|
But isn't NOT hitting back sexism?A point to bear in mind between men and women, IRL: A man attacking a woman can be considered to be using lethal force because (a) he has a heavier musculature and (b) she has a more fragile skeletal structure. In other words, he can hit a lot harder and she is easier to hurt on average; a third point is that due to the hip structure, men can on average run faster than women. This isn't a hard and fast rule, but a man attacked by a woman has a far better chance of shrugging it off, containing the assault (grabbing her hands or blocking blows) or escaping than the reverse without having to resort to retaliation. These are the physical facts of the case that would apply to any two persons involved in an affray of those relative strengths and weaknesses.
Umm I think this paints women as WAY more frail then they actually are. Yes woman can't punch as hard as a man...but the same hip structure that prevents them from running as fast lets them kick a hell of a lot harder then men can. They can do leg grapples that even the most burly UFC fighters will have issues getting out of. A women bent on distruction can do quite a bit of damage.
|
|
Well fair enough...you have to realize that the theory is about societal level of mores and agendas...and not so much an individual one. It says as a society, such action that are taught and enforced is backing up sexism. Not that an individual who holds the door is sexist. Makes sense?Makes perfect sense. Doesn't make it true, though. ;)
Hence why it's only a theory ;) .
|
I just want things to be realistic.
Depends on your players and the game you want to play. Take for example Kult - rape, torture and any sort of perversion you can think of are a valid theme for this game. If you and players are happy with everything it's completely fine. It's a make believe, imaginary game and as long as everyone is mature enough to see it as such there no limit to the level of heroism, or conversely, depravity that you can explore in the RPG context. Sexism, either way around, in a gaming context is not inherently going to reduce society back to before equality. BUT, if a player is offended by the actions taking place in game then that type of situational exploration does need to stop. Fun at the expense of someone else's discomfort isn't real fun.
2.23 cents (adjusted for inflation),
S.
Umm I think this paints women as WAY more frail then they actually are. Yes woman can't punch as hard as a man...but the same hip structure that prevents them from running as fast lets them kick a hell of a lot harder then men can. They can do leg grapples that even the most burly UFC fighters will have issues getting out of. A women bent on distruction can do quite a bit of damage.
IF they know how - I did make the point that training is a factor that can negate this. And I'm not exaggerating - your average fit young man has 50% of his mass as muscle, compared to 25% for a woman, while his bone structure is more robust and that extra muscle can actually shield him from damage. Now muscle power is actually proportional to muscle-cross-section rather than volume, so this does not make men twice as strong as women, but it does illustrate the differences.
Assuming unskilled ability and average build, a man attacked by a woman has three options that don't include hitting back:
1) Let them hit you - there's a good chance if they are unskilled that they won't be able to do much damage.
2) Try and restrain them from hurting you - you will in all likelihood be significantly stronger than them.
3) Run away - your narrower hip makes you faster.
The woman doesn't have any of these.
Now when I did martial arts I trained with quite a few girls that could tie me in knots or kick my ass - I am not unaware of the difference that training and fitness can make, but it also made me aware that there are a lot of options to just hitting back.
If you want over-realism, I suggest playing a female in F.A.T.A.L. You get to roll for vaginal depth.
** spoiler omitted **
I could have happily lived the entire rest of my life without knowing that. 'Realism' is not a word I would associate with that abomination that pretends to be an RPG.
On the OT topic of opening doors, etc.:
If you make a show of opening a door for me, even if it makes things awkward for various people going through the door, and/or imply I am incapable of opening a door for myself, then that's just annoying and embarrassing for both of us.
Perhaps a better example is the related issue of carrying heavy objects--the oldskool idea that men are supposed to carry things for women. This is something that has happened to me, several times in fact:
I am walking, carrying a large box. It possibly looks heavy. However, I've got it securely in my arms or up on my shoulder, and anyone watching me should be able to clearly see I've got the carrying-the-box-thing going on all by myself pretty well. I should note that I am a rather solid looking woman, not exactly the fragile type.
A man approaches, deciding to respond to my carrying the box. What may happen include two scenarios:
Scenario 1:
The man comes up to me and says, "That looks heavy. Would you like some help carrying that?"
I may accept his help--yes, I am getting tired and could use a rest, or no, I've got it and I feel it would be much easier either way if I just hold onto the box. Either way, I smile and thank him graciously for his courteous offer.
Scenario 2:
The man comes up to me and says, "That's too heavy for you. Let me carry that."
