I'm starting a PFRPG game (as GM) set in Golarion in two weeks. Last night I was having a discussion with one of my players for the campaign.
The player asked:
"How are you going to handle female characters?"
I asked for clarification, because the only thing that came to mind was writing down the letter F on the character sheet.
A succinct paraphrase of the player's clarification would be:
"In Golarion, is there a general asssumption that females are inferior to males?"
I said I wasn't intimately familiar with every aspect of the setting, but to me, the world seemed to have rough gender equality, except where noted in the campaign setting. The Vudrani society, for example: "Throughout Vudrani society, such heavy emphasis is placed on the creation and care of male offspring that female infanticide remains a constant problem." (Pathfinder Chronicles 38)
My player seemed to think the whole world would/should have a tilt of male superiority/female inferiority, drawing upon Europe's historical medieval period and other fantasy world sources (such as Yrth from GURPS Fantasy), and that gender equality would be the pocket exception. The passage quoted above would be an explicit example of really bad sexism, but that the world itself would be at least moderately sexist (anti-female) almost everywhere.
Perhaps somebody more in the know about Golarion can enlighten me? In (canon) Golarion, is sexism the exception (as I believe), or the rule (as my player believes)?
|
Based on what I know, extreme sexism is the exception. And a rare exception at that. I could see minor sexism in communities or amongst certain tribes. I do know that orcs are viciously sexist.
In fact, it is generally the exception to the rule in most modern "D&D" settings. The only setting I have read recently that clearly speaks on the concept was Yggsburgh by Gary Gygax. It states that female adventurers were rare and that most women generally had specific roles in society. Even that reference was buried in the hardcover somewhere.
But nearly all other settings I am familiar with treat men and women equally over most of the world. With sexism being an exception that usually reflects a flaw in the society.
The thing is, most fantasy settings are not really a reflection of medieval society and never have been. They are modern societies dressed in medieval clothes. A Renaissance festival has more in common with D&D than the historical period does.
|
I'm starting a PFRPG game (as GM) set in Golarion in two weeks. Last night I was having a discussion with one of my players for the campaign.
The player asked:
"How are you going to handle female characters?"
I asked for clarification, because the only thing that came to mind was writing down the letter F on the character sheet.
A succinct paraphrase of the player's clarification would be:
"In Golarion, is there a general asssumption that females are inferior to males?"
I said I wasn't intimately familiar with every aspect of the setting, but to me, the world seemed to have rough gender equality, except where noted in the campaign setting. The Vudrani society, for example: "Throughout Vudrani society, such heavy emphasis is placed on the creation and care of male offspring that female infanticide remains a constant problem." (Pathfinder Chronicles 38)
My player seemed to think the whole world would/should have a tilt of male superiority/female inferiority, drawing upon Europe's historical medieval period and other fantasy world sources (such as Yrth from GURPS Fantasy), and that gender equality would be the pocket exception. The passage quoted above would be an explicit example of really bad sexism, but that the world itself would be at least moderately sexist (anti-female) almost everywhere.
Perhaps somebody more in the know about Golarion can enlighten me? In (canon) Golarion, is sexism the exception (as I believe), or the rule (as my player believes)?
Going from complete memory I seem to recall a few countries and cultures that was but not all. I think it is more a degree of it. Some will have none, some will have mild and others will have a lot.
You can't really compare Golarion to our own history especially europe. Since a lot of that culture was influnced by the catholic church. In Golarion their are many religions and all different, plus they are all excepted for the most part and most countries have more than one with in them.
Then add in magic which is also not in the real world and it changes even more. I mean a big reason for sexism was that most work was very labor intensive which men being larger and strong on the avg are better suited for in RL. With magic that is less true and it opens up other area's for women to accel in.
|
People don't like to encounter the things like sexism that they encounter every day in real life in their games. They often play rpgs to get away from that sort of thing. It is the referee's responcibility to know his or her players and play the game world accordingly.
That's up to the referee, not the world writers. Because someone will always find something they dislike even if that's not the author's intent. (Never mind extreme examples like Carcosa ;))
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Really it depends david,
With Cheliax for example, anyone playing a tiefling wears a 'kick me' sign on their back. In other cases Half-orcs are in similar circumstances. If the player's willing the DM should feel free to roll with it. Besides, you can't punch out the sexist boss, you can punch out Bob the bartender if he doesn't serve your half-orc a beer.
