About women attitudes
Posted By: AlbertoT
About women attitudes - 12/06/06 23:44
Hello
First of all, I am aware it is a "dangerous" question
Nevertheles I beg you to provide an honest answer based on your actual experience rather than the usual and boring " politically correct " answer
The question is
Do you think that men and women have the same skill for math or in general for science ?
Obviuosly I mean on statistic basis.
It is evident that some women are much more intelligent than a lot of males
It is also evident that such difference, if any, is quite small , but ...
Does a small but noticiable difference exist ?
Some years ago the common argument was "discrimination"
Well it is hard to support this theory nowadays, in opinion.
Think at this claim for a while
There are much more women at high level in a political party or in management than in a scientific comunity
If a woman is busy with children , home etc , it should be the direct opposite
Politics and management are defintly much more time comsuming than research
( meeting, trips , dinners etc )!
That said, you may assume that, in my opinion men, are more intelligent than women ( from a scientific point of view ) but it is not like that
I will explain my theory later on but first I would appreciate to listen to your opinion
Once again, be honest please
P.S.
" Politically correct" people refuse to admit that black people are stronger than white people despite evidence
It does not make any sense to compete togheter in the same Olimpics game
Posted By: PHeMoX
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 00:01
I think the basic problem is 'generalisation', not discrimination. A certain amount of women are definately very smart, a certain amount of men are also very smart.
I think it's hard to say which sex is the most smartest. In my opinion most statistics on this are very questionable. This may sound politically correct and all, but I'm simply undecided about which sex is the smartest.
When it comes to races though, I think the differences are too small to justify a separation. Would it be unfair to let a Chinese run against an African, just because in theory the African will be the most likely winner? Some sports are definately dominated by people of a certain races perhaps, but that may have other reasons than simply their 'race'. A lot of athletes from Kenia are incredible runners, I think that has more to do with the conditions in their home country they train in.
The conditions to train are excellent, higher grounds and things like that. When you're born in such an environment then you simply have that advantage right from when you're not even able to walk. I think it's easy to forget about those factors, they count too.
Again, perhaps this may sound political correct to you, but I think no race is sumpreme to another, their qualities may infact be different, but not different enough to justify anything,
Cheers
Posted By: AlbertoT
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 00:14
Obviuosly I was joking about Olimpics games
Posted By: PHeMoX
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 00:17
Okey, sorry, I've missed that
. However I do know some people who really think the white race is sumpreme to all other races, so I thought I might aswell comment to it anyway.
Obviously those people are not my friends though,
Cheers
Posted By: Damocles
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 00:39
connecting this to races it is not a question about the statistically correct outcome,
anything else than full equality is political incorrect, and cant / is not allowed to be discussed anyhow.
Now women do work on specific tasks differently.
But the women I know from university are quite proficient even in mathematical and
computer sciences. They also have more "emotional" intelligence, to solve disputes,
which helps a lot.
I think it is more a question of interest in a field, where less woman have interest
in abstract mathematical sciences.
The probability to be a really great genius is higher for males, (talking about the very few exeptional geniuses)
but also the probability to be dumb.
This is simply a reason from higher genetic variance due to the X and Y cromosomes.
(where woman have a more stable structure with two X cromosomes)
So in males there is a higher probability for a mutation / variance.
But in the "normal" range, there are certainly as many smart woman as men.
Again, it is more linked to the interest a person has in a field, where simply more
males feel comfortable in abstract sciences.
And beeing good in a field first requires a selfdriven interest in it.
Posted By: Irish_Farmer
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 00:41
I think it has more to do with social conditioning than anything else.
Certainly, men are more logic oriented, whereas women seem to be more emotionally oriented, but that has no bearing on intelligence.
I think women COULD be just as proficient in math and science, but for the way most women are raised it probably just doesn't seem like those routes are a good choice. On the other hand, this is coming from someone who has no idea what the real factors are, that are in play. So I don't know.
Posted By: PHeMoX
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 01:50
I think you're right in a way. If you want to become a 'genius' and granted you've got what it takes genetically, then from quite early on your brain should get enough problems to solve, it almost literally needs 'training' to stimulate the brain to reach it's full potential,
Cheers
I dont think there is much real difference between men and women as far as basic math and science ability. However, i do think that more men are willing to sacrifice some of their personal lives and daily comforts for creative and scientific persuits.
Whether this is cultural or biological I dont know.
Posted By: Rhuarc
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 04:08
Quote:
I think it has more to do with social conditioning than anything else.
Certainly, men are more logic oriented, whereas women seem to be more emotionally oriented, but that has no bearing on intelligence.
I think women COULD be just as proficient in math and science, but for the way most women are raised it probably just doesn't seem like those routes are a good choice. On the other hand, this is coming from someone who has no idea what the real factors are, that are in play. So I don't know.
This sums it up right here... social conditioning. I'll add that although the logic/emotion tendencies do not affect intelligence, they DO affect how that intelligence is used. It's easier to work in math and science with a logically wired brain. It's easier to work in politics with an emotionally wired brain. It doesn't affect intelligence, but rather the application of where that intelligence is commonly used.
Just my two cents.
-Rhuarc
Posted By: PHeMoX
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 05:14
Yeah, indeed.
Quote:
I'll add that although the logic/emotion tendencies do not affect intelligence, they DO affect how that intelligence is used.
Which is basically why the amount of say female scientists vs. the amount of male scientists says absolutely nothing about either sex's general intelligence.
Quote:
It doesn't affect intelligence, but rather the application of where that intelligence is commonly used.
So, again although very very important in practise, we can't use these kinds of facts to determine which sex is actually 'the smartest'. I think we've simply have to agree that it's either very hard or practically impossible to determine which sex is more intelligent. (especially when we make the distinction between EQ and IQ, both off which are perhaps equal off importance, although it seems to me they do imply a different kind of intelligence factor, but still.)
