Poll: How many straight birth-gendered females are on the Escapist?

[Something Amyss]

I'm genuinely surprised. I thought we had a bigger female populace and I thought we had a larger transgender populace. I guess my impressions were wrong.

Well, yes, but "had" being the operative word there. We did, in the past, have both more women of any stripe and more trans individuals on the site. Without getting too specific, the overall gaming community has become more hostile and toxic to minorities and women over the last few years, and there's been a steady exodus and/or retreat to usergroups from such people. I'm actually surprised so many still remain here.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

I'm genuinely surprised. I thought we had a bigger female populace and I thought we had a larger transgender populace. I guess my impressions were wrong.

Well, yes, but "had" being the operative word there. We did, in the past, have both more women of any stripe and more trans individuals on the site. Without getting too specific, the overall gaming community has become more hostile and toxic to minorities and women over the last few years, and there's been a steady exodus and/or retreat to usergroups from such people. I'm actually surprised so many still remain here.

I can't say I didn't notice all of that. I distinctly remember a few times where the prevailing opinion was "You shouldn't include minorities unless they are there for a specific reason." I guess I was just too optimistic about it not having too much of an effect. I think what's happening, and this is semi-optimistic again, is that the gaming community always had these problems but now they're being talked about. We're in that awkward stage where we're being confronted with our issues so it's causing conflict. Hopefully it will pass and things will get better.

 

[mad825]

Well, yes, but "had" being the operative word there. We did, in the past, have both more women of any stripe and more trans individuals on the site. Without getting too specific, the overall gaming community has become more hostile and toxic to minorities and women over the last few years, and there's been a steady exodus and/or retreat to usergroups from such people. I'm actually surprised so many still remain here.

I'm sorry to play that card against your sexism/discrimination card. I suppose I'll say; at what point was the gaming community not "toxic" or discriminative. Was it the 90s? 2000s? Or now? Because apparently nothing has changed.

 

[Silvanus]

I'm sorry to play that card against your sexism/discrimination card. I suppose I'll say; at what point was the gaming community not "toxic" or discriminative. Was it the 90s? 2000s? Or now? Because apparently nothing has changed.

Well, of course, it's not a binary switch. It's a sliding scale. I can't say I haven't noticed a good deal of hostility towards suggestion of including characters of different stripes, for example, which seems to have kicked up a gear semi-recently.

 

[Something Amyss]

I can't say I didn't notice all of that. I distinctly remember a few times where the prevailing opinion was "You shouldn't include minorities unless they are there for a specific reason." I guess I was just too optimistic about it not having too much of an effect. I think what's happening, and this is semi-optimistic again, is that the gaming community always had these problems but now they're being talked about. We're in that awkward stage where we're being confronted with our issues so it's causing conflict. Hopefully it will pass and things will get better.

We're "talking about it" largely in terms that paint women and minorities as outsiders trying to take away gaming from its rightful owners. The toxicity has never been more apparent, and a lot of us have never felt more unwelcome. Speaking of....

Because apparently nothing has changed.

Well, the first thing I'd note is that you stripped out the word "more," so your question of when gaming wasn't "toxic" doesn't address me. In short, you're asking for a "citation" for something I didn't say and is not my stance/.

And apparently? "Apparently" according to who? You? Are you a woman? Are you trans or gay? Have you been on the receiving end of this in the past or the present? Since you played the "citation needed" card, I'd really like to know your frame of reference. Because the women and transfolk in this thread seem to have reached the gee, what a surprise there's less of us now" conclusion, largely independently.

I'm also curious as to why specifically you think there's been such a decline. The last time there was a poll like this, the numbers were almost double (total women/LGBT). Did women and transfolk just up and decide people were suddenly right and we're not really interested in gaming?

 

[Aerevolt]

Bisexual female.
I would like to add a side note about understanding my sexuality. Growing up, I thought human sexuality was binary. I knew I wasn't a lesbian, so I figured I was 100% straight; even though when I was "practicing" kissing with other girls I was getting turned on.
After an intense make-out session where we were found out, by her overly homo-phobic grandmother, I went home humiliated and decided not to kiss girls ever again. It took me another ten years or so to realize I was bi.

 

[Zhukov]

I'm genuinely surprised. I thought we had a bigger female populace and I thought we had a larger transgender populace. I guess my impressions were wrong.

Well, yes, but "had" being the operative word there. We did, in the past, have both more women of any stripe and more trans individuals on the site.

Are you certain of that?

I don't have hard figures or anything but these polls having been cropping up every so often since I registered and I always remember the split being roughly between 85%/15% and 90%/10%, same as this one.

 

[NiPah]

Spoiler

I didn't paint you as anything, I just pointed out something about selective outrage that you apparently aren't enjoying the sound of.

I reported your post for moderation as it seems pretty clear you're not here for discussion or debate, but merely to troll and incite a response.

In case it isn't so, I am very curious about this apparent "selective outrage" and how it wasn't covered in my reply to you. Thanks.

In this case, this is a comic that actually depicts an event that happened to the artist, it's a pretty common event, though the physical confrontation is usually worse than being pushed down. You're conflating a marginalized person venting about being abused, with the people who actually did the abuse. That's where the selective outrage comes in. In fact the whole punch-line of the comic is the people who are only caring about their own feelings about how the character is being "mean to cis people", not why their family member/friend is upset.