Taldor seems to have an undercurrent of sexism in addition to their class stratification. While it's easily ignored, it is there.
That saidm I'd say it's the exception, not the rule.
I'd say that, for most countries, even if there is sexism, it shouldn't quite play out as it has in our own world. For example, if someone wants to run a female fighter, there shouldn't be any actual game issues that restricts them, but having an NPC mention something about assuming a male fighter would be better is probably enough to establish this.
In other words, in most "standard" adventuring nations, there might be some RP elements to show this, but I wouldn't expect to have anything that would actually restrict a female character, such as being imprisoned or stoned for doing "man's work."
In Taldor it almost seems to be a joke shared by the sexes. "Men exist to give the girls pretty things, and make them laugh then go away" while the men discuss 'conquests' amongst themselves and bring civilization to other cultures. They don't really mean it in general (but heaven help you if you say the wrong bit in the wrong place, as then you look like an uncultured boar!) but at the same time they enjoy poking at the stereotypes.
And then there is Qadira, where the females of the race are considered superior.
Near as i can tell with some exceptions Golarion is rather diverse both in gender roles and sexual orientation. Obviously there are exceptions, not everyone will like the equality.
Generally sex roles in the medieval period came from the fact that life was hard and it was short. many women died in childbirth, many children died from disease. You add magic to the mix, not to mention hardy races like dwarves or inventive races like gnomes and your gonna see an effect.
If your player WANTS to play up that s/he obviously can if you or your group is comfortable with that. I personally had fun playing a halfling in our Rise of the Runelords campaign. The attitudes I got while in Magnimar were an interesting change and nice flavor for the region.
Generally sex roles in the medieval period came from the fact that life was hard and it was short. many women died in childbirth, many children died from disease.
This is probably true from the beginning of time up until the turn of the 19th century. Giving birth was always life-threatening. I guess male dominance rests on the sheer power of men for the most part - men are on the average stronger and more aggressive than women, and do not hesitate to use this power. Women have been seen as being weaker not too long ago, and the responsibility of child-rearing rested almost exclusively on the womens shoulders. Now, in the end it is indeed up the the DM how he portrays these fantasy societies, but real-world behaviour is of course easily transported into fiction, and in most societies today, we still see a male dominance - or how many women do we see each day in politics, financial markets or at the helm of big companies or corporations?
Stefan
Generally sex roles in the medieval period came from the fact that life was hard and it was short. many women died in childbirth, many children died from disease.This is probably true from the beginning of time up until the turn of the 19th century. Giving birth was always life-threatening. I guess male dominance rests on the sheer power of men for the most part - men are on the average stronger and more aggressive than women, and do not hesitate to use this power. Women have been seen as being weaker not too long ago, and the responsibility of child-rearing rested almost exclusively on the womens shoulders. Now, in the end it is indeed up the the DM how he portrays these fantasy societies, but real-world behaviour is of course easily transported into fiction, and in most societies today, we still see a male dominance - or how many women do we see each day in politics, financial markets or at the helm of big companies or corporations?
Stefan
Its true its still largely male dominated, but thats becoming less true as time goes by, especially in more technologically advanced societies. We still have a LONG way to go to being truly equal and it may never truly happen. I think most of us when we play in RPGs try to create or mimic to a large extent the type of world we'd want to live in. (to a point at least, I for one wouldn't want to have to worry about a dragon attacking my town, or a horde of undead at the hands of an necromancer sending my dead relatives after me.... my ex girlfriend is bad enough!)
To each their own though. Racism, sexism, like it or not is part of life and its only natural it creeps into our R&R to a degree. How much is up to you.
To each their own though. Racism, sexism, like it or not is part of life and its only natural it creeps into our R&R to a degree. How much is up to you.
QFT. My point of view exactly, perhaps less aptly expressed.
Stefan
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a fantasy world, where there are *powerful* female dieties, and a woman is as likely to be a high priest, a sorceress, a warrior, etc. on par with a man, I would play down (if not entirely abandon) the real-world parallels.
