Sleep lightly tonight, Set. I know where you live!
[Sharpens dogslicer]
|
And yet this philosophy isn't really carried through in the setting. . .
Very true, it's kind of pick and choose what areas of tolerance are acceptible.
Except goblins. They are totally asking for it.
Especially goblin babies. If the gods didn't mean for us to punt them, they wouldn't have shaped their heads like footballs.
Also exceptionally true. A wise man.
[Goes outside to warm up the elite Stinking Buzzard assault vehicle]
But... wenches!
Contributor
|
But... wenches!
The nunnery is Shakespearean-era slang for the whorehouse.
Puts a whole new slant on Hamlet winding up Ophelia:
"Get thee to a nunn'ry, why woulds't thou be a breeder of
sinners?"A~%+~#%!, she killed herself soon after...
In Renaissance Venice, the best brothels were all nunneries. Of course, they were also refuges for lesbians (like the brothels of 19th century Paris, which were legally required to be female-run).
At least with Calistria, we can this without the hypocrisy or patriarchy.
They wouldn't have shaped their heads like footballs.
Stewie Griffon?
|
|
But... wenches!
The nunnery is Shakespearean-era slang for the whorehouse.
Puts a whole new slant on Hamlet winding up Ophelia:
"Get thee to a nunn'ry, why woulds't thou be a breeder of
sinners?"A~%+~#%!, she killed herself soon after...
In Renaissance Venice, the best brothels were all nunneries. Of course, they were also refuges for lesbians (like the brothels of 19th century Paris, which were legally required to be female-run).
At least with Calistria, we can this without the hypocrisy or patriarchy.
Just more hypocracy and and the even worse matriarchy. . .
:)
The nunnery is Shakespearean-era slang for the whorehouse.But... wenches!
It's difficult to write a cogent sentence of modern English without using at least two pieces of Elizabethan sexual slang. Much Ado About Nothing can be read as "Much Ado About Penises."
Any time he talks about wit you get a double entendre too. Same meaning as nothing. Which, yes, means Rowling made a sex joke when she wrote the motto: Wit beyond measure is man's greatest treasure.
Homosexual thread alive and well, Straight people thread has been closed. This tells me what crowd Pathfinder is aiming for, I'll just take me money elsewhere. Goodbye.
Wait, what?!
I just want to point out that the OD&D & AD&D Paladin was clearly stated as being based on Christianic Knights during the Crusades.
BTW: If the man consummated the Marriage before she was considered an Adult he would have been Drawn & Quartered. Only a few Cultures actually considered Women "Chattel". Actually look at history before you speak.
I just want to point out that the OD&D & AD&D Paladin was clearly stated as being based on Christianic Knights during the Crusades.
BTW: If the man consummated the Marriage before she was considered an Adult he would have been Drawn & Quartered. Only a few Cultures actually considered Women "Chattel". Actually look at history before you speak.
Women were considered of marriageable age at 12 in medieval Europe. It's a spectrum, but a woman in a society that has strict gender roles and considers women inferior beings is not free.
A different and generally subordinate gender role for women, among free and good-willed people, is pretty much worlds away from slaveryNo, it is NOT worlds away from slavery. It IS slavery.
Tell that to a 12 year old girl forced to marry a 50 year old man because that is her gender's subordinate role in society. It happens right here in the real world. Could you look into that girl's eyes and say the same thing that you just posted here, from your nice safe position of male cisgendered privilege?
If you don't think you would have the intestinal fortitude to say that to the face of someone whose 'generally subordinate gender role' has subjected them to child rape and sexual slavery, then just don't say it.
And I guarantee you the people who do those things think of themselves as both free and good-willed. It's just that the freedom only applies if you are a real person and not chattel property, eg, not a woman.
Here's the thing, and the possibility that I am misinterpreting mr. Dunn's point, or your's is there. The likelihood that I see things differently, being a privileged cisgendered male, is quite high; but in the interests of You & I coming to a conversation where what we are meaning, is what we are reading, I'm going to put an idea out. My interpretation, if you will, of mr. Dunn's intent.