Cheers
Posted By: AlbertoT
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 08:26
Thanks
My opinion is about the same as Damocles's
The key points,are the following :
a ) in the "normal" range, there are certainly as many smart woman as men.
b )The probability to be a really great genius is higher for males
c ) less woman have interest in abstract mathematical sciences.
a) and b)
I had bridge ( the card game) lessons some years ago
The teacher, a woman, said
"Well boys do not expect too much from me, I am a woman "
Everybody laughed assuming she was joking, she was known as one of the best bridge players in my city
" I am speaking seriously " She said " A woman can be a very good player but a champion must be a man, it is a matter of fact"
c)
The question is why ?
Well , an obvious answer is , because they are less capable
but I think there is an other explanation which is very much related with maternity
A woman feel the responsability for her children ( or future children ) much more than a man , for obvious reason
Cosequently women are more focused on "concrete" stuff , they are more "serious" than men
A men mantain somthing childish in a corner of his brain
I suppose it happens also to you
I have a regular job 8 - 10 hours a day, nevertheless I like to spend some hours a week programming games even though I dont get any benefit
Just for my interest
My sister shakes her head, she simply can not conceive that I can do something for "nothing"
Posted By: Damocles
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 08:44
Thats true, woman very often act more "professionally".
Doing things that yield some result or where askt to do.
Doing less mindplays just for fun.
They much less philosophise about abstract concepts (except social interaction)
than men, just for the fun of it.
But if they work in a field like abtract math, or science, they work really good
on a topic that is set on the agenda.
And it is easier to convince them or have a discussion, as they dont stand
on their point as deliberate as men. (in abstract scientific discussions,
not regarding social interaction!)
And in my university I see not social "barriers" for them, to work in their field.
So social contraints are not there or very small nowerdays.
Posted By: PHeMoX
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 09:25
Quote:
less woman have interest in abstract mathematical sciences.
...
c)
The question is why ?
Well , an obvious answer is , because they are less capable
No offence, but I think your reasoning is faulthy, not being interested in something is totally unrelated to the fact wether or not they would actually be good in something. Once you find out your good at something, then you will most likely enjoy doing whatever you're good at. Personally I think the era of women in science has only just begun, especially because the emancipation has only been started this recently. Therefore looking at how things are now, might not really be representative at all.
Besides that, I don't really see how you could come to the conclusion that they 'would therefore be incapable'.
Cheers
Posted By: JetpackMonkey
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 11:10
Marilyn vos Savant is smarter than you. IQ: 228
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilyn_vos_SavantShe takes on this question in her weekly magazine column:
Quote:
The concern unfolds in two questions: 1) Are women handicapped by their upbringing, social pressures, discrimination from men, and more—not just in science but also in other areas? 2) Or are women less bright than men?
Some Answers
The answer to the first question is too obvious for argument: Yes, and in my opinion, upbringing is the No. 1 cause—not discrimination, conscious or not, from men. Just as significant is the fact (not the problem) that many women are far more interested in their families than outside work, and society clearly approves. Top positions do require time, energy and dedication to goals that may even be selfish.The second question is the hot spot. The average IQ of females is equal to the average IQ of males. But averages can be misleading. In the case of intelligence tests, many more males score at the top and the bottom of the intelligence scale. This could account for the greater number of men in the sciences and—on the other end—in the prison population. So: Does the gender disparity in science give credence to the idea that men are more intelligent than women? My answer is “no,” and these are my reasons:
No evidence indicates that the sciences attract the brightest people. The unspoken assumption that science attracts the smartest people is the foundation upon which we have built the conclusion: “If the sciences are filled with men, men must be smarter, unless women have a good excuse for being absent.” I believe that science—like chess— attracts bright people, but only the ones with certain personality characteristics. Those traits might be more common in men. In the case of chess, the game was developed by males for intellectual sparring with other males. Maybe females simply don’t find the game as fascinating. And note that dictators—who aren’t any stronger than other men—are never women. Maybe females just don’t have whatever it takes to bulldoze their way to this dubious sort of “success.” No one thinks the paucity of women in the field of ruthless domination is because they aren’t smart enough! So why should anyone be shocked to find that most bright people—including women—would flee from the sight of a microscope?!To me, it is clear that the brightest people are spread over all sorts of other occupations. Motherhood is likely among them, and why not? I was a stay-at-home mom while my children were small, and I loved it.
Read the rest of her column here, it's fascinating:
http://www.parade.com/articles/editions/2005/edition_07-17-2005/featured_0
Consider the story of Irene Hueter, famous Swiss mathematician, if you want to talk about social pressure:
"Dr. Hueter was born in Bern, Switzerland. Before entering high school, she was often discouraged to like math as a girl and was pushed in other directions in spite of mathematics being her strongest subject. In the seventh grade, girls at her school were forced to take a sewing class while all boys took geometry. While the school did not want to make an exception upon her request to take the geometry, she still managed to learn it from her male classmates. In exchange, she solved the problems that they got stuck on."
That was in the 1970's in liberal Switzerland no less.
Posted By: AlbertoT
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 11:35
[quote
Besides that, I don't really see how you could come to the conclusion that they 'would therefore be incapable'.
Cheers
No offence but I think that you post to much without even reading what people said., it is not the first time I noticed it...Well ,I must admit it is the same also for me , sometime
If I write
An obvious answer is... but..
It is evident that I consider the latter explanation more reliable than the former
However I dont really understand how you can disagree on such evident claim
People tend to focus on activities which they are fit for
Artists complain about MED and WED while they are happy with C-script
The opposite for programmers
About the traditional arguments of discrimination, Ms Franklin and some others ,this was defintly true some years ago, but I dont think nowadays
I anticipated in my first post this kind of arguments
Look at politics
Ok ,it is still dominated by men but what about Condolees Rice, Hillary Clinton...and many others
How many Nobel prices for phisics have been assigned to women in the last 10 years ?