The first macho aristocrat that tells a Paladin of Iomedae to get back to the kitchen is going to have his @$$ righteously smacked down (and the male Clerics and Paladins will have her back, being just as incensed). The first country bumpkin who hoots and hollars at the old crone on the hill (who happens to be an Adept of Lamashtu) is going to wake up the recipient of the most creative Bestow Curse she can think of (enjoy a nine-year long false pregnancy, bucko!).
Unlike real world medieval churches that had the option of putting up 'no girl priests allowed' signs on the door, few, if any, of the Golarion faiths forbid female clergy, and many prominent gods are female, including the primary diety in charge of chivalry and knighthood (very much male-associated bailiwicks in the really real-world) and the primary diety of the 'Persia analogue' of Golarion.
Similarly, the powers of a Sorcerer manifest as they will, in male or female, and this becomes a world where a big, strong (slightly inebriated and feeling entitled) man might lay his hand on an attractive woman, only to be set on fire and chased screaming through the town square by conjured hell hounds.
The commonness of female rulers (Kyonin, Korvosa, Taldor, Cheliax) also suggests that even secular society has followed suit to the sort of perceptual changes that would logically flow from growing up in a world where the equivalent of the Pope or Merlin the Magician is as likely to be a woman as a man and where entire races and nations predominantly follow female dieties (Qadirans with Sarenrae, Elves with Calistria, Gnolls, Goblins, etc. with Lamashtu, etc.).
If sexism exists in a fantasy setting with this sort of gender-equality at the higher levels, it's primarily because someone at the higher levels is allowing it, or the DM is specifically choosing to put it in at some level.
Golarion, like Greyhawk, the Realms, etc. is not medieval Europe. Comparisons to how things were done in the real-world only go so far, and don't really apply *at all* (IMO) to how things would develop in a world like Golarion. Thousands of years of tradition and 'original sin' based religious thought are *not* keeping the sisters down in Golarion...
|
|
Excellent points you bring out in the arguement. However you have to take each society on a case by case basis. What are the factors influencing the values as well. Is it political, economical, social? Why is one society male dominated and its neighbouring the exact opposite. In drow culture its explained that when the elves descended into the darklands the males were the highest casualties being thus creating a bigger female population and coupled with the low birthing rate of elves it allowed for female dominace. 'Original Sin' was an excuse used in history to subjugate the female, but the motives were more economically and socially driven. It kept property within the sphere of male influence.
True, everything is always more complex, but I was generalizing for effect. :)
The Drow in Golarion thing is interesting, because the 'traditional' D&D Drow have had a matriarchy kept in place by a very sexist goddess who didn't allow male clergy (of any significant level or social power, in some editions, or at all, in others). In Golarion, a completely *different* rationale for matriarchy (the loss of most males) had to be invented, as the Drow of Golarion worship a plethora of Demon Lords, most of whom are male, IIRC.
In some areas of Golarion, even the women in 'traditional' gender roles, such as the 'Keleshite Princesses' mentioned in the Qadira Companion, are *choosing* such roles for themselves, as a Keleshite woman is quite welcome to become a member of the clergy, a scimitar-wielding dervish or a genie-binding arcanist.
In other areas, such as the lands were Amiri comes from, there is ample hint of more sexist attitudes, explaining why Amiri, a strong-willed warrior-woman, has travelled so far from a home that was not terribly receptive to her kind. Their loss, obviously.
And there are areas were things remain unclear. It *sounds* like female arcanists and conjurers are as common (and respected) as male ones in Korvosa, and yet we don't see a lot of mention of female Hellknights, and the Queen of Korvosa only became ruler the old-fashioned way, when her husband died, suggesting male rule as a default assumption.
Now, in the end it is indeed up the the DM how he portrays these fantasy societies, but real-world behaviour is of course easily transported into fiction, and in most societies today, we still see a male dominance - or how many women do we see each day in politics, financial markets or at the helm of big companies or corporations?
Its true its still largely male dominated, but thats becoming less true as time goes by, especially in more technologically advanced societies. We still have a LONG way to go to being truly equal and it may never truly happen.
