Talk:Sexism and video games

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 4 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Outlanderrr (article contribs).

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2018 and 7 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kestrada3.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2018 and 3 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Shainarojas.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2020 and 15 March 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AMToler.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2020 and 2 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Spatel137. Peer reviewers: Kweischedel, MAderinsola.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 13 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lyzbeths.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

removing gabbiadini's discredited study

I've removed the 2016 Gabbiadini study since it has since been discredited in the literature. See:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28639206

Wallingfordtoday (talk) 22:47, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

I think it is inaccurate to call it discredited. Rather, the results have not been corroborated by a reanalysis. Rather than remove both, adding both would make more sense. EvergreenFir (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

The study sample was not randomized. Those are sufficient grounds for dismissing it as discredited. There's no reason why Wikipedia, which should only cite and promote established research, should "include" an obscure paper that hasn't changed/summarized the face of scholarship at all and has been challenged in terms of not accounting for rather elementary controls.Wallingfordtoday (talk) 01:08, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

So in other words the scientific study, wasn't scientific? Yeah, toss it. Leitmotiv (talk) 07:49, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

You people have been just mentioned in an article by Prof. Christopher J. Ferguson

https://quillette.com/2019/04/27/sexualization-in-gaming-advocacy-and-over-correction/

Fragment:

"Another study, also conducted at Ohio State, exposed Italian boys to Grand Theft Auto, a non-sexualized violent game or a control violent game. No connection was found between game conditions and empathy toward female victims of violence. Nevertheless, the authors employed a dubious, complicated analysis to suggest that a reduced empathy effect was hidden in the results. Some outlets, like the ever-credulous Time Magazine ate this story up. Unfortunately, it has been since discredited. A reanalysis I conducted with my colleague Brent Donnellan found that the study was not randomized, despite its authors claims to the contrary. All of the youngest boys ended up in the Grand Theft Auto cohort, with older boys more likely to end up in the non-sexist cohort. If random assignment had occurred, boys of different ages should be evenly spread throughout game conditions.  But this is the opposite of what actually happened. In other words, age was conflated with game condition, a big problem since empathy tends to develop with age. Further, we found that even with that problem ignored, the analyses could not support even indirect links between Grand Theft Auto and sexism.

This study is a good example of what some call the Bullshit Asymmetry Factor. The study’s claim to be randomized when in fact it was not should have been grounds for retraction. However, its findings are still cited as if they provide evidence for effects. The Wikipedia page for sexism in video games, for instance, mentions only the original study, but fails to disclose that it was subsequently found to have fatal flaws." SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 07:03, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Oh boy.. Still though, attention is probably for the best here as this page is in serious need of both it and work. (especially if that comment in the article is correct) As it is now, it's little more than basically a small collection of essays promoting a narrowly specific POV and understanding. Quite clearly one-sided and likely cherry picking in general. James xeno (talk) 08:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Looking at it, it's not really that significant. The professor has had a perspective that would suggest skepticism to the idea and went into it with that in what I'm seeing. He also uses dubious citations, such as GamerGater and anti-feminist Christina Hoff Sommers. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 03:54, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

What do you mean "not significant" in this context? It's not significant that the few basic protections against bias and sampling issues put in place for the "study" weren't followed? That same argument of going in with a bias applies to the very "study" and authors that the professor is critiquing. As well as much of the similar theoretical research of its kind and field of "research". As for the attempts at fallacy based character assassination. Wikipedia is not the place for political or ideological axe grinding.. James xeno (talk) 01:05, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Christina Hoff Sommers surely was a noted participant of "a harassment campaign conducted primarily through the use of the hashtag #GamerGate", according to Wikipedia, but she is a feminist (even if only a "Jewish feminist" and not an "American feminist", also according to Wikipedia). --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 18:15, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Globalize

This article focus exclusively in the West. Content on non-Western countries needs to be added to comply with Wikipedia policies. Some sources that I found with a quick search:

