A Woman KingOctober 31st, 2007 by Monique
Del.icio.us | Digg | Technorati | Reddit | Stumble Upon
The other day my Political Science professor was talking about types of leaders, and heuristic devices. Inevitably she stumbled upon the million dollar question: can women be leaders as well as men?
We’ve heard both sides, probably. We’ve heard there would be no wars if females were president and we’ve also heard that females should learn to stay in the kitchen and mind their own business. Politically, I could just point you to Margaret Thatcher of the UK and her reign as prime minister or Hilary Clinton’s upcoming run for the 2008 presidency. I mean, they’re leaders, right? But while GDG has feminist tendencies, it’s not a political blog; it’s merely a blog about video games by gamers who just so happen to be women. And as such, the million dollar question becomes more intrinsic to us when posed like this: can women be leaders in video games as well as men?
Unfortunately, the answer to this question is a quagmire that makes Iraq look simple.
In essence, the number one and only trapping a female leader will fall into is caring what people think about her. This is the real clincher, because females do tend to care about feelings more. As sexist as I feel for voicing this, it’s still true. It isn’t always a bad thing, either, and I would never try to say that it is. Still, it’s hard to become numb overnight. It’s hard to tune out the voice of the few if it’s negative, even if the voice of the many is overwhelmingly positive. It’s hard to take a blow or two to the stomach if you’ve never done so previously.
This trapping becomes number one when the female in power encounters her first resistance to leadership. For example, let’s say a guy in her guild tells a female in earnest that she “healed like shit” and looks like a “cheap whore.” How does she react? What does she do?
Some would suggest gkicking him, or reporting him, but I wouldn’t. It’s a precarious dilemma and that wouldn’t solve the problem so easily.
Actually, it would create more problems as well because it shows weakness, and sets her up for future insults. So would stooping down to his level and returning the insult—that shows him he reached her on some level. Still, she can’t very well condone his words nor can she simply shrug it off.
Or can she?
If she doesn’t, in the end, guildmates watching with baited breath, wondering if she’ll call her boyfriend for help or burst into tears or ban him from the forums, she’s become nothing more than an episode of Jerry Springer. Some females at this point give out nudes to smooth things over, others jump ship and eBay (yes, this is a jab at myself), and some suck it up and let the abuse continue. None of these work, however, even if they’re likely occurrences. They only perpetuate the problem and will continue to unless she shrugs it off.
Unless she shrugs it off, it’s there that all the female’s attention will go to; into resolving the conflict. And while she does this, she is not leading. She is serving herself and her emotions—not selfishly, but still at the cost of not leading.
Rather, she is letting males lead for her, once again, in an entirely different manner.
This is the true weakness of a female leader, in a video game; in any patriarchal society. She thinks too much and cares too much because society tells her to. Society tells her that someone insulting her is the ultimate sin, society tells her to care. Society tells her, even further, to seek a “knight” to “save” her—the boyfriend lifeline I spoke earlier of.
So, then, what if she said fuck society? What if gender roles fell away? What if she refused to play the role of the damsel in distress or, its angry counterpart, the spurned woman? What if she acted the way she wanted to and not the way she was expected to?
I mean, let’s look back to history for an answer. Because there’s a movie recently released about her, as such is the flavor of every few years, Queen Elizabeth might serve as an excellent example; or maybe Hatshepsut, the Egyptian Queen named a Pharaoh. Elizabeth became the virgin queen, and refused to give another thought to what those thought of her—especially men. Hatshepsut dressed as a man and led like one (although Civilization IV’s depiction of her would make you think otherwise).
But this is the 21st century, making it indelibly better than the historical figures of yesterday’s lives. You don’t see Hilary Clinton parading around with a fake beard and changing her name Henry. We don’t have to dress like men. We don’t have to play male characters. We just have to learn to take a blow and that’s a hard lesson.
So in the end, the real answer to the question can women be leaders in video games? It’s yes, they can—if society will let them. But personally, I say fuck society. We don’t need its permission anyway.
And maybe, just maybe, politics and video games aren’t really so separate after all.
October 31st, 2007 at 4:17 pm
Great article, thank you.
I for my part feel I’d be okay (in life and in game) with people sharing there view that I “healed like shit” - That, I’d be able to evaluate and shrug off if I felt it was a unfair comment, but when the comments become “you look like a cheap whore” … I don’t think anyone (male or female) should have to deal with personal attacks. They really have no relevance in game or in a lot of life experiences.
I’m looking forward to the day when people will comment on “who” I am and not “what” I am (a woman).
Usually, I just let the offender know that by reducing his comments to name calling has totally invalidated anything he may of had to say … yeah, I come across as a stuck up bitch, but I feel more comfortable with that role rather than damsel or angry.
Men & Women are different, I do believe that the difference in sexes leads to one side being “better” at something than the other, but I also believe that there are exceptions to every stereotype and the shape of ones genitals doesn’t dictate what one can or can not do.
Not all Black people can dance, Not all Men are good at Maths, Not all Women make good mothers.
November 1st, 2007 at 4:05 am
In Civlization 4, I always do best when playing as Catherine of Russia. No idea why.
I’m not sure how much of the ‘men & women are different’ argument that I buy. Clearly men can’t have babies, but I think most of the rest of it is just down to socialization more than anything.
