Out of curiosity, I recently took a look at gender distribution in the various Facebook groups for each Stonemaier game. Why? Our mission is to bring joy to tabletops worldwide, so I’m here to ensure that anyone who wants to participate feels welcome and safe. For us, this extends beyond Facebook to this blog, Instagram, YouTube, Discord, BoardGameGeek, our newsletters, and our games themselves. Those are the platforms on which we actively engage and have varying degrees of control, and this goes beyond Stonemaier to the gaming community as a whole. If you want to play tabletop games and/or discuss them, we’re here to welcome you. Let’s start with some data. Most of the data available to me is limited to men and women, not non-binary and transgender. As seen in the Wingspan chart below, Facebook also includes the category of “custom,” but no further information about that category is provided. On our annual demographic survey, 17% of Stonemaier newsletter subscribers identified as women (also, 1.5% identified as non-binary). On our Instagram, 21% of followers identify as women. Same for the Stonemaier Facebook page. Participants in these Facebook groups identify as women and comprise at least 20% of the members: Wingspan (45%), Wyrmspan (38%), Rolling Realms (26%), Apiary (25%), Charterstone (22%), and Viticulture (21%). The other Facebook groups are as follows: Red Rising (19%), Between Two Cities (17%), Tapestry (16%), Libertalia (16%), Euphoria (16%), Scythe (10%), Expeditions (9%). 50% of my full-time coworkers at Stonemaier Games identify as women (Erica, Susannah, and Christine). 35% of our shareholders and independent contractors identify as women (including artists, graphic designers, playtesters, proofreaders, and many others); around 1% are non-binary. I don’t have an exact count of how many content creators on our reviewer list identify as women (the list does not ask for gender, so I’m just going by name, which is full of assumptions in itself and also does not account for non-binary representation), but eyeballing the list, the number looks like around 15% (around 120 out of the 800+ people who have opted in). These numbers are meaningful, but they also don’t tell the full story. For example, do 25% of the people who play Apiary identify as women? If the real number is higher, what is it about our Facebook group that isn’t as inviting as it could be? And is that an accurate depiction of how many people actually want to play a game like Apiary, or is there something we could have done to make the game more welcoming to those looking for a medium-weight, engine-building, positive-player-interaction, competitive tabletop experience? I brought up this topic in yesterday’s livestream, and the conversation yielded a lot of different observations, goals, and aspirations. Here are a few of them: Diversity, of course, goes well beyond gender (to age, ethnicity, experience/ability, sexuality, nation, culture, creed, etc). Today I just happen to be talking about gender (and it’s also one of the few diversity metrics tracked by social media platforms). We have much more content on other types of diversity here. There are several layers to gender inclusivity in the gaming community: It’s about the game itself not having elements that actively exclude you, feeling welcome and safe in environments where people play games, and feeling accepted, protected, and that you belong in online communities focused on tabletop gaming. I try to avoid stereotypes about gaming preferences; instead, I try to focus on what draws people in and what pushes people away (from games and communities). For example, say you’re a company that makes sci-fi war games, and most of the people who play your game or talk about your game identify as male. I don’t think there’s value in assuming women don’t want to play sci-fi war games; rather, ask yourself if there are people who want to play or discuss your games but don’t feel welcome. You can’t control people’s preferences, but you can control your game’s art, characters, playtesters, community moderation, and more. Negative past experiences in online forums may make some people reluctant to give other forums a chance. This ups the ante for all of us to foster welcoming, inclusive, and positive spaces for all participants, especially those who have had bad experiences in the past. This includes clear guidelines, moderation when necessary, and setting the tone in the way we post and comment. We have found that if we do those things, the welcoming nature of the group becomes self-perpetuating by its members. My coworker (Susannah) shared with me that Inside Up Games, Queen Games, and Eagle-Gryphon Games are hosting a Women in Gaming design retreat at the Gamers Ranch in August. You can sign up here if you’re interested. I just learned about this, so we have no official involvement, but if you’re someone who would gain value from this experience and there is anything impeding you from attending (financial or otherwise), I can help find a solution if you contact me at [email protected]. We’re all learning together, and I appreciate you approaching this topic with an open mind. These are just a few data points and concepts; I’d love to learn from you and hear your thoughts in the comments below. What would you like to share? Also read: Inclusion, Diversity, and Representation in Board Games and Beyond Moving Beyond Gender Assumptions in the Board Game Hobby The Box Matters: How Publishers Can Prioritize Diversity Celebrating the Women at Stonemaier Games If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.
This content was originally published here.
