why it should be. Right now, you can claim businesses are denying 50% of their potential workforce, but to them, it's the whiny 50%, or the 50% liable to make a harassment claim over the wrong comment, or the 50% more interested in some social cause than in doing their job. If businesses see liabilities, not assets in a potential employee, that employee isn't getting the job. You shouldn't be making demands, but rather sales pitches: why is it in my bet interest to do what you want? If you can't answer that, you probably shouldn't get it.

I would wager so many people here on the escapist are so concerned with equality and social justice that they seem to forget business is still business. Your logical and solid point will fall on deaf ears but likely nobody will attempt to refute it because it is logical and solid. You take emotion out of the equation and peoples feelings get hurt but at the end of the day this is probably the best description of this situation I have seen so far.

 

[ForumSafari]

Myth #1. Women Don't Want to Work in Games. Sampat quickly pointed out that statement was bullshots by citing survey information she gathered by speaking with the women she could find who were either employed in the games industry already or were seeking employment. "45% have said they always want to work in the games industry," Sampat said.

Congratulations! You've answered a completely unrelated question. So you found a bunch of people already working in the industry and asked them if they always wanted to. Therefore, you've proven that 45% of the people you asked always did.

Worse, it implies that over half of the women working in the games industry didn't really care if they worked there or somewhere else.

All things like this prove is that social justice warriors can't into maths and can't into real evidence.

Yep, those poor men, who make up a vast majority of the workforce that women are denied entry to, now having to show empathy and consideration for the feelings of others and stuff! What a terrible injustice!

You know I take real umbrage to that. Women are not 'denied entry' to technical jobs, in fact the industry is so desperate to shake the image of being a boys only club it's doing everything short of laying trails of sweets from the university to the agencies.

In my university classes I have worked with eight women. Eight women in four years and five were over from the business faculty and could barely switch a laptop on.

Of the remaining three, two had selected a degree based on how wicked-awesome it sounded and couldn't reliably install an operating system (yes I know it's just clicking 'next' twenty times) and only one is someone I would voluntarily work with because she seems to really know her shit.

It's all very well to tell businesses to hire more women and to coax women in as though they're timid woodland animals but if what I and the other techies are saying in this thread is consistent then the reason you're getting so few women in the industry is because they don't exist.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

Straight white female, for disclosure. And I'm sick of a bunch of men telling me society's victimized and oppressed me when I've never felt like anything but equal to them.

Full disclosure. White male here. I'm not and have not been arguing that anybody, male or female, has been "victimized", except in some rare cases. (Let's say that I don't believe the majority of male developers are misogynists.) I do argue that the lack of female game developers may be holding the industry back from achieving everything it could achieve, and I think there's a definite problem about attracting new talent that is female into a largely male-dominated world - which, again, doesn't imply "victimization" of any particular person, male or female, just that the culture at the moment seems to contain, and possibly attract, a disproportionately large amount of males.

But I'd like to ask your opinion on something else here. I was interested that your profile picture is a stereotypically male-looking person in a baseball cap, and your rank is "paperboy". Intrigued, I looked at your profile, where your profile picture is clearly female (longer hair that's tied at the back, no cap). Was this a choice that you consiously made or was it just something that happened because of the way the forums work here?

My question being: was this something you deliberately chose to do?

And if not, what would be your take-away from it?

I just find it interesting that in a discussion about male-dominated culture, a female has a generic male avatar attached to her forum posts (where it's clearly visible to everybody) but a female one on her profile picture (which you have to specifically click on her profile to see). Again, unless it's a choice you deliberately made, that seems to say something about the male dominance of the culture, even on this forum.

 

[AgedGrunt]

Easier said than done. I work at the IT department of a press agency & our department only has guys. We never have a woman apply when a position is open. When I started studying ICT a decade ago, there were 100 students in our first year. Two of them were girls. So there is definitely a lack of interest from women to work in the IT sector.

Shh. We're supposed to assume that, because women deserve equal opportunities that we must therefore see equal results. Facts are not important to fairness.

It's about time for change. I want to know why 100% of the people who deliver the mail, pick up my town's garbage and repair my household appliances are men.

While I'm at it, if male TSA agents were allowed to molest pat down women and children, women wouldn't have to do it and could advance in their jobs. I bet men made that rule so they could have the better jobs.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

Is it bad that all I can think is.

Oh it this topic again.

First thing that popped into my mind as well.