Good post (but you already knew I thought that)
November 1st, 2007 at 8:08 pm
I was gonna write a reply here earlier, but it’s kinda difficult to organize my thoughts here. I suppose the potentiality of leadership is tied to several touchy ideas of legitimacy and power between the leaders and the lead, and… women simply tend to start at a disadvantage in this regard, as guys will be more inclined to try to assert dominance or dismiss them… not maliciously, but simply as a matter of habit. And a lot of would-be women leaders are only able to incompletely prevent this. I guess it’s easier to be a weak male leader than a weak female leader is one of the major things.
But if a woman is able to sufficiently leverage her experience, intelligence, and maturity, then she can get results. But unless you’re an absolute fucking paragon of virtue, a lot of guys will probably harbor disrespect and try to challenge you on various levels.. it’s ultimately about very subtle power relations and the way men and women are implicitly taught to think about eachother, I believe, that makes women leadership in male-dominated domains difficult.
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:36 am
Peter - tend to agree. It’s interesting that Elizabeth was designed to appear more manly in her court paintings by giving her very wide shoulders. Equally, Margaret Thatcher had voice lessons so that she could speak in a deeper, more ‘manly’ voice. It’s also interesting that Hillary is nearly always referred to as “Hillary” and Bush is referred to as “Bush”. You can’t really argue that it’s to distinguish between the Clintons, since there’s enough political Bushes running around loose.
I think it’s much easier for a man with a chequered past (skipping out on duty, alcohol, drugs, sex, whatever) to get into power than it is for a woman — they are very much held up to a double standard. Which does stem, I think, from the old lies about how women were more irrational and more emotional.
There is also the problem that women are always ‘women’. You’re never a gamer, you’re a girl gamer. You’re not a politician, you’re “the first female politician to run for President”. Men can be separate from their gender, but women never are. Writers are always studied in terms of ‘women writers’, whereas few people ask what Shakespeare was trying to say about being male. (Sexuality being slightly seperate from that statement).
November 9th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Nothing about Samus Aran?
November 12th, 2007 at 11:55 am
I stumbled across this site because I was bored. Some of the earlier posts were great, but why are you turning this into some Fem-Nazi stuff?
This post made me *yawn*.
November 13th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
I don’ think it’s fair to make that kind of a generalization. Yes there are some chemical differences between men and women but saying and I quote “because females do tend to care about feelings more” is like saying “celebrities tend to have more emotional issues”, which as a general statement probably isn’t true. We assume it’s true becuase it’s what were told, and it’s what gets most of the attetion in the media. The same holds true for all stereotypes. How much you care about feelings is just as much an envrinomental factor as it is a gender one. I willing to assume that everyone has met a guy who cares. And I’ve met women who could care less about anyone else. We’re unique as human beings, not as men and women. Although I do find it ironic that men decided that women were the servant type, where as from an evolutionary stand point males exist for the sole purpose to provide genetic diversty among their speices. (in short for reproductive sex). Sad but true.
November 13th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
moderation, so much for freedom of speech….
November 13th, 2007 at 9:55 pm
It’s moderated so people can’t spam, don’t bitch.
And yeah, this post bored the fuck out of me too. Writer’s block.
November 15th, 2007 at 11:42 pm
I haven’t had these types of problems. Of course, I am the oldest member of my guild, so I can always pull rank and override any gender issues. Also, my guild is pretty familiar with the idea that the best person for the job isn’t always a male (as we had a leader who was pretty terrible).
All-in-all, I think these games really level the playing field. Males and females have equal access to training and equips (hopefully).
November 16th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Wandered over to your site from Sarcasticgamer.com, and this article caught my eye. It’s great to see it! I kind of shake my head whenever I see people react to articles like this. It’s incomprehensible to me.
It’s interesting to realize that even in games there are few female rulers! That should change!
December 8th, 2007 at 11:12 pm
Yay
December 23rd, 2007 at 5:47 pm
fuck pharaoh s elizabeth…
we are still leavin in the “primitive ages” of conquering and empire… duh …this is obvisouly… but the scaring thing is to think that we are stilll bein ruled by a damn pharaoh.. hidden in the stories from the new world order…
and i dont want either a MAN or WOMAN in that place… the question is not if a woman can be a leader as a man… because either man and woman has been leaders throught history of the world… and none of them were good. beside its very HIPOCRITA that fuckin discusting bout woman doesnt have power .. they are treat bad… etc etc etc. go say it for those stupid pigs who are leading the world…. ( which in special is a WOMAN )
March 4th, 2008 at 10:30 am
The reference to Hillary Clinton made me wrinkle my nose. Nothing about Hillary Clinton smacks of independent thinking as far as women are concerned. A great deal of her campaign is spouting what people want to hear, and her lack of regard for her dignity (in keeping a husband who internationally humiliated her) because she is far too interested in her own politics leaves a nasty aftertaste in my mouth.
In this regard, I think Elizabeth or Hatshepsut are the better qualifiers. Because, they genuinely didn’t care what or how society felt or thought of them. In the end, breaking it down into a ‘can women game better than men?’ is far, far too simple. Even a really crappy female gamer will be able to find a really crappy male gamer she can beat at.. well… whatever. It should be taken on an individual level and basis. Am I saying that gender doesn’t play a role? It most certainly does.
However, I think this has more to do with the fact the gaming industry is male-made and male-played than anything else. Overall, I think in some arenas, women would surpass men quite easily. Why? I would say that women, moreso than men, are extremely competitive. And it’s because of that caring of what others think that would urge her to excel and surpass any expectations put upon her by her gaming partners.
I know it definitely affects how I play in a group setting.