Men in the United States are in many respects falling behind, and have been for some time. It's well-known that education is very strongly correlated with wealth. Overall, educated people make more money than people with a high school education or less. Over a lifetime, significantly more. And there has been for some time now a big sex skew in our colleges and universities. I think American undergraduate populations are something like 55-45, which is a huge disparity, and I believe that the numbers in many graduate and professional schools are similar or even amplified (not surprising, considering that you have to finish college in order to go on, and excepting certain fields which are still extremely male, such as mechanical engineering).
Old article, but worth reading
http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2005-10-19-male-college-cover_x.htm
|
To the OP:
If you want to go beyond inferiority/superiority, you could get into whether adventurers fill gender-stereotypes. Are men more likely to be wizards and females sorcerers? Is a male Cleric of Iomedae treated like he has a submissive personality? How about a female Cleric of Zon-Kuthon?
All interesting questions you could integrate into the roleplay of your campaign world. After all, we are meant to use Golarion as our own world and make it interesting in the way we want.
|
|
To the OP:
If you want to go beyond inferiority/superiority, you could get into whether adventurers fill gender-stereotypes. Are men more likely to be wizards and females sorcerers? Is a male Cleric of Iomedae treated like he has a submissive personality? How about a female Cleric of Zon-Kuthon?
Good stuff. How does a male Cleric of Shelyn differ from a more traditional female one? Does the clergy of Gorum look down on female members? Does the clergy of Gozreh have a holy festival where they cross-dress, spending a day 'walking in the other's shoes' in honor of their two-sexed diety? Do certain Domains of a diety tend to be more or less associated with male or female clergy?
In the traditional 'elves / dwarves as dying race' views, I could see both elves and dwarves encouraging their womenfolk to stick to archery and spellcasting, and even putting them in leadership roles, as opposed to risking them on the front lines of melee combat, but that's more a Greyhawk / Realms trope than one appropriate to Golarion (where the elves, in particular, aren't 'going away,' as they just 'came back!').
In a fantasy world, where there are *powerful* female dieties, and a woman is as likely to be a high priest, a sorceress, a warrior, etc. on par with a man,
In a world where there is Calistria, a deity that's not only very, very female, but also very, very vengeful, you better not say stuff like "women are playthings that cook" too loudly - not if you're not immune to wasp stings.
Oh, and I have a special communique by Her Infernal Majesty: Everyone who thinks women are inferior are asked to meet with her and her chief pain technicians to discuss this point of view.
Of course, there is racism, sizeism, sexism, speciesism, homophobia, xenophobia, and whatever humans do to pass the time on Golarion. There's far worse stuff there, like brutal murder, rape, mutilation, anthropophagy, and a number of similar things.
Amiri, the iconic barbarian, rebelled against her culture's established gender roles, and ended up slaughtering several members of her tribe in a fit of rage over it (granted, they did try to get her killed so they had it coming - plus, they were several of them, and she was still a girl, so in their own eyes, they had it coming. Ironic, really).
Like Elaine Cunningham said on another post history is often written by the people in charge. Which in turn leads to varying degrees of truth and contradictory facts. Most historical accounts of the time was by and large written and recored by men. Thus a large bias is slanted towards women. We cant and shouldnt apply 21st century western cultural values throughout our history and judge by that criteria. The same should apply for the Golarion fantasy setting . Every society has their norms and values and for certain reasons whether environmental, political, social, economic there will be a certain degree of variation between the sexes.
This is quite true. While there was sexism in general during the medieval period, there were some notable exceptions.
The Viking and Saxon cultures showed a fair amout of equality, including having women warriors. In Viking society, women could own land and devorice.
There are numerous cases of women commanding armys on the battlefield.
Urraca, Queen of Aragon led her own troops (against her second husband).
Matilda, Countess of Tuscany (also known as Matilda of Canossa)apparently spent some thirty years at war in the service of Pope Gregory VIII and then Pope Urban against the German Emperor Henry IV.
So, while sexism existed, a number of women did rise above it to command respect from men. Most were nobles to begin with, but that varied by culture. The same goes with the common rights granted to others (such as land ownership).
|
|
From a practical gaming point of view, you want to talk this sort of thing over with your players as well. Sometimes players want to be the revolutionary fighting against an unfair system. And sometimes they want to immerse themselve in a world where real world issues aren't a big deal - they'd rather concentrate on killing monsters or rescuing the heir to the throne from the dragon or what have you.