Rather than:
A different and generally subordinate gender role for women, among free and good-willed people, is pretty much worlds away from slavery.
Let's try: A Patriarchal & Paternalistic society, among free and good-willed people, can be pretty much worlds away from slavery.
Now before you spit-take your coffee & fire up your computer, ; please acknowledge that I just described most, if not all, of Western Civilization.
Is it perfect, no it is not. Does it have disheartening moments where it seems that for every step forward we take at least a half-step back; unfortunately yes, if not even worse. Are we living in it now & in almost universally better relations than we were a century ago? Well, you have your opinion & I have mine.
In the interests of not contributing further to the digression from the original intent of this thread I will not continue this conversation here. I am quite willing to continue it in another, more appropriate thread if you wish.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just want to point out that the OD&D & AD&D Paladin was clearly stated as being based on Christianic Knights during the Crusades.
And, like a lot of other terrible ideas that were in 1e and 2e, this has thankfully gone the way of THAC0 and racial class restrictions.
(Although I guess it's still 'based' on, at least in concept, but it's still much broader an idea than that now at least.)
@Jessica Price: I never said they weren't Marriageable. I said if she wasn't considered an adult when he consummated the marriage he would suffer. And the type of cultures you are saying are a minority. It was more of women and men were trained for specific roles because their naturally abilities lead to them being better in it.
I think I actually posted it before. But Women have been proven to learn intellectual things slower than men but can remember them faster. Where as men learn Physical things slower than women but can remember them faster.
@Alice Margatroid: The problem is Legacy. It is still based on this but it has thankfully been toned down thanks to the toning down of the De-Demonizing of the Game... and am I thinking that that sounds weird...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think I actually posted it before. But Women have been proven to learn intellectual things slower than men but can remember them faster. Where as men learn Physical things slower than women but can remember them faster.
[citation needed]
I consider myself somewhat well-read on this topic. A LOT, and I mean A LOT of studies on the biological differences between genders are terribly designed or obviously agenda-pushing. (You'll see some of the same names come up with the same conclusions time and time again.) So excuse my scepticism.
The problem is Legacy.
We don't stop halflings from becoming clerics or dwarves from becoming rangers anymore, why should we pay attention to a line about the inspiration for the paladin class that refers to a religion that doesn't even exist in most fantasy worlds?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think I actually posted it before. But Women have been proven to learn intellectual things slower than men but can remember them faster. Where as men learn Physical things slower than women but can remember them faster.[citation needed]
I consider myself somewhat well-read on this topic. A LOT, and I mean A LOT of studies on the biological differences between genders are terribly designed or obviously agenda-pushing. (You'll see some of the same names come up with the same conclusions time and time again.) So excuse my scepticism.
The problem is Legacy.We don't stop halflings from becoming clerics or dwarves from becoming rangers anymore, why should we pay attention to a line about the inspiration for the paladin class that refers to a religion that doesn't even exist in most fantasy worlds?
If bards and druids can be incredibly different from their Irish origins, I think we can divorce the paladin from Catholicism.
Given that there have been a number of posts regarding Gender & Sexuality in the world we live in on this thread recently, , I took the liberty of starting a thread for exactly that purpose.
You will find it here
And this is actually from numerous studies... Strangely the ones I know best were done over literally 20 years. I even participated in one of the trials.
Bards, Druids, & Rangers actually seem pretty close to their Celtic Lore Origins. They just don't have it stated in their fluff.
And it isn't just Catholicism... It is just Christianic Knights... Which strangely encompasses:
-Protestant
-Catholic
-Jewish
-Islamic
-& a few other minor churches.
We don't stop halflings from becoming clerics
Wizards. We don't stop Halflings from becoming Wizards anymore. Pre-3E was notorious for not allowing Halflings & Dwarves to be arcane spellcasters, they could be divine spellcasters.
O.k., reality check.