You went and accused trans people of a lack of self-awareness, without using any of your own here. No offense intended, but you're literally taking a perceived offense against you and conflating it with deeply held attitudes. Attitudes that get real people assaulted, raped, and murdered for daring offend another's sensibilities.

Without context I wouldn't blame the friends/family for just caring about their own feelings, all they see is a person being an asshole.

Sure she's venting, but she's doing it in about the dumbest way possible, no context and just exclaiming her hate of everyone who's a certain type of gender, if they said that after reading the complete story then yes it's have a point about only caring about themselves, as it stands it's just a normal reaction to a slight slam, not very poignant.

The fact is I see the opposite all the time from the other side, and the cisgender, or heterosexual people who say "I hate gay/trans people today" always get sympathy, even from trans and gay folk. The worst blow back they get generally is: "I understand how you feel, but you could have worded your first post better." The kneejerk reactionary blowing back like in the comic is generally exclusively directed at trans and gay folk, mostly because cis-het folk tend to feel threatened by our very existence.

On the rare occasion of seeing someone say "I hate the gays" or "I hate transvestites" I've only ever seen people reply to it with admonishment, never sympathy. I'd be quite bewildered by someone saying "I hate gays" and a gay friend providing sympathy, honestly you'd have to send pics of it happening before I even believed it happened, not a slam but an honest disbelief.

Also I wouldn't say the response in the comic is from feelings of threat, more like "hey this person say she hates people like me, what an asshole". There may be some people who feel threatened by transvestites, but the vast majority just don't like having people saying they hate them, just my 2cents.

 

[CyanCat47_v1legacy]

I'm asexual and as such the internet questions my fundamental excistence. And people of the internet if you are going to place me in the category of non-existent creatures can i at the very least have a pet loch ness monster?

 

[Thaluikhain]

I have tried explaining to you how extremely harmful it is to reinforce the divide between "cis" and "trans" by creating a "us and them" atmosphere.

Creating an "us" and "them" atmosphere? Whether or not trans people acknowledge that there's a pretty massive divide has nothing to do with creating it.

Excepting that acknowledging it is a requirement to dealing with it, which makes me wonder about why it's so important it should go unspoken of.

 

[UberPubert]

We are goin to need some more mustard for this sausage party

Ketchup, anyone?

I have to say, the dude to chick ratio isn't a shock, but I am a little surprised we have so many gay men on the forums, almost as many as there are of all the women combined.

Now, who's brave enough to make the race/ethnicity poll?

 

[JoJo]

Well, I managed to find the screenshot of the 2013 poll I took:

Spoiler

Slightly different, since it purely covered gender rather than sexuality as well, but if you add the numbers together they're surprisingly similar. About 81% male, 13% female and 6% other in 2013, compared to 84% male and 16% female in 2016 with no 'other' option. Also 2013 had much larger sample size... that may not bode well for the health of this forum.

 

[Silvanus]

Also 2013 had much larger sample size... that may not bode well for the health of this forum.

I'm not hugely surprised. Not everybody has the inexplicable loyalty we do.

 

[Gengisgame]

-Snip-

EDIT - Yeah, let's not try and provoke a negative response, shall we? - [user]n0e[/user]

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

Well, I managed to find the screenshot of the 2013 poll I took:

Spoiler

Slightly different, since it purely covered gender rather than sexuality as well, but if you add the numbers together they're surprisingly similar. About 81% male, 13% female and 6% other in 2013, compared to 84% male and 16% female in 2016 with no 'other' option. Also 2013 had much larger sample size... that may not bode well for the health of this forum.

Huh. So I was wrong. The numbers are mostly identical, though they have changed a bit. Now I'm curious how it could be so stable over the decreasing figures.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

the title and the options were headache inducing

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

the title and the options were headache inducing

11 words and 6 options gave you a headache?

in short; yes. it wasn't the words alone but the titles and concepts

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

the title and the options were headache inducing

11 words and 6 options gave you a headache?

in short; yes. it wasn't the words alone but the titles and concepts

Which ones in particular got to you?

not one specific. I just feel if there is a need to label, can we not make it snappier?

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

the title and the options were headache inducing

11 words and 6 options gave you a headache?

in short; yes. it wasn't the words alone but the titles and concepts

Which ones in particular got to you?

not one specific. I just feel if there is a need to label, can we not make it snappier?

Such as?

I've no idea of the intricacies required to encompass all of what is being labeled, but I can tell you they ain't going to catch on. I'm talking good branding

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

the title and the options were headache inducing

11 words and 6 options gave you a headache?

in short; yes. it wasn't the words alone but the titles and concepts

Which ones in particular got to you?

not one specific. I just feel if there is a need to label, can we not make it snappier?

Such as?

I've no idea of the intricacies required to encompass all of what is being labeled, but I can tell you they ain't going to catch on. I'm talking good branding

Maybe, but since you can't seem to offer anything except a sort of vague moaning the generation direction of some terms that seem to offend you to the point of a physical reaction, I'm not going to take your word for it. To me, it still seems like a simple way to refer to something, and not an attempt for terminology to "Catch On".

You obviously see it differently though.

To be honest, I barely feel you've engaged in a conversation at all until this point other than tell me I'm offended, I'm not going to waste me time further replying to you. I may have been vague, but i tried, being condescending to me does not help at all.

Good day sir.