Sometimes I don't mind getting guff for playing a female warrior - and sometimes it makes me want to leave the game, as I get enough crap for being a female engineer in the real world every day. If I know the lay of the land before I create a character, that's okay. I have some control over the situation - I can create a character accordingly, or leave the game if it's not to my taste. If I am informed after the fact that my character concept will lead to great social difficulties for my character throughout the game, I feel I have been taken advantage of and my good will in joining a game has been abused.
So you can talk about the game world and general social trends in the universe of Golarion, but please don't forget that the world exists as a backdrop for the DM and players to enjoy gaming together first and foremost.
You might also tell your player that few D&D worlds resemble medieval Europe. That people were in it, and that there were castles and some similar kinds of weapons, and that's about it.
Beyond gender roles (which were actually a little more varied than "men were always superior to women"), the medieval era had some very specific class and religious structures none of which are seen in typical high fantasy, not to mention magic in high fantasy raises the "tech level" and standard of living far beyond what was available in the medieval era.
And as someone noted, with magic being able to purify water (that's an at-will orison, castable by someone with minimal magic) and cure disease and the like, you're going to end up with a society with a much lower mother and child mortality ratio, and thus women will not completely be socially sequestered to play the role of wife and mother because, just as in our own society, it is not "necessary" any more.
"Ars Magica" and "Chivalry and Sorcery" have neat, medieval-based settings that are also fantasy. They are the only ones I have encountered.
Sadly, in my personal experience, the person saying "But I'm trying to be accurate by being sexist," usually is just looking to be a jackass and has little true respect for historical verisimilitude.
I love tossing out non-PC elements into my game.
When running RotRL Arden was smitten with the female bard. He consistently acted both protective of her and wanted to play the "man". "Watch me kill this boar for you my dear!"
It was particularly enjoyable after the goblin raid where the PC rescue him. The bard sang and tried to help with her cross bow missing every time. Foxglove came up and complimented her on the masterful archery.
Then the Sheriff asked most of the male warrior types to join the town watch but none of the females even though the female rogue and sorceress had some of the most impressive body counts of the fight.
This was not to belittle the females but rather to play up on the NPC's sexism. It would have been different if there was a female fighter but all the female characters chose "softer" professions. That made it much easier to enforce stereo types.
There are numerous cases of women commanding armys on the battlefield.
Urraca, Queen of Aragon led her own troops (against her second husband).Matilda, Countess of Tuscany (also known as Matilda of Canossa)apparently spent some thirty years at war in the service of Pope Gregory VIII and then Pope Urban against the German Emperor Henry IV.
Well, these are exceptions encountered only in the high nobility. Matilda of Tuscany is easily one of the most fascinating personages of that time. But she only ruled in her own right after her husbands died. The norm of the day were male nobles ruling, with females only in power either from behind the scenes or after male rulers died or otherwise were not able to rule themselves.
Stefan
In a fantasy world, where there are *powerful* female dieties, and a woman is as likely to be a high priest, a sorceress, a warrior, etc. on par with a man,In a world where there is Calistria, a deity that's not only very, very female, but also very, very vengeful, you better not say stuff like "women are playthings that cook" too loudly - not if you're not immune to wasp stings.
Of course if you had said that "Women are playthings." (and stopped there), Calistria wouldn't have a problem with you. ;D
Amiri, the iconic barbarian, rebelled against her culture's established gender roles, and ended up slaughtering several members of her tribe in a fit of rage over it (granted, they did try to get her killed so they had it coming - plus, they were several of them, and she was still a girl, so in their own eyes, they had it coming. Ironic, really).
Actually, not in their own eyes.
They believed that they were performing a sactioned "Honor Killing." (No, I am not trying to excuse what they were trying to do.)
There are numerous cases of women commanding armys on the battlefield.
Urraca, Queen of Aragon led her own troops (against her second husband).Matilda, Countess of Tuscany (also known as Matilda of Canossa)apparently spent some thirty years at war in the service of Pope Gregory VIII and then Pope Urban against the German Emperor Henry IV.
