|
Making woman completely equal to men make it seems like woman don´t exist or are men with breasts. You don´t have to make woman slaves either, a bit of social custom is enough, like if is expected for women to excel at magic and men at war. Warrior Women are considered wanting to proof something and spellcaster men power hungry. Both fight against stereotypes, but at least put some conflict that make female characters feel different from male characters. You can even have reversed gender roles in other races, like elfs could have reversed expectations, orc expects both to be warriors and gnome expect both to be spellcasters.
Of course this is only in the game setting, i am not willing to kill anyone in real life and my characters could kill in could blood.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hm, i partially solved the problem of fantastic racism, by not having entire cultures be racist, but individuals.
Also, I have a culture in my setting (10 years and running), who is really into slavery. They use slaves for everything.
And of course two new players start railing on me with stuff like "slavery is wrong" "how can you condone this" "what is wrong with you", just to be shut up by the other players.
Then I have them stay at a house of a rich landowner, who owns slaves, lots of them, but is also an incredibly decent person, treats them very well, loves his children and wife and donates to churches so that they can cloth and feed the poor.
His culture holds it completely natural to own slaves. He was brought up this way. But he is not a monster.
Many facets to a person. Just saying.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Making woman completely equal to men make it seems like woman don´t exist or are men with breasts.
That's absurd.
"Makes it seem like woman[sic] don't exist" implies that you literally cannot imagine a woman who is the equal of a man. Your statement says that men are normal, and any woman who's their equal is just "a man with breasts" -- that equality means she's not really a woman.
Actually, they're two equal human beings who happen to have different chromosomes. "Human" (or, in Golarion, "humanoid") is the default for PCs and NPCs, not "male human(oid)." And the default in Golarion is for both male and female (and for that matter, androgynous and intersex) people to be able to be whatever they want, whether that's a wizard or a fighter or a ruler or a farmer, without people thinking it's weird or improper because of their gender.
Please don't bring that sort of attitude here.
"Makes it seem like woman[sic] don't exist" implies that you literally cannot imagine a woman who is the equal of a man. Your statement says that men are normal, and any woman who's their equal is just "a man with breasts" -- that equality means she's not really a woman.
I didn't take it that way. You're thinking of equality in terms of competence. I assumed Draco Bahamut was talking about actions, attitudes, mindset, the way they communicate, etc.
If I roll up a male paladin and a female paladin, and the only difference in their back story is one is male and the other is female, then that's a pretty bland character.
With a little fear of get banned I would say that women are not equal to men.
Not even men are equal to other men, people are diferent for each other.
Differences have to be taken into account always.
Those differences have to do with individual variation, not gender.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I roll up a male paladin and a female paladin, and the only difference in their back story is one is male and the other is female, then that's a pretty bland character.
I disagree. The character can have an equally rich and interesting backstory and interesting concept with no need to change the events they experienced, the people they know, the circumstances they've lived through depending on which gender you pick at the end. There's absolutely no reason why those contents of their history would need to be based specifically on their gender.
Gender is among the last of the things I decide when creating a character, and is usually based on "This looks like a cool picture to use for my character's token". By then I almost always have the backstory dreamed up and mechanics complete.
"Makes it seem like woman[sic] don't exist" implies that you literally cannot imagine a woman who is the equal of a man. Your statement says that men are normal, and any woman who's their equal is just "a man with breasts" -- that equality means she's not really a woman.I didn't take it that way. You're thinking of equality in terms of competence. I assumed Draco Bahamut was talking about actions, attitudes, mindset, the way they communicate, etc.
If I roll up a male paladin and a female paladin, and the only difference in their back story is one is male and the other is female, then that's a pretty bland character.
Those are differences that have nothing to do with equality.
Those are differences that have nothing to do with equality.
You're using a specific definition of equality versus the more general "the same" meaning. I'll let Draco Bahamut speak for him/her self, but if you read the entire post in context, it seems pretty clear that you could replace "equal to" with "the same as" in the post and it would read the same.
The question I would have for DB is why? Why is it a necessity to have some kind of gender roles established in the game/culture/setting? Why is there a need to have some sort of clear difference - mechanical, cultural, or otherwise - between genders? What's the point? What's to gain from it?
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is there a need to have some sort of clear difference - mechanical, cultural, or otherwise - between genders? What's the point? What's to gain from it?
A more immersive setting, I imagine. It would be just as weird to have every culture treat men and women the same as to have every culture treat them differently. It's more congruent to most peoples sensibilities that some cultures see no distinction socially between the genders and some expect one or the other gender to behave a certain way.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Meh. I disagree, but I also have no interest in pursuing social equality competitions in my games. Nothing to gain from it.
