Top
520°

Study Claims Men Who Play Video Games Perpetuate ‘Technomasculinity’

"A new study published by University of Idaho professor Robin Johnson argues that men who work in video game development, play video games, or who are simply passionate about gaming may in fact be perpetuating “technomasculinity.”

The story is too old to be commented.
2pacalypsenow34d ago (Edited 34d ago )

This has to be satire.

Kribwalker34d ago

yeah man. that’s one of the stupidest things i’ve ever heard

2pacalypsenow33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

Reading bullshit like this and knowing that society encourages this makes my blood boil.

Gaming10133d ago

Feminists love to stereotype. They stereotype competence, in this case technical competence, as being inherently male. Therefore, it is masculine, and like all things masculine, it damages women and the LGBTQ community. Everything damages them, apparently. They are but snowflakes, and words are considered a public safety issue since words are now violence and constitute Universities to get involved to protect students from said violence, creating safe spaces.
I know this all sounds like made up garbage, but it's 100% true and real and happening, no exaggeration of rhetoric.
Listen to Jonathan Haidt, download his books on tape, he's an amazing sociologist who just wrote "The Coddling of the American Mind" discussing this very problem that has emerged in just the last 10 years alone.

S2Killinit33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

@Necrom
Stop pretending like leftist are all like this, thats like saying all conservatives are right wing nazis. The reason why we dont hear about “righty loonies” as much is because they are generally not professors so they dont write articles worth reading.

On tooic: im as liberal as it comes but this article just doesnt make sense unless im ignorant of something and missing the point. Essentially they are saying men cant be exclusively good at anything even if they natually were inclined toward that field. And if they are dominating a particular field, then we should try to artificially change that so women are also included. My question is, do we afford the same treatment to men in the cosmetics field? Last time i checked i dont have the same chance of getting hired in certain jobs. I cant compete with a pretty girl if im trying to get a job in a restaurant (or any service industry for that matter). And before you tell me that these jobs are not careers i must pose to you that they may not be carreers but they ARE stepping stones for ambitious people that are not equally available to men as they are to women. For example if a person wants to be an attorney, that person has a higher chance of getting hired in a law firm as a secretary if that person is a female. Are we going to complain that this is unfair to men?

I maybe wrong but i have yet to learn why im wrong.

Nodoze33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

So S2KIll, because someone is a professor it makes the tripe they publish and say worthwhile? Is that your argument? Like the professor who cried out about white men supporting a 'serial rapist', and that their corpses should be castrated? It should be noted that the man she was referencing and publicly convicting...was accussed NOT convicted. Interestingly, 2 of the 3 women have already changed and outright recanted their accusations (a crime by the way which I am hopeful gets brought before the court). The third is a...wait for it...professor. One who is afraid of flying (yet flys frequently for vacations and work), cannot seem to recall any details whatsoever about the events described other than it was the supreme court nominee. Strange....her lawyers are all DEMOCRAT activists, as is she. This would not be politically motivated would it?? Hmmmm. No way leftists would lie and commit crimes just to protect abortion!? Or would they? Think about that. All this just so someone can murder an unborn child. The funny part is that Ginsberg is about to drop dead and they are scared beyond belief as the right holds the senate. THAT is what is important. That is why they are now trying to STEAL senate seats in FL and AZ. They cannot afford a large majority as when Ginsberg dies, the left will be silenced for the next 20+ years. I so look forward to it.

The left is populated with Fascists who refuse to hold a mirror up to the nonsense they spout. They claim to be for free speech, yet move to suppress + shout down anyone that does not align with their thinking. They claim to be for equality, yet move to ostracize opposition. They claim to be about fairness, but move to circumvent rules laws and process when it suites their needs. So so so tired of the left.

In the words of Thomas Jefferson, "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Wonder what all these thumb sucking, safe space needing, protesting leftists are going to do then....the right is ready, are you?

S2Killinit33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

@Nodoze
Thats what you got from what i said?? Then you go on a triggered political rant? Do you know why you are triggered? Because you know what i said is true. More educated people happen to be progressive, less religious, and more liberal. Its a fact you can look it up.