Upon which he proceeds to try to tear the heavy box out of my hands, unbalancing me while trying to take something from me he has no business taking. Only my Quaker upbringing and the possibility I might be in my work place keeps me from shoving the box into his face as hard as I possibly can. If I protest or keep the box away from the man trying to grab my personal property away from me without asking me first, I'm told that feminism has killed chivalry. Ha.
There are two important differences between Scenario 1 and Scenario 2:
1. 1 is entirely about courtesy and respect where as 2 is about invading a person's personal space and implying they are weak when there's no present evidence for that
2. 2 happens far more often in reality than 1.
Carrying heavy stuff isn't fun--nor is opening a door when your hands are full or it's not convenient for you to do so. Having someone offer to do either thing for you is lovely. Having someone make you feel like a useless piece of crap while doing so is being a jerk.
(And like opening doors, I also offer to carry heavy things--by asking, not telling.)
Generally, if you truly behave genuinely respectfully toward all people, few people are going to accuse you of any sort of bigotry. Sometimes there are overly sensitive people who will misinterpret what you do, and there's not much you can do about that except move on. It's always important, I feel, that if someone is offended by something you said or did, to really think about how you said or did it and understand what offended them. Even if you come away disagreeing with their judgment, it may make it easier next time to be sure someone doesn't understand your intentions, if they are well and truly good.
On the OT topic of opening doors, etc.:
** spoiler omitted **...
Don't judge too quickly.
Honestly, I may intend one, but, due to the fact that I was raised by a single parent who is blind and deaf, out of pure habit, I may not ask you first. It's not meant to be rude or disrespectful to you. Rather, it is from a whole lot of experience that taking the time to ask the other person has often caused more stress than it reduced.
I understand your experience might have shaped how you respond, but I'm sure first of all, you found a means to assist your parent without making them feel badly about themselves. And secondly, surely you have learned that you grew up in and learned to cope with an unusual situation, and that you have to strive in the outside world to communicate with different people with different needs in different ways. Respectful communication is important to establish goodwill between most people--whether the communication is verbal or not. If you walk up to me and grab an object out of my hand, your body language is hostility (and I would all the more for my own safety assume that if I could not see or hear you).
I'm sure you're also fully capable of judging whether someone is truly capable or not. There's a difference between someone carrying six large items trying to get a door open by themselves and someone who is walking at a jaunty pace clearly on their own path and not in need of intervention. Or between someone navigating with the use of a cane and someone who is looking ahead and clearly seeing where they are going, for example.
And if you ask me to be understanding of your personal situation, it is only fair that I ask you to be understanding of mine. Or anyone else's.
|
Frankly, we're all capable of well meant errors. Hence, the value of not rushing to judgement.
If you see someone carrying heavy baggage, just remember that the baggage that's a real problem is what you aren't seeing.
Having a retarded aunt and having worked with physically handicapped people, it's more the rule than the exception that unsolicited help will be seen as condescending and result in a hostile response, not gratitude. Sometimes pride is all you've got left.
I'm only asking for you not to rush to judgement or assumption.
I've only given my personal background as an example of there being more than one reason and, while I know that not everyone is the same as my parent, I'm also telling you that I'm perfectly capable of rushing to someone's assistance without first considering that fact.
It's an error, but it's a well meaning error. Frankly, we're all capable of well meant errors. Hence, the value of not rushing to judgement.
And I am asking you the same thing. That includes judgment calls you make about whether someone needs your "help" or not. And the judgment calls you make that you use to determine how you express, verbally or nonverbally, your desire to help.
See also what Set said.
I hope what I am saying you do not perceive as a personal attack. I am trying to get at the idea that we may be more on the same page than you realize. Whether I am expressing it well (knowing me, likely not) is another issue.
some of that upper body str is crap that was true some 50+ years ago, but yet as a guy, there are women in the world who could bench more than me.....
And me as well... but the world's strongest women do not have the upper body strength of the world's strongest men. That's what the others were (presumably) talking about.
Also, the world's strongest women do not have the physiques of bikini models. Am I sexist as a DM if I suggest that a female character with a (non-magically enhanced) Strength of 18 has extremely well-developed muscles and won't look like this month's Maxim cover girl? I wouldn't allow a male character with the same Strength to look like a 120 pound skinny guy either.
2) Try and restrain them from hurting you - you will in all likelihood be significantly stronger than them.