Discrimination ? baahh
Posted By: Damocles
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 12:39
Most female nobel proice winners are for the peace , medicine and literature price:
Femal nobel price winners
Posted By: AlbertoT
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 12:41
It is what I said, is it due to discrimination ?
Posted By: PHeMoX
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 13:27
Quote:
How many Nobel prices for phisics have been assigned to women in the last 10 years ?
Discrimination ? baahh
Your view about the current state of emancipation of women in this world is unrealistic, it doesn't work like that yet.
Condoleeza Rice and Hillary Clinton are part of a very small group of women that actually have something to say in this world.
Eventhough most of us agree it shouldn't be, there's still a lot of discrimination going on.
By the way, I did read your post very well, your socalled 'second' answer comes down to practically the same.
Cheers
Posted By: bupaje
Re: About women attitudes - 12/07/06 23:50
I have read that there may be some structural and chemical differences between the male and female brains. There is still more study needed as scientists don't agree on the importance of any differences, even if they accept them; we were told in Psychology class, that the Corpus Callosum on females may be comparatively larger than that of males. This part of the brain aids in transferring data between right and left hemispheres. Our teacher says this may be an evolutionary development that allows the average male more intense narrower focus to aid his role as protector/hunter, and females as the gatherer, childbearer, etc has a broader focus aimed at juggling multiple tasks.
There may be other factors -like hormones- but my point is that we may be geared in such a way that each sex has a few extra ability points in some fields, or a little more interest in certain topics, based on our wiring. I don't think this means one is better than another, this is just like someone who has a natural talent for music and someone who has to work hard to develop musical ability. Our brains create neural pathways based on how we use them so a female interested in math/science -even if we assume the lesser ability or inclination thing is true- can develop greater ability through her application.
Ethnicity, culture and many other factors add or detract to these abilities.
For me women are 4 quarters, men are a dollar bill. Different physical attributes, equal value. As a married guy of 20 years I can tell you that while I am stronger and more capable than my wife in some areas, she far surpasses me in many many others.
Posted By: Doug
Re: About women attitudes - 12/08/06 18:49
Something you need to think about when you read reports like this is they are talking about an average over a (normally small) sample group. Not to say this doesn't produce useful data, but it is far from the last word.
What really gets interesting is, outside of the obvious "naughty bits", its sometimes hard to figure out what makes a man a man and a woman a woman. As DNA research becomes more common and noninvasive body scans cheaper, we are finding all sorts of surprises in people who are totally "normal" in appearance.
Quote:
we are finding all sorts of surprises in people who are totally "normal" in appearance.
Can you elaborate on this?
Posted By: JetpackMonkey
Re: About women attitudes - 12/10/06 13:54
Carleton "Carly" Fiorina CEO Hewlett Packard
Shelly Lazarus Chairman & CEO, Ogilvy & Mather
Meg Whitman President & CEO, eBay Technologies
Anne Mulcahy CEO XEROX
Patricia Russo CEO Lucent Technologies
Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany
Maggie Thatcher, Prime Minister, UK
etc etc etc etc etc
The subject of this forum says it all, 'attitudes', perception clouded by sexist stupidity. Why aren't there women CEO's in Afghanistan? Discrimination. Why aren't there more in the USA? We were not even allowed to VOTE in this country UNTIL 1920.
Here's a quote from Marilyn vos Savant, IQ 228, smartest person on the earth if you believe in IQ
Quote:
Perhaps most convincing of all are these facts from other outposts in the animal kingdom:
•Female chimpanzees learn complex tasks as easily as males.
•Female gorillas can be taught sign language as well as males.
•Female guide dogs are as capable at their work as males.
•Female dolphins perform practical jokes as often as males.
•Female parrots are able to mime and talk as well as males.
•Female rats and mice run mazes just as efficiently as males.
Would you prefer to adopt a male puppy because you thought you could teach him more tricks? No, you know better. (And we don’t find more female moths in our light fixtures!) Why should anyone think that human females are an exception?!
PS Imagine that, not letting the smartest (tested IQ) person to vote. That's life in pre-suffrage America.
Posted By: Damocles
Re: About women attitudes - 12/10/06 15:10
Next to the political and economical leader issue,
take real life examples.
I think it is just a question of interest in certain fields, why there is a more
male of female dominance.
Take this forum, or gamedevelopment as an example. Next to you (one of the very few exeptions)
and maybe some others, there are no females envolved in gamedesign.
I think this is simply because males have more interest in programming and creating games,
just for the purpose of making them. Very few developers actually earn money with it.
It is simply that males have certain interests that few woman share, and thus
dominate this field. And this is not caused by some discrimination, but simply the
phsycological nature of this gender.
Other fields are mostly dominated by woman nowerdays. For example the social sciences and
arts in our univerity.
Economical sciences have a 50% mix, and Math/Physics/Infomation technology/engeneering have
a male dominance.
This is not caused by discrimination, but by a difference in interests.
Or how often do you discuss macrophysics with your female friends?
Males do, at least some times.
On the other hand, males dont dicuss much about family issues,
at least not to the same extend.
----------
They had a funny test on a TV show some times ago.
A person enters a Taxi (Cap) and the taxidriver talked about
some topics, like the car he bought (about the color, engine, interior) and
then talked about the son of his sister where he had a picture of him in the front.
After the trip, the persons where asked, whatever they remembered about the
dialog.
Males remembered the car, its type, its horsepower, engine, interior (like leatherseats)
But did not remember the name of the kid, or how he looked like.
Most Females remembered only the color of the car, but not the type.
But most of them remembered the kids name, and how he looked like, and what sport he plays.