If a standard intelligence score is 10.5 on 3d6, equating to an IQ of 100 then one standard deviation is 13.46. As many arcane casters START with a much higher IQ, the same could, logically be extrapolated to other areas. In short, any supposed differences between male and female ability are far smaller than the magnitude of ability scores in game.
As a general rule I do not care that Paizo puts homosexuality in their rulebooks as I like elements of realism in a world. IRL I do not care what two consenting adults get up to in private although I am not that liberal in terms of gay marriage.
That being said you could have other nations where slavery exists and one can get the death penalty for whatever reason. Various regimes throughout history have been arbitrary and brutal by modern standards.
Whatever is done and however it is done should be put in however to drive the story. Spartacus TV show has homosexual relationships in it but alot of the sex scences gay or straight are becoming overdone.
Put simply I do not care if Paizo has a hippy do anything you want utopia or a place so socially conservative it makes Cheliax look benign. Sex in PF should drive a story really or a back ground.
|
Contributor
|
The immediate source of the paladin class was Poul Anderson's 1961 novel Three Hearts and Three Lions, not Crusader knights.
Anderson's novel was derived from the Chanson de geste tradition and the later Renaissance epics such as Orlando Innamorato and Orlando Furioso, that developed from legends about Charlemagne's counts and warriors, who lived in the 9th century.
While the Chansons de geste did involve Crusader imagery, this was only a part of its function, which involved themes such as courtly love, the conflict of oaths, bad government, rebellion against the king, and adventure. The "pagans" of the Chansons were an amalgam of Moors, Saxons, Slavs, and Norsemen (often a grand alliance of all four was depicted), who worshipped a hierarchy of demons through idols. This was conscious mythologizing, as the authors - a literate caste of poets, troubadours, and monks - generally knew that Islam was not diabolism; much of Spain and formerly Languedoc had been Muslim in their heyday. At their core they valorised the Frankish elite, who are depicted as violent, lusty, hot-tempered, and haughty, with a Christian or Catholic veneer.
The best of the Paladins, (the knights of Charlemagne's palace or palatia - hence the name), were, however, true to their lovers, chivalrous to their opponents, and spent their time being on the side of right even when it forced them into rebellion against the Emperor. In some cases they aligned with the pagans because of an injustice created by the evil "traitors" within the Imperial Court, of whom Ganelon was the premier example.
Later Chansons and Wolfram von Eschenbach's work later created heroic Saracens and pagans whose existence inverted the usual religious paradigm. The worthiest opponents are the noble enemies, after all. (It strikes me that the potential for paladin versus paladin stories in our world hasn't been really taken up).
They are, by name, distinguished from the Crusaders of the Crusader Cycle of poems and stories, which was also mythologized, and set during the First Crusade period. Those knights (while revived by Tasso) were less complex and interesting (being seldom forced to choose right over faction), and were not as popular as the basis of popular fiction in the medieval and renaissance periods. Gygax's paladins are the knights of Charlemagne, who are frequently faced with moral quandaries.
In other words, these are not monk-knights, sworn to celibacy. They are secular knights who are devoted to their religion and nation, as well as their lovers and justice.
It's also a little queer that one would take the Templars as an exemplar for the paladin class, given that one of the main accusations against that Order in the 14th c. was homosexuality.
@Jeff Erwin: In plenty of Interviews Gygax stated that the Paladin Class was based on the Knightly Orders who fought in the Crusades.
Now this isn't just Templars. It is literally a class meant to replicate all of the Orders not just the Templar. Remember there was over 25 Knightly Orders that fought in any of the 15+ Crusades the Vatican sanctioned.
|
Contributor
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Jeff Erwin: In plenty of Interviews Gygax stated that the Paladin Class was based on the Knightly Orders who fought in the Crusades.
Now this isn't just Templars. It is literally a class meant to replicate all of the Orders not just the Templar. Remember there was over 25 Knightly Orders that fought in any of the 15+ Crusades the Vatican sanctioned.