OT: I do have a question, why does it matter if more women work on games? It doesn't matter if there are women in the game industry or not.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

Easier said than done. I work at the IT department of a press agency & our department only has guys. We never have a woman apply when a position is open. When I started studying ICT a decade ago, there were 100 students in our first year. Two of them were girls. So there is definitely a lack of interest from women to work in the IT sector.

Shh. We're supposed to assume that, because women deserve equal opportunities that we must therefore see equal results. Facts are not important to fairness.

As one of the people arguing for "equality" in the industry, I'm not making that assumption. If the women can't get a job in gaming, they'll get jobs elsewhere. No problem with "equal opportunities" there.

I'm not concerned that this is hurting WOMEN. I'm concerned that this is hurting the INDUSTRY - or at least, limiting it by restricting the culture that its developers are coming from. This is less the case than it used to be, and my hope is that it continues to become less and less. But I do think there are ways to encourage women (or provide less discouragement) into this industry, and I think we should be using them.

Damn, this is a good discussion, isn't it? Something to get your debating teeth into.

 

[Saetha]

Straight white female, for disclosure. And I'm sick of a bunch of men telling me society's victimized and oppressed me when I've never felt like anything but equal to them.

Full disclosure. White male here. I'm not and have not been arguing that anybody, male or female, has been "victimized", except in some rare cases. (Let's say that I don't believe the majority of male developers are misogynists.) I do argue that the lack of female game developers may be holding the industry back from achieving everything it could achieve, and I think there's a definite problem about attracting new talent that is female into a largely male-dominated world - which, again, doesn't imply "victimization" of any particular person, male or female, just that the culture at the moment seems to contain, and possibly attract, a disproportionately large amount of males.

But I'd like to ask your opinion on something else here. I was interested that your profile picture is a stereotypically male-looking person in a baseball cap, and your rank is "paperboy". Intrigued, I looked at your profile, where your profile picture is clearly female (longer hair that's tied at the back, no cap). Was this a choice that you consiously made or was it just something that happened because of the way the forums work here?

My question being: was this something you deliberately chose to do?

And if not, what would be your take-away from it?

I just find it interesting that in a discussion about male-dominated culture, a female has a generic male avatar attached to her forum posts (where it's clearly visible to everybody) but a female one on her profile picture (which you have to specifically click on her profile to see). Again, unless it's a choice you deliberately made, that seems to say something about the male dominance of the culture, even on this forum.

Actually, it isn't something I purposely choose, but it's not something I've really done anything about either. It is weird that my profile defaulted to the female avatar, but my forum profile shows the male one. I presumed it's just a bug of some sort. I haven't really put any effort into changing it, though. There's probably a female avatar floating around somewhere, but I can't say I've looked, beyond a cursory glance over the pre-set avatars. Besides, I'm going to use a completely different avatar eventually, as soon as I get around to, you know, actually doing that.

And no worries. I've followed a few posts you've made in the thread, and I see where you're coming from. You just love the industry and want to see more innovation in it. Even as exhausted as I am with feminism, I understand why people champion it so... vigorously. Really, it's the hypocrisy, entitlement, and general hostility that I despise about it, more than the actual ideals. I know I can get a bit... aggressive, in these debates, but I try to remember that most people act with good intentions.

EDIT: I realized I didn't really actually answer your question (Oops. I did, actually, but it got cut out while I was rewording something) Presuming it's not just a mix-up, then obviously it's the site assuming I'm male, even though I selected female on my profile. And I'm sure there's some larger commentary on the how male's default and female's the other, but really, it's a picture assigned to a fake name I use on one specific website. A pretty petty thing to complain about, all in all. I mean, if default male avatars are the worst sexism I have to endure, then I'd say I'm pretty well-off. Not to mention that gaming IS male-dominated. Making the male avatar the default may be thoughtless, but it's not exactly unfounded. I certainly wouldn't call it sexist.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

Yep, those poor men, who make up a vast majority of the workforce that women are denied entry to, now having to show empathy and consideration for the feelings of others and stuff! What a terrible injustice!

You know I take real umbrage to that. Women are not 'denied entry' to technical jobs, in fact the industry is so desperate to shake the image of being a boys only club it's doing everything short of laying trails of sweets from the university to the agencies.

Yeah, I apologised for that one. It was a douchey thing to say.

Regarding your wider point though... if so few women are applying for these jobs, or have the knowledge and skills to do them... why? What's preventing them? Saetha already said what she thought regarding the "societal pressures" argument. And I find the "males are just more suited to certain things" argument very condescending (not that I'm accusing you of making it, you understand, I'm speaking generally here). I work in a tech-oriented environment where around 50% of the (hundreds of) employees are women. That wasn't always the case. What if years ago we'd just said "Oh, women aren't suited to this stuff anyway?"

