Traditionally, video gaming was a hobby principally participated in by young boys, which from the viewpoint of capitalist-oriented publishers, left a vast portion of the potential market untapped. In 1984, Case Computer Simulations sought to remedy this by releasing a series of games aimed specifically at girls. To eliminate any shred of doubt, they coined it 'Games for Girls', in the process inciting the wrath of many gaming journalists regardless of their gender. Whether to be politically correct (even back then!) or because they were genuinely offended, many reviewers alleged it was supremely sexist to assume certain games would appeal to the fairer sex due to them being inherently wired differently. Possibly they even relished the self-perpetuating controversy.
It wasn't that the nature of the games in question was insulting, or stereotypically derogatory towards girls in any way. On the contrary, in fact, they emerged from the supposition that girls were less inclined to be motivated by violent tendencies, preferring to employ logical reasoning and negotiation techniques to solve problems rather than brute force bravado. All three titles (two action-adventure games and a show-jumping 'simulator') are driven by intelligence-based quizzes designed to engage the brain, one distinctively from a mathematical perspective. A field in which proficiency is typically associated with boys. Positive discrimination then if any at all; far from the insinuations you might have imagined given the backlash.
'Games for Girls' was intended to be an ongoing series, yet in light of its acrimonious reception, terminated at just three titles. All a bit silly seeing as the games were seemingly released with the best of intentions and selected for the brand rather than being designed from the ground up to compliment proposed interests and aptitudes of girls. Had they been unveiled minus such new-wave headlines, the mediocre games would likely have flown under the radar with little fanfare, before rapidly fading into obscurity. Cynics amongst could claim that the whole episode was a rouse to profit from games so dull they weren't worth the tapes they were recorded on. And who knows, they might be right? Certainly no-one is recording playthroughs of them for YouTube, and it's only myself talking about them. I haven't even offered to identify the titles yet: Hicksted, Diamond Quest and Jungle Adventure. There, fixed.
In the ensuing years, rarely has a publisher made similar inflammatory declarations regarding the envisioned audience of their wares, while today gender engagement more closely approximates equilibrium. Games for girls (without the capital letters) are produced, marketed and retailed now by default, often the epitome of sexism. Far more so than CCS were admonished for supposedly being back in the '80s. What has changed is that they're sold without the superfluous gender banner; no-one needs to be informed that Barbie the computer game, for instance, is aimed at prepubescent girls, it speaks for itself… and also, I'd imagine, features little in the way of educational value.
Without the labels, few sane people campaign against the existence of patently gender-biased computer games today, finally mirroring the general acceptance of toys that have targeted boys or girls for as long as they've existed. Had they too been outlawed, Argos and Toys R Us would have been strung up for segregating their departments or catalogues from day one. Making it all the more curious that computer games were scrutinised under an entirely different rubric, as though held responsible for being the gatekeepers of child-rearing morality.