• Penix-Tadsen, Phillip. Video Games and the Global South. p. 143. ISBN 978-0-359-64139-0.
• Tompkins, Jessica E.; Lynch, Teresa; Van Driel, Irene I.; Fritz, Niki (1 May 2020). "Kawaii Killers and Femme Fatales: A Textual Analysis of Female Characters Signifying Benevolent and Hostile Sexism in Video Games". Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 64 (2): 236–254. doi:10.1080/08838151.2020.1718960.
• Kordyaka, Bastian; Jahn, Katharina; Niehaves, Björn (July 2019). "Influencing Prejudice: Different Forms of Intergroup Contact and Sexism in Video Games". Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems.
• Galbraith, Patrick W. (2017). "Adult Computer Games and the Ethics of Imaginary Violence: Responding to Gamergate from Japan". U.S.-Japan Women's Journal. 52 (1): 67–88. doi:10.1353/jwj.2017.0012.
• Afaq, Ahmar; Imran, Mohd. Sexual Violence Against Women in Video Games: The Effect of Virtual World on the Real World. IUP Law Review . Jul2019, Vol. 9 Issue 3, p46-56. 11p.
• Murray, Jeremy A.; Nadeau, Kathleen M. Pop Culture in Asia and Oceania. ABC-CLIO. p. 336. ISBN 978-1-4408-3991-7.
• Choe, Kwisoon; Doh, Sun-Jae; Ha, Jeongmin (July 2020). "Adolescents' Experiences and Coping with Sexism Affect both Female and Male Online Gamers in South Korea". Sex Roles. 83 (1–2): 43–53. doi:10.1007/s11199-019-01094-0.
• Alfaraj, Bushra. "Arab Gamers: An Identity Inclusivity Study". {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
• Oliveira, Thaiane; Gonçalves, Reynaldo; Maia, Alessandra; Silveira, Julia; Evangelista, Simone (2018). "Sexism and the Wow Girl: A Study of Perceptions of Women in World of Warcraft". Feminism in Play: 143–161. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-90539-6_9.
• Cappelli, Claudia; Santoro, Flávia Maria (2017). "Sexism and Digital Games, a Brazilian University Exploratory Research". doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.23004.54404. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)

Edit: adding another sources. - Rupert Loup (talk) 16:17, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, we probably need to have sections for sexism in specific regions outside of the Western ones, where there has been specific focus. Japan would be a clear area (rather than Asia broadly), probably then SKorea and China as well. Other regions may be more difficult in detail simply because of lack of numerous sources. --Masem (t) 16:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Concur with Masem.--Jorm (talk) 16:39, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

y 185.69.186.168 (talk) 18:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

A possible rename

This came up in the WPVG discord after I had made some edits elsewhere. While "sexism in video games" is a legitimate title, the problem is that this focuses on issues in the industry workplace, and of course, not so much sexism but negative aspects of that - eg misogyny. As such, a better article title for this would be "Misogyny in the video game industry" to reflect the scope. --Masem (t) 05:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Masem, OK with "misogyny", but the scope of the article is also harassment of players, who aren't part of the industry as such, but rather its customers. Sandstein 06:29, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

My idea was actually "Misogyny in video gaming" (which covers both players, culture and industry), especially to make it clear it is not "Misogyny in video games", which the current title could be read as. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 07:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

That's sensible. Sandstein 07:42, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

The only thing related to using "in video gaming" is that this comes back to a long-standing naming issue that we had dealt with in that "video gaming" generally was reserved for just the playing of games and didn't necessarily refer to the industry. "video game industry" , I would argue, does incorporate players (as consumers) so that "in the video game industry" would encompass those too. Obviously, there's a whole separate topic of sexism/misogyny in video games themselves, hence this title is rather inappropriate for the coverage it has. --Masem (t) 13:34, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

"video game industry" in my opinion would cover gamers and developers. I like the idea of changing it to that and misogyny. Leitmotiv (talk) 20:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

(To add we have Gender representation in video games as that issue related to the "within video games" aspect) --Masem (t) 14:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 6 August 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. It seems like you've gotten some very good feedback, and made alternate proposals which are more convincing/likely to gain more consensus, in concert with changes made to the article content to make it fit the new title better. It would be my suggestion to just do a quick repeat RM incorporating that feedback in a succinct manner, pinging the participants here. Because I personally would want to see those early participants weigh in to see if they still support the move in its current form, and see if any of the holdouts have changed their minds with the new move parameters. At this point, we are past two relists and the discussion is pretty dense, so it's unlikely this would get a favorable close any time soon. A more succinct and fresh RM is more likely to get a conclusive result imo. (non-admin closure) — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 21:21, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

