Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 8527374" data-attributes="member: 7026594">Certainly we should be using all points of view and every useful bit of data we can get.  But I deny what appeared to be your premise that instead of focusing on credible reports of harm (albeit anecdotal ones) we should focus on quantitative data which no one has.Overall it looks like we've found more points of agreement in this post of yours, though.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Cool, yes, I think we're on the same page on all of this.I think that's an example of Survivorship Bias. The women who DID persevere and still became gamers are the ones who DIDN'T get discouraged by cheesecake art and less representation.  They focused on what WAS there, and were able to do that either due to greater motivation in the first place, or perhaps due to having supportive gaming friends who helped them look past the dearth of representation and focus on the exceptions.  And naturally, if you're talking to women gamers, you're talking to those women who didn't get driven away.It is not a legal term.  I'm just saying that having a passing acquaintance with civil law (as any adult should be expected to) is enough to make someone aware that harm exists in forms other than the physical.  In fact, most forms of civil law, lawsuits and so forth, are about compensating people for nonphysical harms.Now, being excluded from gaming shops or denied fun opportunities to game is less tangible and measurable than, say, defrauding someone on a transaction and thus costing them x amount of money, but both are examples of ways someone could harm another without injuring their body.  Not to take this back off topic, but another example might be, for example, if a famous author were to say, represent or argue that trans people as/are monstrous, dishonest, or predatory toward women.  If a famous author were to do that, I think we can agree that they'd be making the world a less supportive and potentially ALSO a less physically safe place for trans people, by increasing the general level of hostility towards them rather than empathy.  This would be harmful, no?</blockquote>

Verification