Males and Females simply process information differently, since they
have interest in different fields.
Posted By: PHeMoX
Re: About women attitudes - 12/10/06 16:00
Quote:
This is not caused by discrimination, but by a difference in interests.
You're definately right about the interests, but when it comes to certain areas there's definately still discrimination involved! Mostly indirect though, as in, some years ago it would be totally not done to even think about accepting a woman for a certain position in a company or certain jobs or even accept university application, but instead give a 'recommendation' that she would be better of when she would not study.
People tend to deny it, but the effects of those days are still very very noticable in today's world, despite emancipation.
I only have to look at the amount of female teachers in our University. It's still far from equal and then I'm talking about art, languages and culture faculties too! (the faculties women usually are most likely to be interested in, as opposed to e.g. chemistry)
Cheers
Posted By: JetpackMonkey
Re: About women attitudes - 12/10/06 16:59
Quote:
, there are no females envolved in gamedesign.
Well, to say 'no females' is really incorrect. Okay, there are not as many as men, but still that is not something I've seen in my professional experience-- I've worked at four different game studios over the last 14 years and in every case there was about half women staff.. two had female CEO's and producers, every single one had female art directors, and some of them had worked as art directors at other studios. One had only female programmers (small operation), another had 2/5 female programming staff, three of four had female sound designers/composers! There's creator of Sierra Online, Roberta Williams. Director of Product Development for Sony Entertainment for nearly every PS2 and PS3 title Connie Booth, etc etc etc. There really are many more. Sure none are as famous as Wil Wright or Sid Meier, minus Roberta Williams, but that's not really important.. Also while working at a well known graphics software company, exactly one half of the programming staff were genius young women, brilliant programmers.
Also at the SF Academy of Art College's game design program, a significant portion of the game design students are female. I think this will only increase with time as videogames expand in design and content appeal further to women.. as some games increase in quality of narrative and visual design. Games like The Sims... A majority of games have lacked qualities that appeal to woman, which is a factor in this, but it's totally changing nowadays-- that isn't a function of "women don't like games" but a difference in style. It's changing, and many studios are realizing this now that women make up half the consumer demographic, with more women purchasing games than men.
Posted By: Doug
Re: About women attitudes - 12/11/06 18:38
Quote:
Quote:
we are finding all sorts of surprises in people who are totally "normal" in appearance.
Can you elaborate on this?
Using just the DNA examples, we are seeing a lot more interesting DNA markers (like XXY, XXX, YY, etc.). Also, there are many cases of people who look totally normal on the outside, but inside they're DNA doesn't match up (blood may be XY while brain tissue shows XX). In fact, every time we come up with something we think "is male" or "is female" we find somebody that proves that wrong.
San Diego has some fun science businesses. Spend enough time drinking coffee with people here and you get all sorts of fun stories. 
Posted By: Rhuarc
Re: About women attitudes - 12/11/06 19:08
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
we are finding all sorts of surprises in people who are totally "normal" in appearance.
Can you elaborate on this?
Using just the DNA examples, we are seeing a lot more interesting DNA markers (like XXY, XXX, YY, etc.). Also, there are many cases of people who look totally normal on the outside, but inside they're DNA doesn't match up (blood may be XY while brain tissue shows XX). In fact, every time we come up with something we think "is male" or "is female" we find somebody that proves that wrong.
San Diego has some fun science businesses. Spend enough time drinking coffee with people here and you get all sorts of fun stories.
And imagine all the stories they tell about you, Doug
-Rhuarc
Posted By: Ran Man
Re: About women attitudes - 12/11/06 20:39
Have you guys ever noticed that girls and women seem to
love the "STORY LINE" content in games and not necessarily the ACTION stuff?
I mean they watch those dumb soap opera's TV shows when they can and get entertained by it. It seems to be the same with games!?
My daughters, for example, loved to play the "Final Fantasy" series of games. Hello? How boring!
You get to hear and play with the struggles and love lifes of some dumb computer character that somebody dreamed up at "Squaresoft" or Disney. Who cares about that? That's pretty dull.
Roberta Williams, for example, was a good "writer" of storylines for adventure games, but not a technical guru at all.
She could have wrote some fictional novels and been equally sucessful.
They seem to like the "stories" and guys tend to like the real "action" I think...
Posted By: Orange Brat
Re: About women attitudes - 12/12/06 00:52
I mainly play story games, some action adv some pure adv, and I love the Final Fantasy games as do a few million other males. I also know plenty of women who like action games, too. I could care less about pure action games, although I'm sure there are some exceptions if I thought really hard. I must be a woman then. No, wait, it's all still there.
Roberta Williams was a pioneer. She wasn't just a "writer," she's a full-fledged designer and a writer. Jane Jensen is another. She's been out of the game for a while after her Gabriel Knight trilogy, but she has a new adv coming out called Gray Matter.
Game Industry's 100 Most Influential Women:
http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3783&Itemid=2
Posted By: Doug
Re: About women attitudes - 12/12/06 18:41
Quote:
And imagine all the stories they tell about you, Doug
Heheh, nice thought but I don't think my life is that interesting.
Posted By: HeelX
Re: About women attitudes - 12/12/06 19:27
I really have no oppinion. Since I meet and greet everyday geniuses and totally dumbasses all around me, I wouldnt smack it down to the oldish man/woman cliche discussion.
Look: there is this totally screwed up girl, no one likes here because shes so arogant and selfish, she stinks a bit. But I swear, she is one of the smartest scientific addicted people I know. But I don't like her. Oh, and look: there is that guy that is really nice, he asks me stuff about game programming and he has a lot of interest and energy (much more than some noobs we all know).. but he is so stupid.. sometimes I would smack Y, E and S with my fist into my keyboard when he asks me if he is getting on my nerves again. But he is nice and I would miss him if he wouldnt talk to me anymore.
