That’s the gist of the study. Taking it a step further, ever have someone start calling you emasculating things as you are winning - “cuck,” “faggot,” etc.? Seems related.
“We show that lower-skilled players were more hostile towards a female-voiced teammate…”
“…particularly high-performing female players begin to receive greater praise than similarly excellent males…”
That makes perfect sense when I consider it purely in terms of the instinct for survival: A physically weak male – initially hostile toward a stronger female – eventually sees that same female (after she has clearly and consistently demonstrated her superiority and noted the male’s hostility toward her) as someone who has the goods to tear his fucking head off…so he decides to make nice-nice and heap some praise on her.
That argument also holds true if you repeat it while substituting “middle class” and “working class” for “poor whites” and “slaves”.
Eh… not really. Barriers between the classes are much more permeable. Going up or down a notch is entirely within normal human expectancy. Unlike changing one’s race.
Slaves could be freed, and the spectre of white enslavement was a regular feature of pro-slavery propaganda.
The analogy is less about the legal detail and more about the psychological mechanisms that support division and maintain unjust systems.
I have noticed that quite a lot of men are delighted if a woman “hates” them; they call you “feisty” and think it’s “cute when you’re angry.”
But be indifferent to a man and hoo boy. Let me tell you. They lose their minds.
That’s exactly right! There was a guy from the Sons of the Confederacy interviewed on Codeswitch. Very civil interview on all sides, I must say. His point was that you know that the civil war was not about slavery because only 5% of southerners owned slaves. But your point is the rebuttal to that. The institution served all southerners, especially those at the bottom. It also gave them common cause with the southern elite, which tamped down any call for worker restiveness. Another thing in this country we can blame on racism - worker submissiveness to management.
Oh, I was unaware. When we do our next SciArt G+ hangout I’ll have to ask about this.
Get an ad blocker.
Edit -> NVM, replied directly to your initial post w/o reading down ^^’.
Well, they are the center of the universe after all. Who are we to deny that? /s
I always mention this quote because I think it hits the unattractive nail on the head:
On some games I’ve noticed a bias against Russians.
Yeah, but gaming is a much more convenient environment to set up experimental protocols of this kind.
Convenient? It’s shooting fish in a barrel and I find it sad that the gaming ‘community’ makes it so goddamn easy.
I think online gaming is particularly useful, and telling, because you can factor out all other variables. Anything from clothes, body language, personal preferences, race, class, etc. Because you can use the exact same person for all interactions and just change their username, or change their voice to make them sound male or female. So the players can actually be interacting with the same person playing the game the same way, just with a male name/voice and then switch to a female name/voice and see how behavior changes. This confines the likelihood of why there was a change to the perceived gender of the player. Can even switch male players and female players and have each play both genders. Hard to do that in any other format.
This was well known by the class with status and encouraged. (Call it the ‘Bacon’s Rebellion ploy’). How best to make the underclass more contented with their own status and to have any complaints not lodged at the ones really responsible for their plight, than to give them both someone to ‘look down on’ and to blame for their troubles? Pit poor against poor to avoid them both banding together against the upper class. And sadly, it works.
Can you imagine any consequences of the findings of this study that might motivate women to avoid speaking in game?
The women aren’t the ones being unsociable, it’s the men that’s the problem. As the study clearly presents. Good job on your reading and comprehension.
The study monitored only comments that were adjudged positive or negative, and the more skilled female-presenting players received more positive and fewer negative comments compared to the male-presenting ones. Assuming that some percentage of actual female players are skilled and know it, the relative positivity of comments should not be the cause of their silence.
Also, while statistically significant, the difference in average negative comments was only about 30% - and while I can’t find a figure anywhere (probably no statistically significant effect was found) it looks from the charts as if the female presenting players also got more positive comments on average.
So no, I do not think the results of this study explain it.