I'm 100% okay with gender inequality not being a thing at all in my own setting, because the power of the fireball that's about to slam into your face makes the contents of the sorcerer's pants fairly irrelevant.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Those are differences that have nothing to do with equality.You're using a specific definition of equality versus the more general "the same" meaning. I'll let Draco Bahamut speak for him/her self, but if you read the entire post in context, it seems pretty clear that you could replace "equal to" with "the same as" in the post and it would read the same.
No, I'm not. Equal != identical. There's a reason we have different words for those two concepts.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a hard time not including "modern values" in my game.
Of course, I have a hard time not including neon lights, video game arcades, Galtan gulags, etc., etc. in my games.
Someway, somehow, nobody's complained about lack of immersion. Not yet, anyway.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think some modern values are universal. I'm pretty sure the peasants were well aware they were being put upon and that society wasn't fair, we just don't get their perspective because their grumbling wasn't written down.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, I'm not. Equal != identical. There's a reason we have different words for those two concepts.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by (ignorance)"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Due to events in another thread, I stumbled across a wikipedia page that promises to provide hours of interesting reading.
(I met a kid named Wat Tyler once. He said his parents were sixties radicals and I was only the third person he'd ever met who'd ever heard of him.)
Musical Interludes!!!
I don't know this song, Comrade Jeff.
If you could find it for me, I'll trade you one about the Diggers and a Red Army choir tune about, and I quote, "a popular brigand who dallied with a captured Persian princess."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gender and sex expectations in a game are not in-and-of-themselves a problem. We have them in real life, after all, and they are not entirely untrue. I think the problem arises when:
A) They are more extensive than actual life.
B) They are "enforced", which leads to limiting PC choices.
To explain what I mean, here's something I think is totally okay:
Being a druid is considered feminine. When you mention a druid, people assume they're female unless you say otherwise (not unlike a nurse or a dancer these days). A male druid may get teased a little by his friends, or get a little ribbing from new NPCs he encounters, but when the chips are down, no one doubts that he can do what he does well.
Now, what I think is absolutely NOT okay:
Women in combat are either clerics or sorcerers. The GM doesn't allow female PCs to be fighters or paladins, and if they do, the PC gets constantly derided by every NPC they encounter, and the GM actively makes it difficult for them to play their character simply because "that's the way the world is".
—
No GM has to make their fantasy world any one way. If you have them in your games, you are choosing to place these limits on your players because you want to and for no other reason.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I should make an effort to have my NPC peasants afflicted by salt taxes and the corvee in the future.
Of course, my new campaign is set in Cheliax, so that shouldn't be too difficult.
Thank you, Comrade Jeff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gender and sex expectations in a game are not in-and-of-themselves a problem. We have them in real life, after all, and they are not entirely untrue. I think the problem arises when:
A) They are more extensive than actual life.
B) They are "enforced", which leads to limiting PC choices.To explain what I mean, here's something I think is totally okay:
Being a druid is considered feminine. When you mention a druid, people assume they're female unless you say otherwise (not unlike a nurse or a dancer these days). A male druid may get teased a little by his friends, or get a little ribbing from new NPCs he encounters, but when the chips are down, no one doubts that he can do what he does well.
Now, what I think is absolutely NOT okay:
Women in combat are either clerics or sorcerers. The GM doesn't allow female PCs to be fighters or paladins, and if they do, the PC gets constantly derided by every NPC they encounter, and the GM actively makes it difficult for them to play their character simply because "that's the way the world is".
—
No GM has to make their fantasy world any one way. If you have them in your games, you are choosing to place these limits on your players because you want to and for no other reason.
Huh. I can say I've never had that expectation of druids.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest, there is some evidence that most modern perceptions of medieval Europe are probably entirely wrong.
It is known that female knightly orders existed, and actually saw combat. The title for a female night is "Dame." Now you know where a certain piece of old-timey slang came from.
That, combined with the sheer anachronisms (guns predate full plate by quite a bit and rocket launchers are actually the first gunpowder weapons, for example), pretty much show that most fantasy is not even remotely based on history. So, why bother with trying to have a historical viewpoint?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
[Reads from list of Peasant Revolts]
"Wat Tyler...Basil the Copper Hand...Jack Cade...Poor Conrad...Ivan Bolotnikov"
Man, revolutionary peasants had cool names.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by (ignorance)"
This, I think, bears repeating.
Also worthy of mention, someone who is, in fact, ignorant, is not worthy of scorn.