---

Sexism and video games → Misogyny in the video game industry – See prior section but this title better reflects the current content: 1) this is about the industry and people within it, and not video games themselves (we have other articles that discuss the content of video games in this light) and 2) the bulk of issues in the industry documented here are directed towards women. There may be a point where misandry (towards men) might come up, and if we get to that point, we could later rename that to "Misogyny and misandry in the video game industry" but until we have significant such content, this is all about treatment of women. Masem (t) 23:18, 6 August 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. Muhibm0307 (talk) 04:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

• Support The arguments set out above seem reasonable. Girth Summit _(blether) 23:59, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
• Support per nominator. This whole phenomenon has always been about harassment of women. JIP | Talk 02:22, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
• Support per nom.--Jorm (talk) 02:58, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
• Neutral. As noted above, I agree with "misogyny", but think that "video game industry" is too narrow, as it implies a focus on misogyny only against people in the industry, as opposed to against players. Sandstein 09:17, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose move as proposed, support alternate move to Misogyny in video games since it's clearly not entirely about the video game industry, and per articles like Misogyny in sports and Misogyny in hip hop culture. All old titles and redirects should also be redlinked to avoid giving the appearance of bias, since the scope will have changed._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 17:00, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • "Video game industry" includes the consumers/gamers, esports people, and streamers as part of the overall structure, so the proposed title would not be ignoring the misogyny towards them. Saying "in video games" is that nearly all articles that have "in video games" strictly relates to issues within games themselves, and not real world aspects. And as I noted above, say "in video gaming" is a problem because "video gaming" is more narrowly about the playing of video games and not the development/publishing side. --Masem (t) 17:15, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

    Most people don't normally refer to gamers and streamers as the "video game industry". The common usage of the term is solely video game developers and publishers. I'd normally think of gamers as part of "video game culture" perhaps, but not the industry. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 17:17, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

    I disagree, as well as generally when we talk about any consumer-oriented industry, the consumers are always considered part of that value chain. I can argue that if we renamed to the proposed title, then the current, updated first sentence "Misogyny in the video game industry is prejudiced behavior or discrimination towards women as experienced by people who play and create video games." makes it clear what the breadth of the "video game industry" term will cover. --Masem (t) 17:28, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

    Perhaps we could use Monogyny in the video game industry and culture as that leaves no question that we're speaking to devs and players. Its not as sustinct, but it completely avoids perceived missing segments and all the issues around the term "in video games" or "in video gaming". --Masem (t) 22:29, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

    I'm guessing you didn't mean monogyny, although that would certainly be unique. But, that proposed title seems to go against WP:CONCISE when a more concise and widely used alternative exists. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:05, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

    Er yes, Misogyny there. But the problem is with "Misogyny in video games" is, as Salvidrim says below, implies the topic restricted to what happens within the content of video games and neither the industry nor players. And since its clear we're trying to capture both harassment targeting developers and players, we need to consider a term or terms that encompass both, which is why we may need the less concise title if there's the belief that "video game industry" doesn't cover players, and "video game culture" doesn't cover industry. --Masem (t) 23:16, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose as proposed, support alternative move. I guess we have a difference of opinion on what "the industry" conveys, but reading the proposed title I would absolutely assume that it is entirely about the narrower scope of women working in game development. I've certainly encountered my share of misogyny when playing online games, but I would not describe myself or that player–player behavior as part of the video game industry.--Alexandra^IDV 08:22, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
• Weak support as proposed per XCVBNM and Alexandra, as "industry" generally refers to workers, and not gamers/streamers which the article also cover, but that's not so cut-and-dry and this could be acceptable to me as a compromise if the other options fail to gain traction.

Strong Oppose alt proposal Misogyny in video games / Misogyny and video games as this article is not about problematic depiction of women in video games (that's at Gender representation in video games, but about misogyny among the makers and players.

Support and prefer Misogyny in video gaming, which would encompass the industry, the gamers, the streamers, the fandoms.