As to your question, which had nothing to do with my comment, the answer is YES, of course, GENERALLY, when a professor talks it usually has more merit. Thats why people pay to listen to them. (Thats not the case with this article imo as i said above)

As to the rest of your over generalizations and name calling like “fascists” etc... and your declaration that “the right is ready”, I really have to WARN you in the hope that i will reach you on some level. Be CAREFUL, you are talking about other Americans. You’re antagonizing of those who disagree with you, and your calling for a day of reckoning, is not unique to America. If you look at history of other countries, you will see examples of the same type of mentality you are demonstrating. Other countries have reached this type of crossroads before, where a group of them believed wholeheartedly that they were RIGHT, and wished to bring about a day when they would show the rest of their country that they were right. They too asked for a day of reckoning. You know what happened to them? They got what they wanted. They “won” and then they bend everyone else to their will, except by the time they were done, their movement had snowballed, taking a life of its own. They ended up with societies where even the ones who pushed the snowball along were not happy with. So as one American to another, tread carefully, lest you be one of those who will regret how you saw the world as all right or all wrong. Dont fall for this new form of fanboy politics.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 33d ago
rainslacker33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

As we all know, nothing exudes masculinity like partaking in "nerdy" activities like video games. Knowing about technology, and how to game, is what all women want, so we put on this false facade of being socially awkward, while talking about things that women in general don't care about....like technology and gaming.

"Technomasculinity" . The new term for to perpetuate your feminist ideals which can't quite place the generally socially awkward males who make up a bulk of the hardcore gaming community into a neat little catchphrase. Because being technically knowledgeable, and able to completely disregard if someone is actually listening to you just doesn't really scream patriarchal misogynist males as it should.

Seriously....why make up terms. Geek or nerd was good enough. Let us keep our culture, without appropriating us into something else.

I'm masculine enough, because I'm male. I'm proud to be a male. I'm not ashamed in the least. It's what I was born with, and isn't the thing nowadays to be proud of who we are because it's what we are, or how we feel? I can respect others who feel a certain way about themselves, so I expect the same in return. I won't call someone with male or female genitalia a different gender than what they are, but I'll respect that they prefer to think of themselves within the socially designed constructs they wish to believe they belong so long as it doesn't infringe on someone else.

Women are generally better at math than men. They are also better at thinking in abstracts AND logical absolutes(a contradiction for sure), which is extremely important for programming. Those two things alone suggest that women, in general, would be more technically oriented if they actually cared to be. They aren't socially encouraged by systematic patriarchies to be that way though, it's the passing on of socially accepted norms by the parents at a young age.

It's the parents that are giving their girls dolls to play with, giving them these cute little homemaker toys to play with, and dressing them up in pink clothing. It's the parents who are giving their boys hot wheels, G.I. Joe(or it's modern day equivalent), and getting them to enjoy Star Wars. Kids are indoctrinated from birth to be a certain way, and what they learn as an adolescent plays more a role in keeping the social constructs alive.

Anyways, enough of the side rant. I've known plenty of female gamers who also exhibit this "technomasculinity", and its really no different than the fan boy geek culture that's existed long before the feminist came into our hobby.

milohighclub33d ago

Best thing I've read all week 👏👊

Samus70733d ago

This was great until you blamed the parents for what children gravitate towards. GI Joe for boys and Barbie for girls is not a social construct, it is a natural evolution based on what appeals to the sensibilities of our two genders. Now granted SOME boys like Barbie and SOME girls like GI Joe, but that is far from typical.

Pricey33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

"Women are generally better at math than men. They are also better at thinking in abstracts AND logical absolutes(a contradiction for sure), which is extremely important for programming. Those two things alone suggest that women, in general, would be more technically oriented if they actually cared to be. They aren't socially encouraged by systematic patriarchies to be that way though, it's the passing on of socially accepted norms by the parents at a young age."

Whilst i agree with the sentiment of what your saying, i cannot reconcile what you are saying above.

Men are more interested in things and women are more interested in people on average. This is exaggerated at the extremes. This explains why there are more men in STEM fields than women. This is not social conditioning nor is it due to socially accepted norms passed from parent to child. Its biological.