To me, the fact that you're getting so few employable female applicants is itself a pretty huge red signal that something is wrong. As to what it is, and how to fix it... I wish I had more answers than I do, quite honestly. I don't think the answer is to close our eyes and pretend that everything is fine, that's for certain. Beyond that, it's simply a question of doing the right studies and looking for the right answers.

EDIT: To give some figures here, the company I worked for used to employ about 150 people in the office that I'm in, with maybe twenty or so females among them. It now employs 600, with a fairly even ratio of male-to-female.

EDIT AGAIN: In a different physical office location, obviously. 450 new people didn't just get desks, etc, out of nowhere!

 

[Alex Laird]

Sampat gave a stirring speech at GDC 2014 in which she outlined some of the stupid excuses and myths she's heard from studio executives or recruiters about why her gender is underrepresented.

You write that the exec's and recruiters responses are excuses or myths. This is explicitly stating that all of the reasons are they give are invalid. Let us see if you are able to support that position.

Myth #1. Women Don't Want to Work in Games. Sampat quickly pointed out that statement was bullshit by citing survey information she gathered by speaking with the women she could find who were either employed in the games industry already or were seeking employment. "45% have said they always wanted to work in the games industry,"

Firstly, having someone who is directly invested in the outcome of a study conduct it on their own without oversight or some other method of insuring impartiality is very bad science.

Secondly, this first complaint is completely justified, since she clearly states that she biased her study by only talking with what she has already described as the small subset of women who are currently in or looking to enter the field.

Finally, statistics that show that less than 50% of people working in or looking to work in a field aren't that dedicated to do it doesn't support your argument that women do want to work in games!

Better yet, when you are recruiting people don't just focus on that tired old narrative of a dedicated dreamer. "If you are in an interview with a candidate stop looking for lifelong desire but instead look for curiosity,"

In what world should an employer go out of their way to avoid employing people dedicated to a particular field and instead give preferential treatment to people who, regardless of sex, are just "curious" about it? The employee turnover rate in such a company would go through the roof, making them extremely uncompetative in the marketplace.

There's another myth that states that there are no women out there who have the requisite skills to work in games. Whether it's programming knowledge, or the production experience of shipping one game or five, women just don't have the skills they are looking for, the argument goes.

You state that this is a myth, but at no point do you explain why it is a myth or give any evidence that it is not true.

The truth is that invisible bias can hurt women in the resume review process. Some hiring managers admit to looking at men's resumes for potential, while scanning a female's resume for proof. "Do blind resume reviews and you'd be amazed how many women filter to the top,"

Almost certainly true, although you only support it with with anecdotal evidence and hearsay (in bold).

Sometimes women aren't hired in the games industry because they wouldn't be a good "culture fit" - the most nebulous of terms. Most of the time that kind of a statement really just means the female candidate wouldn't be comfortable with staying at the studio around the clock, drinking beer and eating pizza, and going on company outings to the strip club. And yes, that might be true. "If you can't find women who can fit into culture, your company culture might suck,"

Despite what many people believe, enjoying a work environment is not an inalienable right. As long as nothing illegal is going on an employer can create any kind of work environment they want, whether that means working in a mine shaft, in a factory or requiring that all employee's communicate in Klingon. If you want to get a job as a lumberjack, you do not get to tell your employer that you only work indoors. If you are interviewing with a guy who is a jerk and who has hired a bunch of other jerks, you don't have the right to tell them they now have to be nice.

The solution to a sexist employer isn't to make him hire women, putting you both in a situation you don't want. The solution is to work for his competitor, or better yet go into business for yourself and create the kind of work environment,you think will attract the best and brightest to you.

There's the myth that women can't be a part of the problem simply because they are themselves women. Sampat explained that there's a responsibility each woman has to always be "Lifting as We Climb" - a mantra popularized by Mary Church Terell, one of the first black women to earn a degree. Even as she fought and scraped her way to the top, Terell was always there to help her fellow women, and Sampat asked every woman in games to do the same.

So, the solution to sexism is... more sexism? not equality?

 

[Madmonk12345]

Yep, those poor men, who make up a vast majority of the workforce that women are denied entry to, now having to show empathy and consideration for the feelings of others and stuff! What a terrible injustice!

... Are women really being denied entry to the industry, though? Or is it that relatively few women want these jobs?