Alternatively I would weakly support Misogyny in video game culture as roughly synonymous, although the argument that "industry" might exclude gamers/fandom holds the opposite way also, "culture" might not include the industry. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 22:19, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose as proposed per Alexandra. "In the video game industry", at least for me, conveys that the scope is limited to misogyny among professionals (developers, streamers, journalists, etc.) but excluding casual players. Perhaps in a literal sense, one can argue that players are part of the industry (as consumers), but I think that's only true if you are speaking in context of sales or business metrics, not human behavior. I watch movies, and if I read "(x behavior) in the movie industry", I would not think the article is talking about my behavior and those I watch movies with. You could change the scope of the article, or Misogyny and video games seems it would be more appropriate, the key word being "and", not "in". Oppose anything with "in video games/gaming" as it conveys the subject is the content of the games themselves. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 04:42, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
  • The problem with "and video games" is that implies more about content of video games than the people that build and play video games, and that's not the focus of this article. --Masem (t) 05:01, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Makes sense. Alternative suggestions:

1. Misogyny in the video game community
2. Misogyny in video game communities
3. Misogyny in video game society
4. Misogyny in video game societies

TarkusAB^talk/contrib 06:26, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

• FWIW I have pinged WT:VG about this issue - not the "misogyny" part which appears to have full agreements, but how to phrase the second part. --Masem (t) 14:37, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose as proposed. The "video game industry" only encompasses the industry which creates and produces the games, not the people who play them or write etc about them. Misogyny in video games suggests misogyny within the games themselves. Misogyny in video gaming suggests misogyny only among the people who play the games, ruling out problems within the industry itself. Misogyny in video game culture would be acceptable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:22, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
  • "video game culture" has the same problem as "video game industry" in that sense, in that that is more about the players and end-users of video games and not the development side. --Masem (t) 15:34, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
    • Not really. It's all part of the culture. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:23, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
      • It's the same type of subjective issue related to "video game industry" - in that it can be read to include players but some don't see that. "video game culture" can be read to include the industry side, but generally the term is more focused on the end-use of video games and not the development side. --Masem (t) 12:30, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
        • I would say that all writers and developers are part of the culture, but most players are not part of the industry. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:13, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
          • Again, that's a subjective aspect. But let's even take the fair consideration that most video gamer developers (as individuals) fall into the culture. Then we're talking what happens beyond them, the business-level stuff, like what's happening at Activision Blizzard right now in terms of not just harassment of female employees by male ones (that would be under this "culture") but also the discrimination in pay and hiring, which is purely a management thing and is outside that box of "video game culture". That type of workplace discrimination absolutely should be documented here...
          • That said, and I'm not at an easy place to check, but that could lead to an idea of splitting content, where this page would remain at the selected "misogyny in video game culture" as to focus on players and developers as individuals. (Perhaps then even going to a broader topic of "Harassment in video game culture" with misogyny to be a major section of that but not limited to that, and then can include within that harassment in the workplace) and then having a separate article to discuss "Discrimination in the video game industry" (or something like this - I can see this potentially incorporating factors of crunch time into it, which isn't really discrimination per se). There would be some areas (like the current Act. Blizzard suit) that would fall into both. That would make naming things a lot cleaner than struggling on a title now. --Masem (t) 13:23, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose for now. The new scope proposed would mean we would be able to include the largely dismissed claim by propoents that "misandry exists" in the VG industry which is obviously dismissed by RSs [1][2]. I think a broader scope for this article allows for such flexibility, same goes for the whole "industry" part. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 15:44, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
  • If we can extensively document the misandry, then we can rename this to "Misogyny and misandry in X" whatever X is. But the sourcing for misandry is rather thing and would be UNDUE to make it an equal weight at this point. That doesn't men that we can include a short section to summarize those, just that until it is more readily documented, would be improper to give it equal weight in the title. --Masem (t) 16:00, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

    But surely sexism already covers both "misogyny and misandry", which would make the title unnecessarily long. By having the wider "sexism" label it allows the topic "misandry" which yes is not well documented to be reported on the same highly inter-related page. When I mean "misandry" it coverage is not that "misandry" actually exists in VG, but RSs dismissing the claim by proponents [3][4]. That doesn't men that we can include a short section to summarize those, just that until it is more readily documented, would be improper to give it equal weight in the title. That is fair point but sense if the article gets renamed then editors will just say it is simply out of scope "read the title", etc. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 17:06, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

