Does this new study affect us?
So what started many years ago but on a lighter note has slowly, and at the same time suddenly, sprung into a way different creature than we originally thought it could be. Lets us dip our toes into the pool of “study” that seems overly concerned with drawing a correlation of some sort between Gamers and their Attractiveness in society. * sigh * Here we go.
The Studies
So…yeah, there are studies. LOTS of studies to my shock. More studies than I’d care to check, read through or find out at this moment, but will probably have to do so later for the purpose of some “deep dive” later. These group of studies that seem to center on the looks of gamers and non-gamers as perceived in social interactions. I don’t claim to be the sharpest tool in the shed, hence I do not understand the great social need for this line of studies.
In what seems to be a more recent study, a working paper under the National Bureau of Economic Research has been out a while (since August 2024) and its titled “Looks and Gaming: Who and Why?”. An interesting title in itself. Find the study and full PDF Here. Its Abstract goes…
It explores the supposed correlation between gaming, its participants and how attractive or unattractive (seems to lean more towards unattractive, if you ask me) gamers are perceived to be AND why.
Its abstract goes “We investigate the relationship between physical attractiveness and the time people devote to video/computer gaming. Average American teenagers spend 2.6% of their waking hours gaming, while for adults this figure is 2.7%. Using the American Add Health Study, we show that adults who are better-looking have more close friends. Arguably, gaming is costlier for them, and they thus engage in less of it.
Physically attractive teens are less likely to engage in gaming at all, whereas unattractive teens who do game spend more time each week on it than other gamers. Attractive adults are also less likely than others to spend any time gaming; and if they do, they spend less time on it than less attractive adults. Using the longitudinal nature of the Add Health Study, we find supportive evidence that these relationships are causal for adults: good looks decrease gaming time, not vice-versa.”
Interesting, right? I won’t deep-dive this as it would make this long article longer than it should be. Here is another study I skimmed through if you are interested: “Good Video Game Players Look Better.” From where I sit, and I think many older and recent gamers would agree, that even without the studies gamers got a bad rep all on their own with almost no effort on their part.
Being called all manner of things and sometimes treated different. Not that it bothered a lot of them (as is evidence in the industry now being a trillion dollar one), but to scientifically research gamers and this hobby seems like actively looking for more issues for gamers while they mostly just sit and enjoy their hobby. Why though? Help me out.
As expected, a good number of netizens were not pleased about this and I suspect some even include non-gamers. Said displeasure seen on Reddit and I’m sure on many other platforms. But then…things grow to get even trickier, as this ball ends up being picked up and kicked in a continued undesired direction by the dear popular political commentator. Let us welcome…
The Liz Wheeler
Meet Elizabeth “Liz” Theresa Wheeler, a well-known right-wing political commentator who used to host the One America News Network’s Tipping Point with Liz Wheeler, a podcast host and author of the well-received “Tipping Points: How To Topple The Left’s House of Cards.” Now, some may wonder “Well, what is she doing in this space?”. That is an apt question. The answer to this question is in a post she made August 19th 2024 on X (formerly Twitter) about how “Men playing video games is peak unattractive.”
In her post was a chart indicating hobbies generally enjoyed or undertaken by usually by men. These hobbies are then ranked in order of the Least Attractive hobby on top. As you can see, the least attractive hobby according to this chart and Liz Wheeler is Playing Video Games. Just like with Reddit, a good number of viewers waged their own keyboard war under said post, hurling virtual fire at the post in hopes of reducing it to cinders. Being in a point in time where a large number of people do not easily take kindly to certain remarks, you would think she may re-evaluate this post of hers with a bit more widespread fact checking from people who actually live their lives as gamers. Maybe even turn it into some form of conversation where she could learn from others, and others from her. Instead, she doubled down on this initial post! Trying to somewhat explain it away as a Meme she put out for others to enjoy, not to fight. Have other groups not been turned to into memes that have been deemed distasteful and out of pocket across the internet? I am quite sure those groups expressed displeasure so I wonder what made it ok to point at gamers in this manner
She seems to try to ‘save face’ at a point in her post and then doubles down again, saves then doubles yet again. From a Meme and “loosen up” to “…video games are a net negative on society…” She ends the post admitting to the fact there are “toxic hobbies women have too…”, even giving examples and showing that she is not trying to incite war or drive a wedge between the sexes (again, managing to level the field and save face).
THEN sets her appeal for peace on fire by hinting that men should still STOP playing video games and instead laugh at the hilarious meme. Excellent sidewinding you’d expect from a great political commentator. Her skill truly does shine here, I’ll give her that. There is just too much wrong with picking a group and singling them out for the WORLD (thanks to the internet) to see and scrutinize from one sex to the other. Hmmm…does that happen to sound familiar? …it kinda should
Cause & Effect
To nobody’s surprise, I believe, gaming has been the topic of study ever since gaming blew up in recent decades. Whether it is the industry’s rise or the wide variety of people gravitating towards it that gave way to people, groups and educational institutions deciding to study gaming under various micro-scopes, the societal and individual side effects are undeniable. Sort of like in the movies, when someone is found to have some abilities or powers, they are then captures, maybe tortured and possibly dissected “in the name of science and study.”
My question is that once whatever large or small correlations are finally made, properly determined and established, what actions will “science,” society and even the industry at large do if these are negative? We already know what in general happens if there are positive correlations. What is hard to fathom is the negative. What will they do? What will be the result? What will our reaction as gamers be?
Time will tell.