There are so much examples, so much jokes and prejudgement, so that we are some kind of brainwashed about this. Though, it helps us to be "straight" in our mind.. it helps us so that we dont get struggled in our complex and sad world.
Posted By: Ran Man
Re: About women attitudes - 12/12/06 20:28
Quote:
I must be a woman then. No, wait, it's all still there.
Haha! Not to imply anything bro.
I was just stating very " generic " tendancies.
Guys tend to like raw ACTION stuff without any plot, but girls tend to like STORIES type stuff. Now it's not true with every individual however.
I never met any female that liked raw action stuff like DUKE 3D for example, but I know that is a very old title.
The 3d shooter Lara Croft and tomb-raider was mainly a guy thing. Guys liked it and most girls did not like it, because lack of a strong story-line.
Roberta Williams was a great "Pioneer" because, yes she designed and wrote interesting stories for games, but also she had super great imagination and creativity, which is something every game-maker should emulate.
Btw, this story-line stuff is exactly what I'm up against in the "CHRISTIAN" gaming world. Most of their stuff is story-line based biblical stuff. It seems boring to me...
About story-line based games:
Why play them? Just read a fictional novel or watch TV?
For Christians, just read the bible.
Why does anyone like them? I feel DISCONNECTED from the crowd on this.
Posted By: PHeMoX
Re: About women attitudes - 12/12/06 22:09
Quote:
raw ACTION stuff without any plot, but girls tend to like STORIES type stuff.
Lol, yeah right.. For some reason this reminds me off girls often claiming we men do not think about anything but sex. 
Quote:
I never met any female that liked raw action stuff like DUKE 3D for example, but I know that is a very old title.
I don't know any either when it comes to Duke Nukem 3D, however I do know their are quite some female Quake(I t/m IV), America's Army, Joint Operations and Unreal Tournament (I t/m 2004) players out there. It's nothing in numbers compared to the total amount of men playing these kind of games, but there are enough to say that women can really like action games too.
By the way, I've seen on a documentary once that girls did like Tombraider, especially because it "finally had a girl/woman as the main playable character", not forcing girls to play with some "some stupid guy".
Quote:
Why does anyone like them? I feel DISCONNECTED from the crowd on this.
It's all about getting a connection with the story-line, getting involved in the game, attached to the main characters, things like that. Some lack imagination and seem to be totally emotionally imune for a game story line's experience. Compared to movies, most games are not yet really emotionally convincing. It's like you've posted yourself before, why care about some sci-fi guy who doesn't even look real.... We're simply not there yet, when it comes to thát kind of realism, it's one of the main reasons why e.g. Doom3 or Half-life2, although looking great, couldn't really scare me,
(the much much older game Phantasmagoria II did scare the hell out of me, because it was using movie material inside the game, an interactive movie kinda game.)
Cheers
Posted By: Orange Brat
Re: About women attitudes - 12/13/06 06:43
Quote:
About story-line based games:
Why play them? Just read a fictional novel or watch TV?
For Christians, just read the bible.
Why does anyone like them? I feel DISCONNECTED from the crowd on this.
People like them for all the same reasons they like books, TV, or films. Plus, they get to interact and hopefully be able to alter the narrative along the way.
Posted By: JibbSmart
Re: About women attitudes - 12/13/06 10:40
I've never gotten excited about storyline-focussed games, but i do enjoy a good story in a game. I enjoy reading a good book, but only if forced to start it, and then i usually wont stay reading it more than halfway. The Bible has some great stories in it, especially the OT... Joshua can be quite violent. Could be great for an action game.
I did Software Design and Development for three terms (completed my Preliminary year and then dropped it because it felt like a waste of time) but anyway, there were about 25 kids in that class and absolutely none of them were girls.
I have no doubt that women are just as capable, but I don't know any who have an interest in these sorts of things, and in fact don't know more than three or four who have more than a vague interest in video games.
Quote:
Why aren't there more in the USA? We were not even allowed to VOTE in this country UNTIL 1920.
Sorry but i had to have a quiet chuckle at this. Most people alive today weren't even born by 1920, let alone were old enough to vote. The quote seems to me a little like "Why didn't I do well in my english essay? People didn't speak english in my family until my Grandad's generation" (which isn't true, btw). Generally -- and i stress the word "generally" -- men are more logical and competitive (not that the two are related) than women, giving them an advantage in business.
Women obviously are very capable -- there are three full-time female maths teachers at our school and one male. There are three full-time science teachers and, again, only one male. In fact, there are three full-time english teachers and only one male. Oh... wait... same deal for social sciences as well. Two-to-one in physical education... and one-nil in cooking. The school Principal is a woman and there are two vice's -- one female and one male.
You know what this confirms.... "those who can't do, teach" Whoa! Settle down! I really didn't mean that.
I am completely aware that women didn't always have the vote, and that many social systems were (and I stress the word "were") sexist, but now I think you'll find it swings both ways. I am not sexist in the slightest. I think people who think men are better than women are foolish. I also think women who complain too much (and I stress the phrase "too much" -- too much stressing in this post) about men and their 'sexist' ways (which is often not the case) are foolish. Jetpack_Monkey, I am not puttin you in this category, btw. This discussion just reminded me of my old History teacher. Thought I'd let you know just in case you mis-construed my two cents worth.
I think I've run out of things to say.
julz
Posted By: A.Russell
Re: About women attitudes - 12/13/06 11:07
Quote:
Do you think that men and women have the same skill for math or in general for science ?
Men and women have different strengths and weaknesses. For maths, science and engineering, men are "generally" hands down better than women. Those fields also attract far more men than women. Computing, too. Men are far more likely to be geeks than girls are. There are always exceptions, though.
