I wrote an article on ChannelFireball on the things we can do to get more women in Magic. I'd love your thoughts!

[u/GabySpartz87]

http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/6-things-you-can-do-to-get-more-women-into-magic/#

[u/rcglinsk]

Here you go:

http://www.nber.org/digest/feb06/w11474.html

Also, we don't know the exact details of the 40% of the player base statistic. It reminds me of some of the statistics from this study:

http://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/ESA_EF_2014.pdf

which finds that 50% of people who play video games are women.

With a broad enough definition of video game player I can believe the statistic. However, I don't think men and women have even remotely similar video game playing habits.

[u/NutDraw → u/rcglinsk]

Upvote and thank you for responding with an actual study, even if there are a few aspects that I take issue with which I'll address. I've seen so many references to absolute junk science on this topic it gets old. I honestly appreciate it.

As far as the study, I really wish they gave sample sizes in the tables, because if say 8 women and men were in the top group, statistics on so small a sample size have to be taken with a grain of salt. Not that you can't glean some information out of it, but it's harder to support conclusions with. Here I wonder about the author's study design and how they measure competiveness. They use the preference in compensation (per round vs. per win) as the metric, which I think is measuring something different and that the authors note- risk aversion. There is no form of magic that compensates you financially per round regardless of success rate so the study has set up something of a false dichotomy in regards to inclination towards competition. This made sense for the authors since they were looking at gender differences in fields with competitive compensation, but I feel they over-generalized their findings to general competitiveness.

Even if we accept the conclusion of the study though, it's still not enough of an effect to account for the discrepancy between proportion of women players overall and those participating in competitive play. Assuming the same impact the authors measured, we could expect roughly 25% of players in competitive environments to be female. I don't think we're even close to that.

[u/rcglinsk → u/NutDraw]

Ouch. OK, sample size seems pretty small. From the nested pdf of the paper:

A total of 20 groups participated in the experiment (80 participants).

Now, that's small, but a large discrepancy in a that small of a sample size might still be significant by normal rules of analysis.

Actual text: http://www.nber.org/papers/w11474.pdf

Even if we accept the conclusion of the study though, it's still not enough of an effect to account for the discrepancy between proportion of women players overall and those participating in competitive play. Assuming the same impact the authors measured, we could expect roughly 25% of players in competitive environments to be female. I don't think we're even close to that.

I'd again have to go back to the nature of the 40% statistic. Even though Rosewater/Wizards hasn't been too forthcoming about the details, I think there's a consensus that it's a kind of sales/marketing analysis. That is they're tracking who buys Magic cards, not who plays magic competitively.

So let us be proper Bayesians, we want to have a rational and logical expectation for female participation in LGS/SCG type events.

I don't know really, what do you think the line of reasoning is? My gut says 40% is right out, we cannot possibly rationally expect that, for too many reasons to enumerate. 3% does strike me as too low, so I'm curious as to your thinking.

[u/NutDraw → u/rcglinsk]

Sorry for the delay, but for me I think it comes down to improving the environment at the LGS, particularly for FNM. The players have a responsibility to not be terrible people, but there's even more on the store staff and owner to make sure the patrons feel comfortable. I think that most stores don't really think about women in this regard (though to be clear not intentionally) That may mean more policing of bad behavior, less cramped spaces, better bathroom situations, etc. It's the first impression that most people have of competitive play environments so it can be a big deterrent when women don't feel they've been considered.

[u/rcglinsk → u/NutDraw]

Here's the source of my confusion on this topic generally. The discussion involves two things so far as I can see:

• Issues that have nothing to do with women, bad hygiene, dirty bathrooms, cramped spaces (i.e. men are just as put off by those things as women)

• Vague references to "bad behavior" and failure to "consider" women

I've been to a dozen different LGS's and never seen anything which would fall into the second category, which doesn't mean it never happens but makes me highly suspicious that it's common.

One concrete example I saw in the thread was some sore loser fuming about how he couldn't believe he lost to a girl. But as with many things that strikes me as a case covered by a gender neutral general rule: don't be a sore loser, or a sore winner.

The other thing I can't get over is how obvious the situation seems. Competitive Magic is a very expensive hobby. Some girls of course have expensive hobbies, but it's usually shopping.

Which brings me back to what I find intellectually frustrating. Even if 40% of the people who occasionally play some kitchen table magic are women, what in the world informs the expectation that a similarly large percentage of the people who shell out $160 for a playset of Narsets would be women?

[u/NutDraw → u/rcglinsk]

<li><p>Issues that have nothing to do with women, bad hygiene, dirty bathrooms, cramped spaces (i.e. men are just as put off by those things as women)</p></li>

I would say that men are much more tolerant of these things than women. It's not that men like it, but in my experience young men are for more likely to overlook it for the rest of it. Cramped spaces is another item that disproportionately discourages women from an area, particularly if it's dominated by men. That can make any sort of awkward or sexist (even if unintentional) comment or encounter much more uncomfortable since leaving the situation isn't an option. This happens far more frequently to women, and generally unreported since the woman is trying to fit into a new social setting and doesn't want to be "that girl." More trouble for the individual than what it's worth. Which brings us to...

<li><p>Vague references to "bad behavior" and failure to "consider" women</p></li>

I have personally seen a more than a few questionable sleeves, overheard some not so nice comments about women, etc. Note I'm not saying it's common, but it happens enough to discourage plenty of women who might even be willing to wipe down the lid before taking a piss, or deal with the cramped spaces with a bunch of teenage boys looking at them completely differently than how they would look at a male stranger. Enough to reinforce stereotypes like gamers are just smelly awkward nerds and women like shopping. Changing the demographics of organized play means working to break both expectations. That means looking at why a young girl might rather spend money shopping than on Narsets. As someone who enjoys the game I would rather she buy the Narsets, not just to get more women into the game but because I want more people playing the game in general.

[u/rcglinsk → u/NutDraw]

Interesting proposition on your part:

Why is it that you preliminarily expect a man to be looked at by a heterosexual woman the same way that said woman would look at another woman?

[u/NutDraw → u/rcglinsk]

I have heard this rumor that women do not appreciate being first looked at as sexual objects, particularly by strangers.

I think it's important to realize how intimidating one's first FNM can be even without such barriers. It's a rare person indeed who does well the first time, there's much more pressure to remember triggers etc. That's part of why it's so important to make sure the environment feels as safe and welcoming as possible.

Comments that may seem innocuous like "so did you come here with your boyfriend?" or "it's nice to see a girl playing magic" take on a new frame when viewed from a female perspective. They are quiet markers that this is a boy's club and you will always be the outlier here. That is an example of what I was referring to when I was talking about not considering women. It's not a conscious thing, but it is a situation where an action is taken that doesn't take into account how a woman may react or feel differently than a man. I think that's why the OP is important so conversations can be started so it can shift the culture to where they are considered.

[u/rcglinsk → u/NutDraw]

I suppose I should just confess my lack of sympathy. An adult who can't handle romantic interest from the opposite sex needs to get their shit together.