Compare and Contrast

Lots of buzz in gaming about this post about gamers and bias and privilege and all that jazz. It’s not a terrible post, and if the fact that sexism (and other isms) are a problem in the world at large is news to you, it’s probably a useful read. 

It was a let down for me, and it took a minute to put my finger on why.  While it’s framed in the context of gaming, it’s really not about gaming.  Gaming is an excuse to talk about these issues.  Now, they’re real issues, and it’s good that they’re being talked about, but the gaming wrapper feels like a bait and switch to me. What we can do about whatever-ism in gaming is a really interesting topic to me, and one where i feel I can do things.  Talking about it in those terms invites me to be a partner.  Using gaming as an excuse to talk about the issue in broader terms invites me to be an audience.  As a quick rule of thumb, if the takeaways are equally applicable to NASCAR and The Food Network, then you’re not talking about gaming.

And, again, that’s fine. The broad issue is worth talking about. But if you tell me you’re talking about gaming, expect a predictable response.

This would not be as big a deal, except around the same time I read that post, I was exposed to two other really fantastic pieces about sexism (and other isms) in specific industries which illustrated the point so well that the contrast was impossible to ignore. Both cases were pieces which were passionate and invested in change, but also were speaking to the specifics of their industries, not the world at large.  As a result, even though neither field is one that I participate in, both pieces were much more compelling to me.

The first was a podcast, the recent episode of Let’s Make Mistakes, a podcast on the 5by5 network. To quote the blurb: “While Mike Monteiro and Katie Gillum talk destruction of apple products, feats of athleticism, and dead baby jokes, they also manage to wax diverse and emphatically discuss how people can be better designers, organizers, and people by thinking about diversity in their work.”

It drilled into practical stuff, ranging from how to present samples to handling speakers at conventions all without needing to patronize the audience or drift into theory. It was solid, practical stuff, and it’s worth a listen if you have an hour.

The second was a marvelous piece by Roseanne Barr about her experience as a woman in the TV industry. It’s a brutal, amazing read and I just encourage anyone even faintly interested to give it a read. It’s not about sexism, except that it is, and that’s kind of marvelous.

Now, I don’t say this to bust on the original Chaotic Good post. The author has good, important things to say, and it’s important they be said.  But my usual objection to such pieces is that they will never be as powerful as people talking about actual things.  Practice trumps theory, and real people move us more than hypothetical ones. It is rare that I get a confluence of events that lets me illustrate that point so clearly.

So with that in mind, I applaud Lyndsay for the post.  It’s not easy to broach these topics within the geeksphere, and the simple act of doing so requires courage and a depth of belief that I find admirable.  If she chooses to walk away now and declare her work here done, then I will not fault her for it. But if she decides that the foundation has been laid, and she can now go on to talking about actual things, actual people and actual gaming? Then I will be an eager audience.