    • While I agree sexism would cover both, what actually exists to be documented is misogyny, making it a more precise title. It would be odd that if we have no misandry to really report to use the term that covers both aspects. There is no issue with having an article that is nearly all dedicated to misogyny to have related content section about misandry or the lack thereof, just to show we're not ignoring if there's documented cases of this. "Sexism in X" (whatever X becomes) would still remain a redirect here. --Masem (t) 17:21, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose misogyny as a title component (and, you know, as a concept too ); split the article as explained below. Regarding misogyny, I believe that using the word "misogyny" is not a positive change. The sexism is essentially against women, so we do not need to be overly specific with our language and are able to just use the common name. As an analogy, Tree of Ténéré is not titled Acacia of Ténéré even though it was an acacia. Sexism in video games doesn't need to be called "misogyny" just because it's misogyny. Red Slash 17:31, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
• Comment: Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think "sexism" is simply a gender neutral term that encompasses both misogyny and misandry. It is my understanding that misogyny specifically refers to a hatred of women and primarily describes a person's attitude/worldview, which of course can cause them to exhibit sexism/sexist behaviors. Sexism is the produced outcome in the world, including both individual sexist behaviors (e.g. catcalling) and systemic sexist structures (e.g. glass ceiling). Cf. the difference between racism and racial prejudice/racial animus. Based on this distinction, I believe Sexism in the video game industry is the most accurate description of the contents of the article as it stands now, which is sex- and gender-based discrimination within the industry (i.e. production, coverage, experience of playing). Another article, Gender representation in video games, covers the topic of sexism in in-game content (and is indeed slightly broader than sexism, hence the title difference). Axem Titanium (talk) 01:15, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

This needs a split

There are clearly, at least, two different topics here worthy of inclusion in the encyclopedia. One is sexism within video games themselves (how men are treated in games vs. how women are treated). One is sexism within the real-life companies that produce video games. Other possible topics include sexism within the broader industry (e.g. journalism) and sexism among players in online play. Currently, this article hosts all of these different ideas. I don't think this is tenable. We need a split. Red Slash 17:31, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

How genders are treated in video games is covered in Gender representation in video games, and not discussed at all on this current page. This content is specifically how real-life humans (mostly women), both in development and as players, are treated by the industry and by the VG culture. --Masem (t) 18:01, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Alternate idea

This is from above but pulling out for more visibility: this would involve a possible split and moving around content from other articles:

• Current move would be to move Sexism and video games to Discrimination in video game culture, focused on the actions of individuals (gamers or individual developers not as business entities, not necessary corporate aspects; this would include known sexual harassment within companies, but not other types of corporate discrimination though we'll be linking these clearly) (Alternatively, Harassment in video game culture, Discrimination and harassment in video game culture. If anything, this should be "X in video game culture" since with that, we're talking more away from the corporate side and more on players and individuals.
• A new article would taken anything related to corporate discrimination (the situation around Riot, Ubisoft, and Activision Blizzard for example) as Discrimination in the video game industry, possibly. It would be nice to include what is also currently at Video game development#Quality of life related to workplace conditions and talking about unionization in this article, so this might not be the best title. And in the event we can't find a title, we can always expand over at that Quality of Life section to include all types of discrimination (gender being the largest, but I'd assume one can find info on race, nationality, and LGBTQ+ matters). --Masem (t) 13:34, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
  • I would append "gender" at the front of either of these (e.g. "Gender discrimination in the video game industry") because encompassing all forms of discrimination (racial, LGBT, etc.) into one article might be too much to cover. Please also consider "Sexism in the video game industry" for this article for the reasons I mentioned above. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:05, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Now that I have a bit of time to look, we have Women and video games which is broadly talking about any intersection of women beyond the content of video games. This already has a section Women and video games#Treatment of women in the industry. I am thinking that if we take the current section in this article about the Me Too movement and move/merge it to there (there's duplication already), then this article should then be strictly limited to "[Sexism/misogyny] in video game culture", briefly touching on how the culture permeates into developers which affects the industry treatment, as to provide a way to link to that. The above Video game development#Quality of life section, I'm just going to go ahead and add a part about discrimination and harassment to talk about this for women, and likely race and LGBTQ+ too. But that's the simplification that works, I feel. --Masem (t) 14:16, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
    • I like and support your proposal here with regards to the relevant topics. Haleth (talk) 03:07, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wiki Education assignment: GWSS 1101 Introduction to Gender, Women, and Sexuality Studies

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2022 and 21 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yzerr0309, Ella311, Pgvez24 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: ETWestacott, Reirei0612, Kweekwa, Jone4194, Chenry84.

— Assignment last updated by MNmagistra (talk) 19:53, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Attempt at Globalization

I'm gonna be categorizing some of the examples in order to globalize the page.

Ella311 (talk) 01:15, 4 December 2022 (UTC)