Quote:
That said, you may assume that, in my opinion men, are more intelligent than women
No, it doesn't work like that. Intelligence is not neccessarilly measured by how good you are at physics, maths or how quickly you can solve a Rubic's Cube. Women tend to be much better than men in other fields, like languages for example. If a woman didn't know anything about the sciences, but was fluent in three languages and deeply knowledgable about third century Chinese paintings, you wouldn't think she was unintelligent, would you?
It is true that most genius are men. However, genius often comes with some kind of insanity or social difficulties.
There is no reason why women can't be politicians or managers. In fact, womens' "generally" more refined and perceptive social skills can make them very good leaders and politicians.
Ultimately it comes down to individual strengths, anyway. For example, I've read some of the utter creationist rubbish you've written on this forum, and I would have to say that all the women I know are more knowledgable about science than you are.
Posted By: JetpackMonkey
Re: About women attitudes - 12/13/06 12:39
Quote:
I think people who think men are better than women are foolish
Totally Julz
Quote:
women who complain too much (and I stress the phrase "too much" -- too much stressing in this post) about men and their 'sexist' ways
It's silly to 'blame men' (I don't) just as it is to 'blame white people'on racism, but what you can blame is old-world societies based on racist and misogynistic social structures. That's what I meant. America and western european societies have realized this and changed things intelligently over the last couple of decades-- and benefited greatly! Suffrage is just one example of this.
Places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan are just horrible in this way. I don't blame the people of these countries, or their men, but the social system. Iran used to be totally enlightened and progressive before being taken over by religious nutjobs, and now women suffer under it. Women who were brilliant doctors, lawyers, professors now are forced out of participation in society. That's the fault of a social system. Women in Iran are not any less intelligent than men, but the social system keeps many in the dark. Women aren't even allowed to drive there. A quarter of my family in law is from Iran, by the way, and the Persian people themselves are youthful, progressive and fun-- its just the social and religious system they are forced to live under keeps them down.
BTW the USA has done nothing to help women in Afghanistan and Iraq. In old Iraq women had complete social freedom, now that religious extremism has taken over, many can't even go outstide, like in Iran.
Quote:
About story-line based games: Why play them? Just read a fictional novel or watch TV?
Action and sports games are sorts of story line games-- the story is an action story or a story of competition and the thrill of victory or "agony of defeat".. and likewise why play these games when you can watch James Bond or Schwarzenegger movies or a football game on TV? How different is a football match from Braveheart?
The Sims is a story based game where you write the story. Surely the difference between The Sims and (the Excellent show) Desperate Housewives is easy enough to see. They're not the same thing.
Duke Nukem I find very boring, but GTA: San Andreas is a lot of fun and the story really adds to the whole experience, because I care about the characters I'm helping or fighting against. A lot of women find action games boring for the same reason they find mindless action movies boring. The Godfather or The Sopranos have great cross-gender demographic appeal in spite of the violence because the stories are really good.
An excellent article on Idle Thumbs discusses some useful items on appealing to the female gamer demographic: http://www.idlethumbs.net/display.php?id=185&p=2
I've been looking a lot at this information because my game is designed to appeal to both men and women, but leans a little more towards women, like the show Invader Zim. Actually has slightly more women viewers than men!!
In short:
Quote:
Originality
We need to invent some more genres. If we assume that general male and female tastes in film are analogous to games, then violence, driving and sports are generally out. Puzzles are only a small portion of what will work. How can we translate the preference for human drama to games? Adventure games, RPGs and Sims-type stuff all might work, but all still feel flat. We need more intense interaction that will pave the way for the hallowed Emotion Engine (please step forward, Ico!)
Having mentioned The Sims, I'd also like to say that extended game series aren't really going to cut it. Not for a while anyway. As we're opening up this market to the other side of the human race, most of them are going to start as casual gamers. A lot of girls have played The Sims, but what we really don't need is more Sims knockoffs. They've been there, done that. Let's explore something else. There have got to be other ways to portray social interaction in games (check out our recent Façade review for just one). While a popular licence may be great for brand recognition, each successive game ought to have a lot to offer in terms of different gameplay. More of the same is great for adolescent fanboys, but not many others.
More diverse settings
Lay off Sci-Fi. Easy on the Swords and Sorcery. Modern conflict is a big no no. Bizarre mushroom filled lands with no relation to reality have limited success. Film and literature have much to teach us here too. How about something from the 1920s? Or the 50s (a Grease game anyone?) Then there's the hordes of teeny goth chicks - there has to be more for them besides Buffy games and Vampire: The Masquerade. We need to explore all these subcultures and female interests and bring them to the world of games. There's so much potential here I'm not even going to list any more. Just open your eyes.
The themes that games explore are going to have to get more diverse too. Continuing the appeal for human drama, narratives should include things like more complex portrayals of love, friendship, difficult choices and... well whatever it is that the mountains of "chick lit" is about. I'll leave this area of research to the better qualified among you.
Better Characters
Humans are good, although talking animals are also popular. But we need better writing for characters. This is something that plagues the whole game industry and really deserves its own article, but suffice to say that unless female gamers can connect to the people on the screen, any effort you put into narrative and gameplay and style will be severely hampered.
Art, not Graphics
I've talked a lot about gameplay and hinted at interface, but what about the look of the game? It's still got to look good. Appealing design is important to women, and the art in any girl-friendly game must be carried off with style and flair, created by talented artists, architects and fashion designers. The number of polygons and special effects won't mean a damn thing. Photorealism will have its place, but should probably not be sought after too much - the thing about photorealistic CGI people is that, really, they aren't. A consistently pleasant visual ethic is much more important. Oh, and if there is one area where there is a really good chance to attract women into the development community it is on the artistic side.
