I have always tried to be aware of inequalities in my community and in the world around me, but something I had not grasped prior to this class was the huge scope of inequality, the issues that intersectionality creates, and the systems that perpetuate inequality. I think it is this idea of perpetuation that disturbs and intrigues me the most. The idea that there are systems that consciously seek to control whole populations through the perpetuation of inequality is truly horrifying. I brought up in my Institutions video that the Pager article produces almost irrefutable evidence of blatant racism. The stigma of being associated with the prison institution is great, but the stigma of being black and being associated with the prison institution is even greater because of existing prejudices, prejudices that the system which creates them does nothing to curb.

The cumulative damage that one minor disadvantage can do to create another, and another, and another is truly concerning. The fact that gaps of all kinds, income, standard of living, achievement, etc. are widening between the advantaged and disadvantaged is equally worrisome. Looking at all these issues together culminates in the realization that there are systems, like the immigration laws in Alabama, the prison system, the school system, and a hundred other essential institutions, that are being used for something other than their original purpose and are now contributing to the widening of the gaps.

In my video about Wealth, Class, and Poverty, some of the ways in which inequality is perpetuated outside of bureaucratic institutions are discussed. The damaging idea of “exposure,” highlights multiple facets of this reproduction of inequality. The school system is not only increasingly segregated, with resources and support favoring schools of advantaged families, but projects exist to show students from disadvantaged schools what they are missing. We have seen again and again in this class that inequality is not only something people must suffer through in the everyday institutions that we experience in life, but also something that is ingrained mentally. Stereotype threat, the mental effects of the “exposure” program, the consequences of prison on family life, and Dasani’s expectations for life, are all examples of the way that the systems of perpetuation create inequality in the mind which is every bit as effective as the societal, governmental, and legal manifestations.

No Girls Allowed: Women’s Involvement in Video Games

During our discussion of gender, I found myself understanding many of the articles in terms of my own experiences. As a woman who loves video games, I am very much aware of the sexism and gender inequality that exists in that realm.

Video games have long been a “boy’s club.” Despite the fact that women helped to pioneer the field of gaming, men have always dominated it, both in culture and industry. Even though women now make up 50% of gamers, there is still the feeling that women gamers are a minority. Games are still being designed, developed, and marketed as if female gamers are a small and insignificant fraction of the customer base. I worked as a design intern for a mobile game developer, and upon expressing my disgust at the highly sexualized advertisement art, was told “If you want to get ahead in this industry, you’re going to have to suspend your feminist morals. This is what sells.” This attitude is prevalent in the gaming industry. These issues have enormous implications for both women in the industry and women who associate themselves with the culture. One a deeply under-represented minority, the other reduced to minority status regardless of actual representation.

Women who seek to work with video games are faced with formidable roadblocks to success. First and foremost, stereotypes, many of which are consciously promoted by people within the video games industry, create an hostile environment for women to pursue video games. Stereotypes that inhibit female participation in the game industry include ideas that women are not as talented as men in the usual required fields (math, engineering, computer science) and that women do not understand how to make a game that will appeal to the masses (based on the equally incorrect assumption that the masses are predominately male). As we saw in the Correll article, men rate their ability as higher (regardless of actual score) than women when they perform an activity that they have been told men are better at. In the game industry, most executives are male, and so hiring males to do a job they think males are better at is the usual (albeit sexist) response. The damaging stereotypes coupled with the cumulative perceptions of male skill create an environment reminiscent of the Rivera article. Women are not being pushed out of the hiring pipeline because there are fewer of them who are talented enough, but because gaming executives have inherently sexist hiring procedures.

The Waldfogel article also highlights an interesting trend which has implications for the gaming industry as well. Women without children can “edit” their femininity, but with children, femininity is confirmed. Having children and childrearing is so heavily associated with female gender roles that woman can no longer function in that industry by being “one of the boys.” The main issue here is that women have to edit their femininity in the first place. For women who present as highly feminine, the stigma of “sleeping one’s way to the top,” comes into play. The stereotype does not specifically involve sex, but it implies that the only reason the women has any influence is because she is using her femininity to manipulate the man who is in charge of things.

The sexualization of female characters, the intentional marketing of games toward men, the attacks on female character inclusion in games, the exclusion of women from being in a voice in the gaming community, and the general toxicity of masculinity in gaming culture all contribute to the persistent, almost propagandistic, idea that women should not be playing or making games.