Masculinity is not inherently bad, however it seems to be increasingly thrown around as some sort of insult or example of bad behavior. A balance is always needed to foster a healthy society and if you chastise one to the extreme (Which is what appears to be happening) you allow for the extreme of the other, and that is very very bad.

rainslacker33d ago

@Samus

I'm not blaming them for influencing their childrens decisions, per say, just that the parents are the ones who are building up the social constructs that we know and understand within the child's mind. It may be an evolution of what boys and girls gravitate to, but that graviation is what has made the social construct. In a world where those walls are trying to be torn down, you can't separate the two and expect to be taken seriously, because I've always been of the belief that the reason women don't pursue those kinds of careers as much is because has never really been expected of them, so they have less exposure to it.

And yes, I was generalizing the barbies and gi joe thing, but in a conversation its best to exclude the much less common anecdote and focus on the bigger picture.

@Pricey

I respect that viewpoint, and it has a lot of merit. But that biology has also created the expectations of what society and culture deem appropriate...or at least what is "normal" to place people in neat little categories for people to maintain their comfort zones.

Unfortunately, while above I dismiss the anecdotal, I would be curious of studies where the child was raised without such confines of gender, or more androgynous, because I'd like to know the results.

To me though, when it comes to STEM fields, I think the idea that it's more masculine in nature is actually more about that its been dominated by men longer because of the interests that men are more inclined towards technology. However, young women of today are exposed and partake in technology more than they ever have, mostly due to cell phones, and social media does give more outlets for exposure, so more women are starting to show interests in those fields. But I think one thing discouraging a lot of them is this constant notion by these SJW twits that if they enter the field, they're going to face nothing but adversity.

Anyhow, thanks for the good responses, I'm probably out of bubbles now, but its nice to see decent conversation once in a while.:)

Christopher33d ago

***As we all know, nothing exudes masculinity like partaking in "nerdy" activities like video games.***

In this day and age, and as time changes, it kind of actually has become the masculine thing. Masculinity changes over time. Remember when masculinity was dressing up in wigs and elaborate coats with knee-high socks?

I think your argument on "what is masculine" ignores the fact that society changes.

***I'm masculine enough, because I'm male. I'm proud to be a male. I'm not ashamed in the least. It's what I was born with, and isn't the thing nowadays to be proud of who we are because it's what we are, or how we feel? I can respect others who feel a certain way about themselves, so I expect the same in return. I won't call someone with male or female genitalia a different gender than what they are, but I'll respect that they prefer to think of themselves within the socially designed constructs they wish to believe they belong so long as it doesn't infringe on someone else.***

Umm... that last half kind of was out of nowhere and having nothing to do with the topic at hand. I'm not sure what to say to that, but it seems weird to read in the context of the article.

That first part didn't need to be said if you're secure in your masculinity. That's just my $0.02.

rainslacker33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

Too true about culture chaning over time.

I know the first part didn't need to be said, but with the climate today, I'm going to keep saying I'm not ashamed of what I am, if others are going to try and shame me for being what I am. While this particular topic didn't do that, it's this kind of thing which keeps popping up which tends to try and change culture into an "us vs. them" mentality.

Anyhow, I feel that second half is relevant, because it speaks on if being "technomasculine", or just masculine is a good or bad thing. To me, it's not, because how one perceives themselves is their own business. I don't like this notion that something that is masculine is frowned upon, when others are allowed to choose their own belief in what they should be. Guess its like saying, if I can respect other people's desires to be what they are, then they should respect mine. Two way street and all that, and maybe people should stop trying to classify people into these distinct groups to keep trying to keep us divided.

In any case, my comment just kind of flowed when I wrote it. I wasn't trying to start anything, nor did I give it really any deep thought to the point of it coming up to some sort of agenda.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 33d ago
Kumakai33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

It’s not. My wife just got out of law suit with her boss. If you can’t respect that f u. We call them “brogrammers” it’s like being in a frat house for women employees. And it caused hell in our life.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/...

Cobra95133d ago

Verbal attack instead of debate, as if disagreeing with your views were a crime.

It isn't.

frostypants33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

It's pjmedia, so it might as well be. It's an alt-right website with a proclivity for fake news. Not sure what it's doing on N4G.