As a man, I would suggest being very careful of this method. The different physiologies of men and women mean that a man defending himself by grabbing the wrists of the woman attacking him, is very likely to leave worse looking marks on her arms than she left on his body. If she calls the cops, even though the man may correctly claim to be the one being attacked, he still might be the one charged with abuse. This is especially true when it comes to a married couple that is breaking up, divorce lawyers tell women to claim abuse even when there isn't any because the men are assumed guilty.
That the issue, the whole chivarly stuff of holding doors, giving up seats and what not IS sexism. Those nice thing are done because your view of women is not of an equal but something less that needs protecting.Interesting.
And all this time I thought I opened doors for women because I'm a nice guy and because women are the crown of creation deserving honor and respect.
+1
You and me, both! ; )- C.
2) Try and restrain them from hurting you - you will in all likelihood be significantly stronger than them.As a man, I would suggest being very careful of this method. The different physiologies of men and women mean that a man defending himself by grabbing the wrists of the woman attacking him, is very likely to leave worse looking marks on her arms than she left on his body. If she calls the cops, even though the man may correctly claim to be the one being attacked, he still might be the one charged with abuse. This is especially true when it comes to a married couple that is breaking up, divorce lawyers tell women to claim abuse even when there isn't any because the men are assumed guilty.
But then, that's still preferable to hitting her, and preferable to both is removing yourself from the situation. The same can be said of any situation where you are attacked and get the better of the attacker, really, and that is why the law states that you are entitled only to use the minimum force necessary that you think is required at that time.
As a police officer once advised me, "Worry about being alive to hear the jury's verdict, not about what it might be."
Ahem. I hold doors for others whenever it seems appropriate, regardless of who or what the "other" is. When I'm out with my buddies, I may step up to hold the door for them if I'm in the front of the group. But when I'm out on a date, I always step up to hold the door for the girl, with a smile, unless doing so would require me rushing past and knocking her over to do so. Guess what? She smiles back and knows I'm a nice, chivalrous guy. What's that lead to? Take a guess.
+1 regarding postmodernist BS.
As for chivalry, please read Chretien de Troyes and the associated biographical information before saying women in the middle ages didn't enjoy it, regardless of whether they do or don't now.
Also, the world's strongest women do not have the physiques of bikini models. Am I sexist as a DM if I suggest that a female character with a (non-magically enhanced) Strength of 18 has extremely well-developed muscles and won't look like this month's Maxim cover girl? I wouldn't allow a male character with the same Strength to look like a 120 pound skinny guy either.
I think this is a case of actual reality vs story/fantasy reality. For instance, The character of Eoywn was played by Miranda Otto in the Lord of the Rings Films. She is by most accounts a woman who appears to be relatively normal I believe in terms of her muscle definition. Yet the character she played possesed rather significant physical strength in battle (consider the strength required to make some of the parries she made or to cut through the skin of a mumak's legs, or severing the head of a nazgul in 2 swings of a sword.
I personally do not believe that in the case of fiction, a high strength requires any specific kind of physique. There are tons of examples in film, television, anime etc where characters that are fairly normal in appearance have consideraable strength.
For me I believe a player should be able to have their character however they wish. If they wish to be a maxim cover girl and have an 18 strength I'm fine with that. The character is just deceptively strong. Just like a character with a 8 charisma can be beautiful/handsome they just dont get along well with others.
|
Ok, about the opening doors and the whole "chivalry" business. I do my best to hold open doors for everyone I can, male, female, intersex, whatever. It's the polite thing to do. I also make sure that when I'm on a date, I hold open doors, pull out chairs, stand up at the right time, etc. etc. I don't find that to be a sexist act, and if someone other than my date says it is, I reject their assertion. I'm nice and considerate, because in the end, that improves my odds. I also like whoever I'm on a date with, and being nice is being nice. If I were to go on a date with a man, I would do the same. I think its pretty simple. If my date asks that I stop with my "chivalry", then I would. I dislike the view of being nice as "sexist". I'm a feminist myself, and if I want to treat someone I'm dating with respect, I find it confusing how that could be viewed as disrespectful. While the original source of "chivalry" may have been to protect "weak" women, I don't think that means that its modern use is entirely the same, especially not in my case. My partner may be my equal, but that doesn't mean I can't serve her now and then.
I don't reject the idea that some men may be attached to that old idea of chivalry and of protecting their partner, but I don't think it applies to all applications of manners.