You do realize that women by and large were fundamental to the development of Comp Sci as we know it, right?
Ada Lovelace invented programming itself.
Grace Hopper invented the compiler.

In addition, there's some hard evidence that this isn't tied to gender. This is a recent phenomenon.

Women peaked in computer science degrees in 1983 at 38%, which was right when windows was announced for the first time with a penetrable interface for the average user, after which computing became more mainstream, desirable and accessible beyond a small clique of oppressed "geeks" that would be accepting of women. It seems it became "man's work", and bachelors degrees in CS for women have declined every year since then. This cannot be just a natural phenomenon.
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~women/resources/aroundTheWeb/hostedPapers/Syllabus-Camp.pdf
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/history#T1=era1

 

[ForumSafari]

Regarding your wider point though... if so few women are applying for these jobs, or have the knowledge and skills to do them... why? What's preventing them?

If I had to take a guess, and this is just a guess mind you, I'd suggest that the lack of women is down to peer pressure on girls at a young age. From my perspective and that of my older manager it looks like women in tech started to trail off a few years after the rise of the awkward nerd stereotype. From what I've seen of little girls growing up I'd suggest that their in-group peer pressure to conform is stronger than that of boys and I don't think that's an atmosphere that fosters the years of experience necessary to get a really good technical knowledge.

By the time girls get to secondary school even the battle is lost, no amount of encouragement will get them to take up a field that reviled once any curiosity is squeezed out of them and even if they do try they'll frequently be years behind the boys, who have spent those years with this as their hobby.

If you want women in tech and you want them to be good at it you really ought to be tackling the primary school age children. Anyone trying to encourage women into tech is going to fail because the ones you ought to pitch to are little girls.

Ada Lovelace invented programming itself.
Grace Hopper invented the compiler.

Hopper is a very good example but Lovelace's contributions are, shall we say, 'controversial'. As in, if she weren't the hero that Gotham needs then her contribution would basically be rubbished since it's popularly thought most of 'her' programs were prepared for her.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

Actually, it isn't something I purposely choose, but it's not something I've really done anything about either. It is weird that my profile defaulted to the female avatar, but my forum profile shows the male one. I presumed it's just a bug of some sort. I haven't really put any effort into changing it, though. There's probably a female avatar floating around somewhere, but I can't say I've looked, beyond a cursory glance over the pre-set avatars. Besides, I'm going to use a completely different avatar eventually, as soon as I get around to, you know, actually doing that.

And no worries. I've followed a few posts you've made in the thread, and I see where you're coming from. You just love the industry and want to see more innovation in it. Even as exhausted as I am with feminism, I understand why people champion it so... vigorously. Really, it's the hypocrisy, entitlement, and general hostility that I despise about it, more than the actual ideals. I know I can get a bit... aggressive, in these debates, but I try to remember that most people act with good intentions.

EDIT: I realized I didn't really actually answer your question (Oops. I did, actually, but it got cut out while I was rewording something) Presuming it's not just a mix-up, then obviously it's the site assuming I'm male, even though I selected female on my profile. And I'm sure there's some larger commentary on the how male's default and female's the other, but really, it's a picture assigned to a fake name I use on one specific website. A pretty petty thing to complain about, all in all. I mean, if default male avatars are the worst sexism I have to endure, then I'd say I'm pretty well-off. Not to mention that gaming IS male-dominated. Making the male avatar the default may be thoughtless, but it's not exactly unfounded. I certainly wouldn't call it sexist.

Good answer. Very good, in fact.

As I said, I tend to be a lot harder on my own sex, which may be a mistake. Despite some of my earlier comments (which I've apologised for, and honestly I feel don't represent me well), I enjoy debates. To quote "The West Wing": "I like smart people who disagree with me." If you don't take opinions into account that disagree with your own, you're denying yourself a chance to make better choices. Then you just keep repeating your own prejudices. I try not to do this, but it's pretty difficult. There's scientific tests that suggest we're "wired" to look for opinions that match our own, and to disregard those that don't. So it's hard to avoid this sometimes.

And don't be too cynical about "feminists". I grew up with women, I went to college with women, I work with women. I've known a fair few people who had feminist views, even if they wouldn't necessarily call themselves that. Very few of them have been overly hostile, entitled, or hypocritical. (Now some of the men I've known, on the other hand... but again, I'm a lot harder on my own sex!)

My point is, there's always a couple of assholes in a group. Doesn't mean the whole group is like that. Plus the Internet is not always good for your temperament. (Given a couple of the posts I made earlier on, I should know!)