Christopher33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

When someone attacks your core ideals...

To be honest, I can't say for certain, but there definitely is a group of technomasculinity present in male gamers. Is it because of gaming, not likely. Is it influenced by gaming, probably. But, they would probably be influenced by other things as well, just moreso and readily available in video games.

This is likely a poorly reasoned topic by assuming association with gaming and not general masculinity concepts.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 33d ago
ninsigma34d ago

So the gist of it is, you couldn't stick all men under the toxic masculinity umbrella because there are men out there who are more reserved and weaker. So to fix this, you've created this new bs thing where you can now vilify the men who don't fit under toxic masculinity as well. Good job idiots, good job.

"Gender is socially organized in the West in a hierarchized binary differentiating men and women along supposedly natural or biological masculine and feminine traits". Not supposedly. It's true.

"But as a form of masculinity it tends to exclude women from being seen as legitimate technically skilled individuals. Because being technically skilled is seen as masculine, you end up with the following associations: men = masculine = technically skilled, while women women = feminine = not technically skilled... that is a negative consequence."

Also not true. Women are not excluded, there are just less of them who want to do technically skilled jobs. I'm a software dev and no one I've ever come across has ever had a problem with women in this field. There just aren't as many women as there are men doing it because on average women prefer to do other things. It's insulting to women to say their CHOICE was made because people think they can't do something else and therefore suggesting their choice is wrong.

Serisuouly this is a joke. 20 people were interviewed for this crap. How do you write a thesis on such a small sample size?? Can't be take seriously in the slightest.

DerekTweed34d ago

I work in Automotive Electronics and it's the same less than 1 in 50 women and those that we do have are just as skilled as the men, more skilled than some and less than others.

No one has a problem with a woman engineer, girls have been encouraged for decades to get into science and engineering. Maybe the sciences has more women than before but engineering seems not be a preferred profession for the majority of women.

ninsigma34d ago

The women I've come across in my field have been very capable as well. Those that have a mind for it are no different to the men in the same field. I think it's shameful to act as if those who prefer to do other things that are more "stereotypical" for their gender is a bad thing. Could have sworn the whole point was to let women chose what they want to do. No one is holding them back anymore except the people who falsely tell them that men are holding them back.

Snookies1233d ago

"No one has a problem with a woman engineer, girls have been encouraged for decades to get into science and engineering." You see though, if they admit things like that, the SJW's and Feminists won't have something to complain about.

rainslacker33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

Engineering is a more creative field, which is generally well suited for the typical way women think. Software engineering is also the same, and has it's own rules but open enough to be very creative if you go far enough with it.

Men tend to think more in absolutes and logic to a conclusion, where as women tend to think more in abstracts, and logic to a possible conclusion. The latter is generally better for programming, because the possible conclusion gives more chance of success than the absolute conclusion. If that makes sense.

I've worked at game making seminars for young teens for about 6 years now, STEM for all girl seminars, and general seminars hosted by various backers for the boys, and without fail, I find the girls seminars to be more productive because they seem to have a much quicker grasp on the way games are designed, and how to adapt should things change half way through. The boys are good at the initial design, because kids can be quite creative when unencumbered, but not as much at adapting when it comes to implementation. The girls tend to be quicker at making changes, and are often less willing to give up on creating their original design. Boys are more willing to change the outcome to deal with any bumps in the implementation.

neither of these things is bad from a development point of view, and at that level, it's not as important either way. It's just an observation. However, I think both have their pros and cons when it comes to practical application of applying ones career to such tasks, as you have to be flexible, but also can't deviate too much from the original goal....and if you can't deviate at all, women tend to be more adaptable to making it work the way its supposed to. Although, in a real working environment, very few actually have the opportunity to decide if something will change or stay the same.

rainslacker33d ago

@Snookie

That's why I think these SJW feminist are more harmful than helpful. They'll preach on and on about how society needs to stop forcing these women into gender roles, and they may even go on a bit about how these girls are strong and should be able to do whatever they want. But they don't spend the time to actually understand how culture and society works, and worse, they don't actually do what they have to to tell these girls, at an age where it's important, what is out there, and certainly don't seem to do much to expose girls to it.