Well from this ENworld interview, Gygax states:
"As far as I am concerned, the Paladin is Lawful Good--perior. The class takes vows, swears an oath, and then follows it. The concept is drawn from some legend--Authurian--and some quasi-legend--the paladins of Charlemaine plus the code of chivalry as it was written, more honored in the breach than the keeping."
Though here he denies the Anderson book was a major influence (I've seen it asserted elsewhere pretty authoritatively), he cites Arthurian knights and Charlemagne's paladins. He does not mention the Church knights. These are secular knights.
EDIT: he also ties the cleric class, instead, to the Templars.
Paladins are knights, not monks, at least in origin.
Intentional fallacy. No author is a privileged expert on their own material, including Gary Gygax, who also sometimes went on record as denying or diminishing any Tolkienesque influence on D&D.
It's odd how this conversation has morphed from one about homosexuality toward one about gender roles. The two things have nothing to do with each other, in my experience and observation.
In any case, I continue to appreciate and applaud the attitudes that all of the caretakers and most of the stakeholders in Golarion have exhibited in this thread. At least in this one aspect of human experience, it can be said that our shared fantasy world is a more fundamentally decent place than the real one.
It has more of a connection than people think...
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The nunnery is Shakespearean-era slang for the whorehouse.But... wenches!
It's difficult to write a cogent sentence of modern English without using at least two pieces of Elizabethan sexual slang. Much Ado About Nothing can be read as "Much Ado About Penises."
Any time he talks about wit you get a double entendre too. Same meaning as nothing. Which, yes, means Rowling made a sex joke when she wrote the motto: Wit beyond measure is man's greatest treasure.
Not quite right.
Nothing/Noting is slang for vagina.
It makes more sense in a way, denoting a cavity...
Although, we're getting a bit off topic here, probably just making something out of nothing!
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Intentional fallacy. No author is a privileged expert on their own material, including Gary Gygax, who also sometimes went on record as denying or diminishing any Tolkienesque influence on D&D.
It's odd how this conversation has morphed from one about homosexuality toward one about gender roles. The two things have nothing to do with each other, in my experience and observation.
In any case, I continue to appreciate and applaud the attitudes that all of the caretakers and most of the stakeholders in Golarion have exhibited in this thread. At least in this one aspect of human experience, it can be said that our shared fantasy world is a more fundamentally decent place than the real one.
responding to something about men not letting other men be affectionate
As a teacher, I see that kind of thing all the time.
If one male is very supportive of another -> mocked for being 'gay'.
Two men embrace or are partially undressed together (like, at the beach) in a comic, story or video-clip used to supporting learning -> mocked for being 'gay'.
It is a juvenile way of asserting masculinity when one actually has few socially recognised masculine attributes (still undergoing puberty, not permitted any responsibility, protected/excluded from risky behaviour, socially restricted from displaying dominance, not able to access trappings of manhood, etc.)
Plus, mocking others for being gay -> 'proof' of not being gay -> proof of socially constructed masculinity.
I claim my maleness by mocking others lack of it!
All built on a structure in which "masculinity" inculdes desire for women, objectification of women and (sadly, more often that not) dominance over women.
As long as that structure remains, homosexuality will always be regarded as 'less manly' and caricatured as effete.
Weird, really. Homophobia and misogyny are so tightly wound together.
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is a juvenile way of asserting masculinity when one actually has few socially recognised masculine attributes (still undergoing puberty, not permitted any responsibility, protected/excluded from risky behaviour, socially restricted from displaying dominance, not able to access trappings of manhood, etc.)
And yet it persists well into adulthood. People (not just some men, but also some women) viciously reinforce and police each others behavior for gender-appropriateness (or class-appropriateness, culture-conformism, etc.).
It creates, IMO, an unhealthy atmosphere where people feel compelled to be dishonest to their best friends and family, for fear of being mocked or perceived as behaving in a non-conforming way (even more so if they are gay or otherwise 'non-conforming'), and encouraging them to 'cop' their own friends and family members behavior to 'prove' their own conformism.