When I first began running into the LBGT community, there were many, many folk who treated me very harshly for simply not knowing, and when I explained that I really didn't understand, more derision and vitriol were heaped upon me.
"Can't you use Google?"
"Why don't you just go back to your white male privileged Christian clique so you can continue to bury your head in the sand?"
"So you're saying you're stupid, too?"
... and more rhetorical questions of similar ilk were often launched at me, and it was extremely difficult to even know where to begin.
As someone with minor learning difficulties (severe ADD and Dyslexia in my case) in subjects I've not trained myself to learn, I flounder very hard in even beginning to find methods of finding a start to self-education. I have to physically fight my own strong avoidance behavior, forgetfulness, and outright inability to read when not interacting with others.
And when the only response you receive for the longest time from groups self-identifying in that manner is hatred, you don't really see much value in that community.
What it creates is a self-perpetuating cycle. This has been true of many members of the LGBT community as well: being the focus of scorn and derision has made them (comprehensibly) see little value those who self-identify as different from them.
But, one way or the other, outright fury at someone's mistake, even if it looks bad, isn't really the best response.
(By the way: I'm not just talking to LBGT members, here - this applies to everyone, including myself.)
Ignorance isn't always something chosen - sometimes it is, but sometimes not. Patience, a willingness to dialogue, and to explain, "That... sounds really offensive when you put it that way, do you really mean it?" first (plus some constructive criticism) can go a long way.
To be clear: I know full well that the LGBT community is not all hatred and vitriol. One of the people I'm most fond of hanging out with online is part of said community, is a very open and honest person, and is generally the kind of guy you just plain love to be around. He's (one of the many) people that helped me. My workplace at Barnes and Noble in Miami helped me (and man do I regret some of the things I said there - not from malice, because I didn't hate anyone for anything, but ignorance and naivete can be embarrassing, later). These forums help me.
These are people and places that take a look at the walls that've been erected for various reasons, kicked those hatreds and separations to the curb, and proceeded with, "Glad you're here, pull up a chair, friend!" to various sides of the fence.
This is the kind of thing everyone needs to do. And be aware that you're ignorant of something, of someone, somehow. And that's cool, too.
Because when you don't know something, you can learn something.
And when you do learn, you don't have to agree with someone, and that's okay, too. You can disagree, but want all the best for them in life. Weird*.
Generally treating anyone, even if they're annoying or offensive, as being basically a decent person is really important. That doesn't mean you don't tell them that they seem to be annoying or offensive, it just means that, deep down, they're probably not as awful as they seem right now.
'Course, there are always exceptions. 'Cause, people, amirite?
To weigh in on D-B's post: I read his post and I both agreed with it, but felt that something was very off about his wording. I think I new what he meant (or at least what I knew how I was taking his words), but at the same time, there was just something uncomfortable and "not right" at the same time, and I think it's just that some of the language is potentially offensive, even if he doesn't mean it to be. If he does... well, that's his choice, I guess.
Disagreements just are.
ANYway. Peace out. Now back to lurking.
* Hopefully Non-offensive Example: there's a proctologist who moved into a space near the front of our Subdivision a few years back. I hated his sign - way too bright and eye-searing, the colors looked terrible, and generally the entire thing made the area unpleasant, ugly, and depressing during the day, and nearly blinding at night while driving. I hated the place, and really wished they would change the whole thing. Also, a proctologist telling you to get your rear-end checked out and warning you of cancer isn't necessarily the best way to drive up property values. A while back I was walking by and noticed the parking lot was chained closed, and the sign was off, and the first thought was, "Oh, man, I hope the place hasn't closed!" Not because I liked the place, their obnoxious advertising, or gaudy imagery, but because they were people and they needed those jobs to live and have good lives... and ultimately, I wanted them to have a good life more than I wanted to not look at their terrible sense of style. Fortunately, they weren't closed. Still looks ugly, though at least now they've lowered the brightness at night.
Druid to me is more grizzly adams than grano1a girl.
Probably because I play most of the druids around here...
[Strikes a pose]
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest, there is some evidence that most modern perceptions of medieval Europe are probably entirely wrong.
It is known that female knightly orders existed, and actually saw combat. The title for a female night is "Dame." Now you know where a certain piece of old-timey slang came from.
Well sorta of at least. They existed but were still sort of rare, and some of the females knights seemed to have served mostly as medics or the knighthood existed as sort of a badge of prestige rather than a sign of combat capability. but yeah, female noblewomen at times did take up the sword to protect what was theirs.
Wow. Gender essentialism (along with conflating sex and gender). That's original.
Good job, thread.