Well, these are exceptions encountered only in the high nobility. Matilda of Tuscany is easily one of the most fascinating personages of that time. But she only ruled in her own right after her husbands died. The norm of the day were male nobles ruling, with females only in power either from behind the scenes or after male rulers died or otherwise were not able to rule themselves.
Stefan
True. The point I was trying to make were that some women were able to overcome a measure of sexism. Were they considered equals by everyone? No, but they were not viewed in the same light as others. Of course this situation can backfire, such as the case of Joan of Arc.
Now, something else to consider in Golorian is that by and large the kingdoms have a large moble "middle class" population. You did not see that historically until close to the renaissance. While this may not directly affect sexism, it does point to Golorian not being a true European model.
Add in the existance of magic and you can start seeing a shift in dynamics.
I'm an old time RuneQuest player and in the old world of Genertela their was a degree of sexism but it was balanced. There were very powerful cults lorded over by female priests (kigor Litor, Ernalda, Babester Gor for example) and powerful male orientated cults (Orlanth, Humakt, Yelmalio).
I don't have a problem with this kind of "sexism" in that male members were treated as inferior in female cults, etc.
What I dont want to see is the kind of blatent sexism as found in the good awful Gor books.
Queen Elizabeth can be considered the greatest monarch Great Britain ever had. You will not look at the 16th century for equality of the sexes.
Having a powerful queen or goddess will not bring equality. You need a female sheriff who will thump heads of the drunks and foot pads. You need a female banker people need to go to for loans. You need mandatory conscription of women into the army.
If you have a sexism gap then breaching it will always be the "exception". The only way to erase a gap is to have both sexes represented in every job from Queen to rat catcher.
Personally I like the women and children first rule. My goblin raids always target the juicy ones first!
If Im not mistaken in Ancient Babylon the clergy of Astarte were crossdressers.
Well, it had to be said!
Gorum the war god intersting case. I would say more male dominated clergy and the females have subjugated there female sexuality alot to be part of the unit.
Well, until some girl knocks out some guy. Just knocks him out. Takes a big club and hits him. Gorum doesn't discriminate against anyone who can knock someone else out.
I think Cammy is a priestess of Gorum.
Urgathoa and Lamashtu seem to favor more females over males.
Well, Lamashtu is sexist. Until a guy can birth spawn from his genitals, he doesn't have a chance in her clergy. And honestly, if he can do that, and wants to do that, Zon-Kuthon has the stronger claim.
You might also tell your player that few D&D worlds resemble medieval Europe.
That's a given. Far too few elves and gnomes and actual wizards in medieval Europe, and far too many dwarves (everything with more dwarves than minus inifnity has too many dwarves - unless they're all horribly tortured).
And as someone noted, with magic being able to purify water (that's an at-will orison, castable by someone with minimal magic)
That can help if you do have someone with said minimal magic around. They're not everywhere.
and cure disease and the like, you're going to end up with a society with a much lower mother and child mortality ratio
While the water thing is cheap and available to acolytes, cure disease is not. Not everybody can afford a cleric powerful enough to cast that spell - and not every priest works pro bono.
women will not completely be socially sequestered to play the role of wife and mother because, just as in our own society, it is not "necessary" any more.
Necessary or not, it still works, it still is a great excuse to put them in the roles, they're still better at the whole rearing children thing (there's some things men cannot do as well, like breastfeed)
Actually, not in their own eyes.They believed that they were performing a sactioned "Honor Killing." (No, I am not trying to excuse what they were trying to do.)
Well, while your larger-than-life villain or Operative-from-Serenety know that they're being evil bastards and liking it, a lot of evil people don't think they're being evil. They still are. Intentions count for nothing.
Now, something else to consider in Golorian is that by and large the kingdoms have a large moble "middle class" population. You did not see that historically until close to the renaissance. While this may not directly affect sexism, it does point to Golorian not being a true European model.Add in the existance of magic and you can start seeing a shift in dynamics.