Instead, they drone on about the patriarchal conditions within an industry or industries(technology) they don't really even know anything about, likely have had no exposure to in any real way outside something they read on the internet, or some inflammatory twitter post, and then do what is basically akin to telling these girls that if they follow these kinds of things, they're going to meet nothing but adversity.

I recall one 13 year old girl at one of the STEM seminars I volunteer for ask, "As a guy, do you think that women are held back at your job?".

First, it was heartbreaking to think that a 13 year old girl heard that, and understood the implication, even if she couldn't eloquently express what she was asking. But I digress.

I said, to somewhat paraphrase since it was a lengthy response, "In my experience, I can't say that I have ever noticed a systemic environment of sexism or discrimination towards women". I then had to explain what systemic was. Then said, "I have noticed, at times, sexism that exists, and on at least one occasion, from a manager. I'm also sure that there may have been behavior that was inappropriate towards women at those work places. I can't say that you will never experience such things at a job in the gaming industry(it was a gaming seminar), but I can also say that you are just as likely to experience that at any job you take, at any industry you decide to pursue a career in".

And that's a hard truth that I wish 12-15 year old girls didn't have to hear, and that sexism and discrimination is not because anything is a boys club, or because its a systemic societal problem. It's because sexist people exist, and people who discriminate aren't isolated to only one gender.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 33d ago
ElementsUnknown33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

You can conduct a qualitative research study with small sample sizes but it is understood and always acknowledged that it is impossible to generalize any conclusions to the greater population. In the thesis section “for further study” the researcher suggests that a quantitative study should be conducted with a vastly larger sample size to be more realistically representative.

You are correct, this is garbage research on a pathetically contrived topic.

Tross33d ago

@ElementsUnknown Right you are. There is absolutely a value to qualitative research as even though the sample size is never even close to the bare minimum for a statistical study, its strength lies in being able to go more in depth and learn more about the handful of participants you have. But, generalizing is not the point of qualitative research. Quantitative research is often cited to support any such inference, if the study itself isn't mixed-methods, but usually the researcher just concludes that what they observed...is what they observed in those five people and that's it. Maybe they can make the point that they've found some examples of what tech culture can mean to someone, but they should never presume that what they've observed apples to everyone.

Heck, even statisticians are well aware of the limitations of their study. They acknowledge they're only studying a sample of a larger population, and include things like confidence intervals. Sometimes they conduct more then one study to increase the reliability of their research, as doing so can often weed out outlier studies and give a stronger indication if something is actually a trend. They also often cite and build on similar studies conducted by others. At the end of the day they still acknowledge their field of study is imperfect, but with any luck they can be quite confident in their findings. But yeah, even they won't say "X so Y", or ever presume to have a confidence interval of 100%.

rainslacker33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

Women aren't excluded, but they aren't encouraged to pursue technical fields. Or at least haven't been as much until more recently. Which is a shame, because women tend to be better at math, logical thinking, and abstract thinking than men are, which are three characteristics of good technical ability. Programming is math heavy, requires logical progressive thought for algorithms, and abstract thinking to make things work as efficiently as possible where things may not work otherwise.

But the lack of encouragement is not systemic, it's cultural. A culture which can be changed through exposure, which is why STEM was created, and its made a lot of headway in exposing girls at a young age to technical fields where society may not generally say they should explore such things.

STEM itself tries to target the girls around the early teenage years, 12-15, where most people are most prone to start the interests that will carry them for the rest of their life. That's the age that is a turning point for most people, male or female, on who they will be as an adult, because it's the point where more is expected of them. Wait until after this time, and its too late, and their minds are usually made up.

The hardest thing that STEM faces is the way that kids are conditioned to fit into social norms for what a male, or female, may be expected to be interested in because of their respective gender.

Girls from a young age are given "girls" toys, and toys that promote care giving(dolls), shown media which is more female oriented(various female focused animated shows), home making(play kitchens, play garden sets), and are dressed in a way that is considered socially typical for a girl(pink being popular).