Don't Alienate the Rest of the Market
Now, you can make a game that meets all of the above requirements and guess what - it can still be enjoyed by us testosterone victims. Making a game aimed solely at a female market such as "middleaged housewives" or "girls aged 9-13" isn't going to be a huge success. It might pay the bills, but in terms of making a great game I think there's an unwritten rule that says it will stink. Any game aimed at women should be a great game first and a female-orientated game second; and I really do belive that if you add a little something for the mainstream game market (no, not skimpily clad women with guns) then the overall game will be better. Females are a diverse lot, and if you aim too narrow then you'll probably miss entirely.
Finally
I haven't covered things like marketing, and only touched on the recruiting side of the issue, but I hope at least some of my suggestions ring true and set off more ideas because, despite the insinuations of the press at large, male gamers and developers really do want more people to join our livelihood. It would be especially great if more of them were female because I think we would all benefit. The general standard and diversity of games would rise and the industry would finally mature as both an entertainment and an artform.
Thing is, there are already quite a few games that nail at least some of the above points. We need to get more women playing the games that are out now, to build on what we've got rather than try to create something out of nothing. With just a little bit of thought and courage, the next age of video games could happen tomorrow.[/qupte]
Posted By: Ran Man
Re: About women attitudes - 12/13/06 20:56
Quote:
BTW the USA has done nothing to help women in Afghanistan and Iraq. In old Iraq women had complete social freedom, now that religious extremism has taken over, many can't even go outstide, like in Iran.
Well in that case, that is why we all need to finish up our games!
Because, if those people do manage to go to an internet cafe in Baghdad or elsewhere on the internet and play our games, then they can escape reality for a while and be entertained by our gamestudio games! Yes?
I guess you guys are right about the story-line game stuff. I suppose we have to force ourselves to get involved in the game story, much like we have to force ourselves to get involved in some bad hollywood movies. And hopefully the story-line won't be too ugly...
My kids always used to talk about Rhinoa in FF8 and how they hated her kooky personality.
Posted By: AlbertoT
Re: About women attitudes - 12/15/06 19:45
Quote:
That said, you may assume that, in my opinion men, are more intelligent than women
Why did you not quote the complete sentence ?
I said..
( from a scientific point of view ) but it is not like that
Quote:
No, it doesn't work like that. Intelligence is not neccessarilly measured by how good you are at physics
Quote:
Again ...Why did you not quote the complete sentence ?
I said..
( from a scientific point of view ) but it is not like that
Quote:
and I would have to say that all the women I know are more knowledgable about science than you are.
Again ...Why did you not quote the complete sentence ?
I said..
well go and read yourself
Quote:
I've read some of the utter creationist rubbish you've written on this forum,
What ? me a creationist ? Are you jocking I suppose
Posted By: Rhuarc
Re: About women attitudes - 12/15/06 23:25
Quote:
Quote:
And imagine all the stories they tell about you, Doug
Heheh, nice thought but I don't think my life is that interesting.
Coming from a guy who gets speeding tickets... on rollerblades.
Tell them that story and see how many times it goes around
Posted By: Kado
Re: About women attitudes - 12/17/06 05:28
Here we have an issue that regards multiple intelligences.
Howard Gardner, a Ph.D and professor at Harvard University asserts that there are 8 kinds of intelligence, shown as follows:
Linguistic intelligence: a sensitivity to the meaning and order of words.
Logical-mathematical intelligence: ability in mathematics and other complex logical systems.
Musical intelligence: the ability to understand and create music. Musicians, composers and dancers show a heightened musical intelligence.
Spatial intelligence: the ability to "think in pictures," to perceive the visual world accurately, and recreate (or alter) it in the mind or on paper. Spatial intelligence is highly developed in artists, architects, designers and sculptors.
Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence: the ability to use one's body in a skilled way, for self-expression or toward a goal. Mimes, dancers, basketball players, and actors are among those who display bodily-kinesthetic intelligence.
Interpersonal intelligence: an ability to perceive and understand other individuals -- their moods, desires, and motivations. Political and religious leaders, skilled parents and teachers, and therapists use this intelligence.
Intrapersonal intelligence: an understanding of one's own emotions. Some novelists and or counselors use their own experience to guide others.
Naturalist intelligence: the ability to recognize and classify plants, minerals, and animals, including rocks and grass and all variety of flora and fauna. The ability to recognize cultural artifacts like cars or sneakers may also depend on the naturalist intelligence.
To say that one sex, males, are the smarter of the sexes, because they dominate a scientific or mathematical field is to assert that there is one standard of intelligence--science and math. This is completely untrue.
I think a lot of things have to do with the environment with which you were raised. For instance, my roommate's father is a biology teacher, they live by the ocean and she was allowed to be a "tom-boy", go out and explore the ocean and its creatures. Now she's a biology major in college. My dad was a teacher (he now is a successful entrepreneur, business owner, and real estate owner. kind of like monopoly or something.); my mom studied early childhood development for a while. My brother has special needs, and I worked with people with special needs. My other brother was a huge history fanatic. I am now a history, special education, and secondary education triple major in college.
Why are my roommate and I the way we are? The environment in which we grew up in.
Although my interests lie in a certain field, my ABILITIES do not only lie in that field. I am great at math, solving problems, music (which used to be studied as a math), science-especially biology and chemistry, and given an introduction, I've been told I would do great with programming. Maybe I'll pick it up on the side.
Just because someone's interests lie in a certain area, such as many women's interests may lie in a "people-helping" profession, doesn't mean they are less smart or less capable to do math, science or programming.
If we truly want a good, accurate statistic of women and men's capabilities toward a certain field, be it science, history, counseling, politics or housekeeping, there needs to be an equal playing field. That would mean that all children, regardless of gender, should be encouraged and given the experiences and opportunities to explore all fields of study or career. Men should be equally supported to pursue nursing as they would to pursue engineering. Women should be equally supported to pursue programming as they would to pursue elementary education.