From generation to generation, it just encourages people to be raging dicks to each other, to 'prove' their own propriety by pointing out signs of impropriety in others, which leads to some people throwing others under the bus to demonstrate their own party loyalty.
Stuff like this makes the 'phobia' tag seem more appropriate, since entire generations live in fear of being 'labeled' with a tag that may or may not be appropriate to them, and continue the witch hunt by pointing fingers at others, to draw attention away from themselves, unaware, or uncaring, that they are perpetuating a climate of fear and mistrust, of lies and cruelty.
Geraint, Set, great description of the problem. Would you mind if I kept your quotes for future use in similar discussion and/or article/blog post/etc.?
|
|
It is a juvenile way of asserting masculinity when one actually has few socially recognised masculine attributes (still undergoing puberty, not permitted any responsibility, protected/excluded from risky behaviour, socially restricted from displaying dominance, not able to access trappings of manhood, etc.)
And yet it persists well into adulthood. People (not just some men, but also some women) viciously reinforce and police each others behavior for gender-appropriateness (or class-appropriateness, culture-conformism, etc.).
It creates, IMO, an unhealthy atmosphere where people feel compelled to be dishonest to their best friends and family, for fear of being mocked or perceived as behaving in a non-conforming way (even more so if they are gay or otherwise 'non-conforming'), and encouraging them to 'cop' their own friends and family members behavior to 'prove' their own conformism.
From generation to generation, it just encourages people to be raging dicks to each other, to 'prove' their own propriety by pointing out signs of impropriety in others, which leads to some people throwing others under the bus to demonstrate their own party loyalty.
Stuff like this makes the 'phobia' tag seem more appropriate, since entire generations live in fear of being 'labeled' with a tag that may or may not be appropriate to them, and continue the witch hunt by pointing fingers at others, to draw attention away from themselves, unaware, or uncaring, that they are perpetuating a climate of fear and mistrust, of lies and cruelty.
Oh yes, definitely. I agree with all of this.
Oh, I don't deny that homophobia and misogyny come from similar places. People who categorically devalue others are always fearful, ignorant, and immature, whatever the "category" of people is they're devaluing. Note that fear, ignorance, and immaturity are all things that can be grown and learned "out of," often with the help of other individuals or of communities. One of the things I'm really bad at, actually, is remembering to try to help people who express hateful views about other people rather than simply castigating them. I need to work on that.
& Yet an Arranged Marriage is still the Expectation of quite a few Cultures.
& The Young unwilling marrying The Old is rare. Literally in recorded History it happened 37 Times. Most got to say Yes or No. Also 7 of those were actually Homosexual. 3 between Men & 4 between Women.
Actually, the 12 to 50 was rare. but 12 or 13 to a 17-25 year old was somewhat common.
|
Gender roles are very relevent to a conversation about homosexuality too i think. So many of our current trend in what a gay man/ lesbian "is" is partially because of our gender roles. Without our traditional gender roles we probably would not have the gender reversal so common in modern stereotype gays. Gay greek men did not wear skinny jeans and obsess about home decor, i think that is a product of modern gay men rebelling against gender expectations and holding to something see as feminine. Most of what gay folks are in golarion would be vastly different without our notions of gender roleOn one hand, you seem to recognize that as a stereotype and call it out as such, but then I think you go on to give it too much credence. The phenomenon you describe exists, but is less prevalent than popular entertainment would have you believe.
This from a gay man who dresses terribly and does not get identified as gay unless I tell somebody.
Mostly based on my gay brother's view of things. he HATED sanfrancisco for the stereotypes and people trying too hard to be them
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again the amount of say depends on the culture & circumstances.
A Celtic Women would have complete control inside the Home & have significant say outside. A Viking Woman had more say in the tribe than any man. A British Woman wouldn't have much say anywhere.
Heck, the movie Brave was wrong in the sense that the Woman would have been allowed to compete and not forced to marry a Man "weaker" than herself.