I think this is a case of actual reality vs story/fantasy reality. For instance, The character of Eoywn was played by Miranda Otto in the Lord of the Rings Films. She is by most accounts a woman who appears to be relatively normal I believe in terms of her muscle definition. Yet the character she played possesed rather significant physical strength in battle (consider the strength required to make some of the parries she made or to cut through the skin of a mumak's legs, or severing the head of a nazgul in 2 swings of a sword.
Actually, Eowyn is a good example of a character in fantasy that faced sexual prejudice. She kept having to play second fiddle, in spite of her ability, and eventually disguised herself as a man in order to join in the fight, as women have done throughout the ages.
But the fact is that sometimes people will make well meant mistakes. To err is human. Don't rush to judgement because they made a mistake.I can understand the desire to avoid being judged, however if you make a mistake, you just have to own up to the mistake, apologize and try and not do the action again in life.
People can't read minds, and people need to make judgments to function in life, so the best thing to do is do your best and if someone gets upset reflect on why they got upset. Maybe they weren't justified or were just crazy, or maybe they were justified and it's time to own up to the mistake.
With Deathquaker's situation she can't sit their contemplating the life history of the dude who's grabbing something from her and saying something that sounds condescending. She's got like one second to quickly come to the judgment, "No! I don't like this! Stop it!" If the guy says, "Hey, no reason to get upset, I mean well!" She's still perfectly justified to say, "The way you're meaning well isn't appropriate, you need to work harder on your social skills."
Ultimately, we all make mistakes and we have to own up to those mistakes, not try and give excuses to avoid feeling judged.
Thanks.
|
|
Ahem. I hold doors for others whenever it seems appropriate, regardless of who or what the "other" is. When I'm out with my buddies, I may step up to hold the door for them if I'm in the front of the group. But when I'm out on a date, I always step up to hold the door for the girl, with a smile, unless doing so would require me rushing past and knocking her over to do so. Guess what? She smiles back and knows I'm a nice, chivalrous guy. What's that lead to? Take a guess.
+1 regarding postmodernist BS.
As for chivalry, please read Chretien de Troyes and the associated biographical information before saying women in the middle ages didn't enjoy it, regardless of whether they do or don't now.
+1 Being French, I have read some Chretien de Troyes, and other classical from the time. I had that in mind in my earlier posts.
Not necessarily an easy read due to barrier language coming up over time, but pretty enlightening. Also Chretien de Troyes was mostly endorced by the church at the time as a means of "Civilizing" the warrior-testosterone-filled-knights into something else than bloodthirsty killing machine/berserker. It was a real issue at the time.
Just sayin'
Also, "sexism is realism" is wrong. There's a reason it's an -ism.
So is realism!
So is realism!
Also, "sexism is realism" is wrong. There's a reason it's an -ism.
Which is why we play a FANTASY game!!!!
;-)
So is realism!
Also, "sexism is realism" is wrong. There's a reason it's an -ism.Which is why we play a FANTASY game!!!!
;-)
Game? o.O
Game? o.OSo is realism!
Also, "sexism is realism" is wrong. There's a reason it's an -ism.Which is why we play a FANTASY game!!!!
;-)
I'm sorry. I misspelled "lifestyle." ;-)
DUDE. We do not mention that game. Ever. Like ever. I mean ever. Did I mention ever?
WARNING. DO NOT GOOGLE THAT GAME. NOT FUN TIMES.
+1 ... not cool to drop the F-bomb.
|
|
Ahem. I hold doors for others whenever it seems appropriate, regardless of who or what the "other" is. When I'm out with my buddies, I may step up to hold the door for them if I'm in the front of the group. But when I'm out on a date, I always step up to hold the door for the girl, with a smile, unless doing so would require me rushing past and knocking her over to do so. Guess what? She smiles back and knows I'm a nice, chivalrous guy. What's that lead to? Take a guess.
+1 regarding postmodernist BS.
As for chivalry, please read Chretien de Troyes and the associated biographical information before saying women in the middle ages didn't enjoy it, regardless of whether they do or don't now.
+1 Being French, I have read some Chretien de Troyes, and other classical from the time. I had that in mind in my earlier posts.
Not necessarily an easy read due to barrier language coming up over time, but pretty enlightening. Also Chretien de Troyes was mostly endorced by the church at the time as a means of "Civilizing" the warrior-testosterone-filled-knights into something else than bloodthirsty killing machine/berserker. It was a real issue at the time.
Just sayin'
Which according to all the historical texts I have read utterly failed...and except as a religious text, mostly irrelivant.