Boys are given "boys" toys. Masculine toys which perpetuate being a protector or warrior(toy soilders), Athletic toys(baseball, football, etc), Mechanical toys(hot wheels, construction sets, legos), and technical toys(Video games), shown media which is more male oriented(sci-fi, action), and are dressed in ways that are more typical for males(blue being popular).

So, when a kid spends the first decade or so of their life being told this is what's normal, by the time they get to the point where they have to start learning about what they'll be interested in for the rest of their life, they're going to gravitate towards those things which are considered normal for their gender to follow. Then that's when peer pressure takes it's course, and the social norms and expectations come in through their need for social acceptance of their peers.

Its easy enough to say that we live in a patriarchy with defined rules which keep a gender down, but unlike those in STEM, they're looking at the outcome of the years of crafted orientation by those who have more impact on a childs life than they ever will....and that's the parents, who themselves went through the same process.

rainslacker33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

There is no masculinity or femininity. There are just people following social norms, and you can't change that by shaming it out of people.

On the plus side, there are so many more resources for women, or even men, to follow to find out what might interest them. The internet, despite all it's shortcomings, is a powerful tool, and in general, the general thinking that a person of a certain gender has to pick something that is "gender appropriate" are coming down. What once was considered taboo for women to pursue, is perfectly normal, and kids today are savvy enough to know that there are more options for themselves, and plenty of opportunities for them to be exposed to things, either in private to avoid ridicule, or in public, with other like minded individuals. If it's the latter, it goes a long way in building confidence and helping them be what they want to be.

Source: My years of volunteering for STEM programs to encourage more girls to explore careers or interests in technical fields. I'm one of the few males that actively talks at programs like this because I have the technical expertise needed to describe the work, and apparently I'm good at discussing it in a non-gender related way. But if I hadn't been doing it for so long, there are now a lot more women available which could take my place, which wasn't so much the case when I started....which is why i was approached to do it in the first place. Despite being one of the few males to actively participate in workshops or seminars, there are a lot of men behind the scenes who recognize the importance of getting more women to see these trades as a good option for them. The future of technology actually demands that women get involved, because the need for technical trades is expanding much faster than the population rate, and the number of males who pursue such jobs just isn't enough to sustain that demand, so it can easily come crashing down, or become prohibitively expensive if more people don't learn such trades.

Kumakai33d ago

The gist is men are often dicks to women in tech jobs - video games being one of them. My wife and I both work in tech/media/interactive and she’s been thru it and I’ve seen it. We actually just got done suing her boss and left with $200k. It’s real.

ninsigma33d ago

You can't take a personal experience and apply it to everyone. Doesn't work like that. And that's awful that your wife had to go through crap like that and I'm sorry to hear it. Honestly I hate crap like that. In no way am I trying to say it doesn't happen. However this paper is saying that a majority of men playing games or in technical fields is automatically a bad thing for non men. Which is wrong. There are people out there who suck and they deserve to be taken down, but this paper is just wrong.

Akarogg 32d ago

What are women interested in?

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 32d ago
XiNatsuDragnel34d ago

What?.... wait you're serious?

Switch4One34d ago

To what end? Why was this even a study?

rainslacker33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

Because when it comes to a thesis paper college study, you can make up any crap you want to do research on. No matter the merit, or how its staged, because how do you come to the conclusion of "technomasculinity" without actually thinking it from the start?

These kinds of papers are more about seeing if a person is capable of doing the work, more than it is about proving or disproving something. Doctorate level thesis papers require more effort, and can take years to conduct, and you don't generally use small sample sizes, and you either prove or disprove a general belief, or something that has been done before and you're doing peer review.

For every college research study like this, you can find another which will come to a completely different conclusion, and likely be conducted with the same haphazard way, with the data collected being just as meaningless to come to the conclusion they come to.

This thesis apparently ends with, "For further study", which is to say that no definitive conclusion was made, and others should do the work. Even reporting it as a "study" is shoddy journalism or desperate agenda, as there is no actual peer review, and without peer review of a definitive solution, or to verify a conclusion that invites further review. "For further study" is really only good when the data collected is appreciable, and the results aren't conclusive.

D3TH_D33LR33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

Weird flex but ok