So, fantasy societies seem to be modeled after Renaissance-era societies rather than medieval. The technology seems to point in that direction as well - plate armor, greatswords, in some settings reliable guns (note that "guns" were in use as early as the 14th century in Europe - 1324, Metz. But the "pot de fer" would hardly qualify as a reliable gun IMO). The knowledge standards, the relative freedom of city dwellers, the big cities also seem to point to the Renaissance (or north Italian proto-Renaissance, in case of big city states) rather than the middle ages.
The classic wizard draws as much from the Renaissance or Baroque-era magician like John Dee or Faustus as from Merlin or Gandalf IMO. So, I guess pointing to the Middle Ages as a model for a fantasy RPG is not the whole truth. This of course influences the portrayal of the societies as well.
Stefan
So, fantasy societies seem to be modeled after Renaissance-era societies rather than medieval.
I would be willing to except that arguement.
So, fantasy societies seem to be modeled after Renaissance-era societies rather than medieval.I would be willing to except that arguement.
I would be willing to accept it also.
So, fantasy societies seem to be modeled after Renaissance-era societies rather than medieval.I would be willing to except that arguement.I would be willing to accept it also.
Unless what he meant what he said (in other words, he meant "except" as in "make an exception" rather than "accept," as in "show acception for"), and the question is then, what is he excepting the argument from?
The sentence was completely grammatically correct (you could diagram it and everything); it's just the spelling/meaning that is an issue.
So, fantasy societies seem to be modeled after Renaissance-era societies rather than medieval.I would be willing to except that arguement.I would be willing to accept it also.
Unless what he meant what he said (in other words, he meant "except" as in "make an exception" rather than "accept," as in "show acception for"), and the question is then, what is he excepting the argument from?
The sentence was completely grammatically correct (you could diagram it and everything); it's just the spelling/meaning that is an issue.
This is true. This sentence is correct in itself, but it makes no sense as written.
But if taken as an error, which I did (correctly or otherwise), then it is the wrong use of "except."
Well, while your larger-than-life villain or Operative-from-Serenety know that they're being evil bastards and liking it, a lot of evil people don't think they're being evil. They still are. Intentions count for nothing.
Actually, not in their own eyes.They believed that they were performing a sactioned "Honor Killing." (No, I am not trying to excuse what they were trying to do.)
I agree. However, what I was taking exception to was your original statement.
Amiri, the iconic barbarian, rebelled against her culture's established gender roles, and ended up slaughtering several members of her tribe in a fit of rage over it (granted, they did try to get her killed so they had it coming - plus, they were several of them, and she was still a girl, so in their own eyes, they had it coming. Ironic, really).
In this case, "intentions" do mean something. Because what I was commenting on was not the right- or wrongness of their actions, but on their perception of their actions.
Yes, I agree that they had it coming. What they were doing (attempted murder) was evil from an objective standpoint.
But, in their own eyes they were doing the right thing, so - they believed that - they would deserve no retribution.
You can't really compare Golarion to our own history especially europe...
Sexism is a global phenomenon.
There has been a lot of it in Europe - but in varying degrees depending upon time and geography.The same is true of most other parts of the world.
To make European gender bias through history synonimous with sexism is a grave mistake.
You can't really compare Golarion to our own history especially europe...Sexism is a global phenomenon.
There has been a lot of it in Europe - but in varying degrees depending upon time and geography.
The same is true of most other parts of the world.
To make European gender bias through history synonimous with sexism is a grave mistake.
Are you implying that all evils in the world are not the fault of white males?
That attitude defies every precept of Political Correctness. This is just not acceptable.
So, fantasy societies seem to be modeled after Renaissance-era societies rather than medieval.I would be willing to except that arguement.I would be willing to accept it also.
** spoiler omitted **
Yeah, it should have been "accept." It is hard to type while rushing to get ready for work.
I should have waited and replied from work (like I am doing now).
That attitude defies every precept of Political Correctness. This is just not acceptable.
No it isn't.
Thank you all for not acceptable to political correctness.|
|
You can't really compare Golarion to our own history especially europe...Sexism is a global phenomenon.
There has been a lot of it in Europe - but in varying degrees depending upon time and geography.
The same is true of most other parts of the world.
To make European gender bias through history synonimous with sexism is a grave mistake.
I never said it wasn't but then sexism was different in different cultures. The OP was talking only about europe in that time frame so that was what I was addressing.