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

Yep, those poor men, who make up a vast majority of the workforce that women are denied entry to, now having to show empathy and consideration for the feelings of others and stuff! What a terrible injustice!

... Are women really being denied entry to the industry, though? Or is it that relatively few women want these jobs?

You do realize that women by and large were fundamental to the development of Comp Sci as we know it, right?
Ada Lovelace invented programming itself.
Grace Hopper invented the compiler.

In addition, there's some hard evidence that this isn't tied to gender. This is a recent phenomenon.

Women peaked in computer science degrees in 1983 at 38%, which was right when windows was announced for the first time with a penetrable interface for the average user, after which computing became more mainstream, desirable and accessible beyond a small clique of oppressed "geeks" that would be accepting of women. It seems it became "man's work", and bachelors degrees in CS for women have declined every year since then. This cannot be just a natural phenomenon.
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~women/resources/aroundTheWeb/hostedPapers/Syllabus-Camp.pdf
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/history#T1=era1

Excellent answer, particularly about Lovelace and Hopper (I didn't know Grace Hopper's name, by the way. I really should.) This has obviously been my personal experience as well - again, the company I work for went from being fairly male-centric to having a similar number of males and females, and that is in largely tech-oriented positions - but it's gratifying to see it written down like that.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

Regarding your wider point though... if so few women are applying for these jobs, or have the knowledge and skills to do them... why? What's preventing them?

If I had to take a guess, and this is just a guess mind you, I'd suggest that the lack of women is down to peer pressure on girls at a young age. From my perspective and that of my older manager it looks like women in tech started to trail off a few years after the rise of the awkward nerd stereotype.

That definitely seems like a plausible factor. I've heard it before, and while it's pretty hard to prove or disprove right now, I can see why someone like me (who fits the "awkward nerd" stereotype at least somewhat) might not be put off by an "image" that might put off young girls. There's definitely a certain glamour about being the "underground hacker" who can change the world from behind his computer screen. That's often the image that you see in films and such, and it does largely seem tailored towards boys rather than girls.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

This is one of those strange articles you read sometimes where you're not honestly sure if it's supposed to be satire or not. The points it uses are either wrong, nonsensical, or don't seem to understand how a business actually functions.

Just a few nuggets:

-"If you are in an interview with a candidate stop looking for lifelong desire but instead look for curiosity"
Companies don't hire you because you're curious that you might possibly like the job or industry, companies hire you because you're going to be dedicated to them and that industry, they see you as someone who they are willing train and invest in and see a return on that investment, and because you'll be dedicated to them and willing to work hard. Want to fail a job interview immediately? When they ask you "why do you want to work in the __________ industry?" Say "I don't really know, I'm just curious about the industry and I thought it might be fun, but I'm not sure".

-"Sampat quickly pointed out that statement was bullshots by citing survey information she gathered by speaking with the women she could find who were either employed in the games industry already or were seeking employment. "45% have said they always wanted to work in the games industry,"
In addition to the fact that it doesn't say how many people she talked to, how many were seeking employment vs. how many are already in the industry, or the dubious analysis of asking people already working in an industry whether they wanted to be in that industry, the 45% is meaningless. If you asked American men how many of them would like to play professional football, I can guarantee you a large % would say yes, but that hardly makes them qualified to do so.

-"If you can't find women who can fit into culture, your company culture might suck,"
And? It's not your company, a company can establish whatever culture it wants (within legal reason). When you become a shareholder, feel free to demand a company change its culture, until then, they can run it however they choose.

-"What would our companies look like if we judged growth of companies in other ways?" What if growth meant becoming more well-rounded and full of happy, productive, diverse employees instead of just more rich? The horror!
If a company can't turn a profit, having a bunch of 'happy, productive, diverse employees' is meaningless, as they'll soon be a bunch of happy, productive, diverse people looking for jobs with companies that focus on making a good product that sells instead of focusing on invisible internally created quotas. And sorry, but company growth is measured by profit, sorry if that reality is cruel, but it's just that: reality.

I suppose I should caveat this with saying that people in the industry should treat everyone equally and not be prejudicial towards people based on their gender, religion, race, etc., but that's very different than demanding that companies which you've invested nothing in change everything to accommodate your worldview of how things 'should be'.

 

[FogHornG36]

snip

Based on what? is gender equality a bullet point you can put on the back of a box? if you found out that there wasn't as many women working at a company as men does this play into your choice of buying a game? or if you found out the company was all women, would that sell you on a game? I just care more about the game, it could be a team of androgynous dolphin people, if they make a good product, i will buy it.