To have any of that happen, there needs to be a societal change. There also needs to be a change in the way people are being paid. Women *STILL* make less than men in the same job, with equal experience and qualifications, and sometimes with the women having more experience and qualifications. Men are given raises and positions of authority more than women in certain jobs/industries, despite qualifications and requirements.
I would say that women and men have the same *capacity* for skills in science or math, but do not have the environment to fully develop those abilities.
Posted By: Rhuarc
Re: About women attitudes - 12/17/06 05:37
Quote:
I've been told I would do great with programming. Maybe I'll pick it up on the side.
Heeey... if you picked up on the side, I'd have to find something else so I could still be better than you at *something*
-Rhuarc
Posted By: Kado
Re: About women attitudes - 12/17/06 05:39
Yeah, because we know Scrabble will never be an option.
Posted By: Rhuarc
Re: About women attitudes - 12/17/06 05:40
Quote:
Yeah, because we know Scrabble will never be an option.
What can we say, I'm a scrabble masochist...
Posted By: Kado
Re: About women attitudes - 12/17/06 05:42
Quote:
Quote:
Yeah, because we know Scrabble will never be an option.
What can we say, I'm a scrabble masochist...
Even masochists who enjoy physical torture would cringe at your Scrabble humiliation.
Posted By: Doug
Re: About women attitudes - 12/18/06 18:21
Quote:
Coming from a guy who gets speeding tickets... on rollerblades.
Just the one ticket, and it was on a downhill.
These are people who have driven hundreds of miles so they can pick up somebody's brain to do tests on using a saw and a Tupperware container (and, yes, the person was dead before they started ).
Posted By: lostclimate
Re: About women attitudes - 12/18/06 19:32
oh, they were dead.... damn i thought it was going to be an interesting expiriment:)
Posted By: Joey
Re: About women attitudes - 12/19/06 17:18
sorry for i haven't read the whole thread, so if it's already been said just ignore me...
men are more probable to be genious. why? the intelligence "lays" on the X-chromosome. since men have both X and Y, there's only one X that has to be the genious chromosome. women have two X-chromosomes, so both X need to be intelligent. obviously, the gaussian normal distribution is somewhat flattened for men, for women it has a higher peak around 100 (i speak about the IQ here). as a result, there are more ingenious men, but well, also more jerks.
joey.
Posted By: Doug
Re: About women attitudes - 12/19/06 18:11
The studies I've seen have all but ruled out a "genius gene."
Potential intelligence probably does have a lot to do with the genes we are born with, but there isn't a single gene (or even a small group) that would distinguish a genius from a simpleton.
Posted By: Damocles
Re: About women attitudes - 12/19/06 22:36
It is probably not a single gene.
But the amount of mutations / off average development has a higher
probability for men, as the genepool is not as static (just one X cromosome)
This also yields a higher probability to have a genetic combination that
creates a genious.
This probably also has an evolutional reasoning.
Men have the higher probability to bear genetic mutations.
So men with a "good" new combination have more offspring in
the competition for sex.
Females are likely to have the same number of offprings as other females.
So the female genepool is better off to have a smaller probability for mutations
than the male genes.
Posted By: Joey
Re: About women attitudes - 12/20/06 13:38
that seems quite logical to me. might this also be the reason why there are more men around than women?
Posted By: A.Russell
Re: About women attitudes - 12/20/06 13:40
Genius are people who devote all their attention to solving some mind blowing problem, often at the expense of the everyday reality around them. This behaviour is far more typical of men than women. Simple as that, without even knowing any thing about it at dna lavel. It also frequently results in insanity, or at least eccentricity, something which most people don't find desirable.
Quote:
might this also be the reason why there are more men around than women
Is that so? I grew up in a region that had more women than men. Certainly, men are more likely to die young than women, even in times of peace (and women live longer). Women get the strongest survival genes.
Posted By: Doug
Re: About women attitudes - 12/20/06 17:22
Quote:
Men have the higher probability to bear genetic mutations.
This I have heard. But not all mutations are good, in fact most aren't.
So, using this logic, men are also more likely to be total idiots.
Posted By: Joey
Re: About women attitudes - 12/22/06 16:31
well, exactly what i thought. but as we see, species such as virii with a high mutation rate are highly successfull...
Posted By: Irish_Farmer
Re: About women attitudes - 12/22/06 19:53
This isn't really relevant, but I just wanted to say, "i'm posting from my Wii." ...Sweet!
Posted By: Damocles
Re: About women attitudes - 12/23/06 00:30
This concept of non sexual reproduction
(bacteria, some simple see lifeforms etc)
just works for really small lifeforms, that can reproduce very fast with little energy.
For higher liferforms/more complex, the twin sex reproduction is the most benefitting one.
Posted By: Kado
Re: About women attitudes - 12/24/06 08:53
Actually, Damocles, it's not just some simple lifeforms that can reproduce without intercourse. For instance, female komodo dragons (largest lizards in the world) are able to reproduce by self-fertilization.
Check out this
news story.
Posted By: Damocles
Re: About women attitudes - 12/24/06 13:50
Reptiles can change sex, but this is just a short term strategy.
(probably to be able to survive with just one female, who cant find a mate)
In the long run, it is required to combine 2 genoms from 2 differnt animals.
Else, the probability for unwanted mutations grows to big, wich is more severe
for large, slow reproducing lifeforms than for bacterias.
Also plants can reproduce with seperated plant parts, but
soon or later, a 2 sex reproduction must take place.
Posted By: PHeMoX
Re: About women attitudes - 12/24/06 14:33
Changing sex is something different than self-fertilization I think. This is a nice example and good proof that sort of a dualism of sex isn't always needed for reproduction and eventually the survival of a species. (at least for 1 generation, I did hear several professors state that a healthy population should consist of about 200 genetically more or less different individuals, otherwise the population would be doomed eventually)
Cheers