@Riot A serious discussion about gender. Please read

First Riot Post
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

clappersucks

Senior Member

10-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ayrona View Post
Well, as was pointed out in the first post, one of the reasons why they do not have more customers (specifically women) is the portrayal of women as a whole with respect to men. I have to agree with this because I have not successfully convinced other women that I know personally who enjoy games to play this game, and this really saddens me. I also understand where they are coming from because I almost didn't play this game because of it, but mostly because I wasn't sure if I could take the game seriously with the *** appeal thrown right in my face. I realized once I started actually playing that it was just a small cosmetic aspect of the game, and one that I could also enjoy (I own Officer Caitlyn and Bewitching Nidalee as far as sexy skins go).

Also, the goal of this thread is to see more diversity in the future design of champions and skins. I would argue that since League of Legends has over 100 champions, the push for more diversity is favorable from a design standpoint because there is more of a need for champions to be distinct from one another than when there were 50 champions. This goal certainly does not interfere with appealing to the majority.
I think the main reason that this game fewer female gamers then male is simply because..... not many women play video games. This game already has a larger female population then any other game I have played.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

SonsofaBastages

Senior Member

10-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteglint3 View Post
women aren't in combat situations for very, very good reasons.

the main, and mostly only reason is this.

women put into combat situations cause incredible problems when injured in the line of duty, nearly ALWAYS the men combatants instinctively do everything they can to help them, this is bad because if say.

1, female combatant is shot by a sniper, everyone is behind cover, normally the correct procedure is to use coverfire to protect said injured, find the sniper and route him, then apply care to the injured soldier.

when females are put in place, the men will break cover to protect/help her, they will then all be killed, combat effectiveness is instantly lowered to nothing (because they are dead).

this same event happens in other situations, the men WILL do whatever it takes to help the women, its instinct, and it kicks in hard in combat, and it has gotten men killed many times (and the women involved).


women are entirely capable of being in combat, they can kill people just as good as men (infact they are very good fighter pilots and helicopter pilots, and is the main combat role the get to take)

but women should not be put into ground forces combat, they disrupt combat effectiveness and get people killed due to situations I discribed.

so.. knowing this, women are treated diffrently in the army, do you think what I said was sexist? (if you do that means you think progression is more imporant than soldiers lives).

I await your answer, i'm sure your mature enough to give a good one (ha).
This is true. The Israelis have used women in combat roles and ran into this issue. Men in the area are more willing to compromise mission objectives to protect a wounded female squadmate than they are to protect a wounded male squadmate.

The argument "well they shouldn't do that" hasn't done much to counter the problem. So women are generally excluded from combat roles where that type of situation could come up. Women are in Aircraft combat roles, and the four star in charge of Air Force Materiel Command - Gen Wolfenbarger - is a woman. So even if there are some combat restrictions there's not much of a glass ceiling currently in the military.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Loves II Spooge

Junior Member

10-08-2012

Stopped reading at the point where you said Olaf isn't mancandy; needs more trans-gendered men that wear eyeliner.

Not my fault you don't find Olaf "mancandy." Go play Inuyasha. You can pit your sexual ambiguous favorites against each other there.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

clappersucks

Senior Member

10-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Waafu View Post
So when male combatants act in undisciplined and stupid ways for no good reason, it's the women who are "disrupting combat effectiveness"?
While it may seem sexist, it is true. It has always been known that female interactions with males in a military environment can be bad for everyone. Not necessarily for the specific example the poster used, but it is true. It is just the way humans are.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Whiteglint3

Senior Member

10-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Waafu View Post
So when male combatants act in undisciplined and stupid ways for no good reason, it's the women who are "disrupting combat effectiveness"?
almost all men do this in the same situation, its instinct and being in the midst of combat makes it easy to fall to instincts so strong as this one.

do you think they made this call lightly? the military would GLADLY send women to the combat wood-chipper if they thought it was COMBAT EFFECTIVE to do so.

no discrimination needed, no talks about equality, being a soldier is about being combat effective, the military would do anything (within moral limits such as Geneva convention) to insure combat effectiveness, and if women were able to be there it wouldn't even be a question.

women still serve in practically every other position in the military, but not regular infantry of any branch, for very specific reasons that have been looked into for the last 200 years.

unless you think you know better than the people who's entire job it is to test these things and find out just how combat effective they can make a solider?

why would you even doubt this? has feminism erased the logic centers of your brain.

would YOU allow women into combat roles knowing it could cause many people (including the women) to be killed needlessly for the sole sake of "equality" and "progression"?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Whiteglint3

Senior Member

10-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by SonsofaBastages View Post
This is true. The Israelis have used women in combat roles and ran into this issue. Men in the area are more willing to compromise mission objectives to protect a wounded female squadmate than they are to protect a wounded male squadmate.

The argument "well they shouldn't do that" hasn't done much to counter the problem. So women are generally excluded from combat roles where that type of situation could come up. Women are in Aircraft combat roles, and the four star in charge of Air Force Materiel Command - Gen Wolfenbarger - is a woman. So even if there are some combat restrictions there's not much of a glass ceiling currently in the military.
there isn't any ceiling whatsoever, women can do nearly everything in the military without question, Ground forces being the exception.

my point was simple, is this form of "different" treatment sexism to the person I asked the question to.

if you say "yes" then well.. your a pretty simple person then aren't you.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Whiteglint3

Senior Member

10-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by clappersucks View Post
While it may seem sexist, it is true. It has always been known that female interactions with males in a military environment can be bad for everyone. Not necessarily for the specific example the poster used, but it is true. It is just the way humans are.
my "specific" example got 6 people killed FYI.

and "seem sexist" jesus christ I can't even begin to tell you what that simple sentance says to me.

it says that people now knee-jerk react to anything that even remotely sounds sexist, regardless if it is or isn't, it doesn't even matter if it would get soldiers killed put the girls in the Infantry or the feminists will RIOT.

personally I think the feminists who want it to happen should be the ones put in, just so when the situation I discribed happens, they'll know they were idiots.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

BerserkSheal

Senior Member

10-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteglint3 View Post
my "specific" example got 6 people killed FYI.
I doubt anyone is going to argue against it, no point to.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

clappersucks

Senior Member

10-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteglint3 View Post
my "specific" example got 6 people killed FYI.
I simply meant that I do not know anything about that specific scenario and therefore I cannot comment on whether it is true or not.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

SonsofaBastages

Senior Member

10-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ayrona View Post
Well, as was pointed out in the first post, one of the reasons why they do not have more customers (specifically women) is the portrayal of women as a whole with respect to men. I have to agree with this because I have not successfully convinced other women that I know personally who enjoy games to play this game, and this really saddens me. I also understand where they are coming from because I almost didn't play this game because of it, but mostly because I wasn't sure if I could take the game seriously with the *** appeal thrown right in my face. I realized once I started actually playing that it was just a small cosmetic aspect of the game, and one that I could also enjoy (I own Officer Caitlyn and Bewitching Nidalee as far as sexy skins go).

Also, the goal of this thread is to see more diversity in the future design of champions and skins. I would argue that since League of Legends has over 100 champions, the push for more diversity is favorable from a design standpoint because there is more of a need for champions to be distinct from one another than when there were 50 champions. This goal certainly does not interfere with appealing to the majority.
It's just hard to get people into lol in my experience regardless of gender.
I agree wholeheartedly on the diversity issue. there's 100+ champs and Riot needs to get creative to avoid cookie cutter syndrome.