Those differences have to do with individual variation, not gender.With a little fear of get banned I would say that women are not equal to men.
Not even men are equal to other men, people are diferent for each other.
Differences have to be taken into account always.
I am not an expert in the chemist and biology of the brain, but to my knowledge the diference of the amount of testosterone in the pregnacy make the male diferent brain from the female one. Women and men also have to endure diferent thing in puberty and the biological clock can be a really big factor in women behaviour. So, I would say that both gender are diferent, in the vas majority of cases at least.
Afther all the fights women have done for their right I suppose there is fear cause maybe diferent can be misinterpreted like inferior.
Like homosexual and heterosexual. DIferent is good, homogeneity is boring.
I suppose The interpretation of "different! play a major role in our disagreement.
I think there are differences in the brain chemistry of women from men, but I guess the relevant point here would be whether those differences manifest in any meaningful way that would influence how woman are treated in a RPG. I would say: no...at least no differences which could have a meaningful effect on class options or stat arrays.
(Exception being sexually dimorphic species like Lashunta of course)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. Gender essentialism
I am not familiar with this term. Define it please?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Property rights is one of those values I often see misrepresented in Fantasy settings that interests me greatly. It doesn't get as much attention as gender equality and slavery because those are fairly hot topics, but almost every medieval rpg I have played in is supposedly a feudal society but with modern/western values when it comes to property and ownership.
Most people are interested in gaming, not sitting through a history lecture. The fewer points of divergence & the less that has to be explained, the easier it is to hop into the game.
E.g. it's easier for me to explain Knights of the Old Republic ("It's Star Wars, but set a long time before the movies") than it is for me to explain Dune ("Well, see, they use humans for everything that computers would be used for in most other Sci Fi...") than it is for me to explain Skyrealms of Jorune ("...")
Those differences have to do with individual variation, not gender.With a little fear of get banned I would say that women are not equal to men.
Not even men are equal to other men, people are diferent for each other.
Differences have to be taken into account always.
I am not an expert in the chemist and biology of the brain, but to my knowledge the diference of the amount of testosterone in the pregnacy make the male diferent brain from the female one. Women and men also have to endure diferent thing in puberty and the biological clock can be a really big factor in women behaviour. So, I would say that both gender are diferent, in the vas majority of cases at least.
Afther all the fights women have done for their right I suppose there is fear cause maybe diferent can be misinterpreted like inferior.
Like homosexual and heterosexual. DIferent is good, homogeneity is boring.
I suppose The interpretation of "different! play a major role in our disagreement.
So you say they're different without concretely explaining why you think they are different or in what way. They just different and it's because.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. Gender essentialismI am not familiar with this term. Define it please?
It means people being certain ways based on what gender they are. Historically, this has some precedence, but in all cases that has been because of societal standards for what gender roles are. In some cases, such as the Amazons, this could be the reverse of what people think traditional gender roles are.
Note that gender essentialism did not preclude women fighting; Norse women, for example, had the duty of protecting their homes while the men were off at war and had shield-maidens who were trained in combat for specifically this purpose.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I guess I just get suspicious when people start talking about "modern values."
It's Doodlebug's fault for the first link, but I've been listening to Fairport Convention on Youtube, and somewhere towards the end of Liege and Lief, "Tam Lin" came on. There's one D&D style story featuring a female protagonist which was most definitely written way before modern values were an issue. Ditto Cupid and Psyche (seriously, that one's greco-roman, its sell by date expired millennia ago), Isis and Osiris (Egyptian, and in this day and age you need a doctoral degree just to understand the symbolic language) and even Rumpelstiltskin (that one's a fairy tale, so maybe more recent, but, oral tradition, maybe not).
My point? I feel like the people who are trying impose gender roles on adventurers are bringing "modern values" to fantasy games, in a bad way.
Sarcasmanser, did you just mention Skyrealms of Jorune? You're on the the list! (No, it's cool, it's a list you want to be on.)
Edit for clarification: Doodles actually linked the song I mentioned in the Halfling Paladin Slavery thread, but I have had some wine tonight and am easily confused at the best of times.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sarcasmanser, did you just mention Skyrealms of Jorune? You're on the the list! (No, it's cool, it's a list you want to be on.
Thanks I'm just glad to be on a list that isn't "people who need to be involuntarily committed"
Sarcasmanser, did you just mention Skyrealms of Jorune? You're on the the list! (No, it's cool, it's a list you want to be on.Thanks I'm just glad to be on a list that isn't "people who need to be involuntarily committed"
I'm probably on that the involuntarily committed list.
Being a druid is considered feminine. When you mention a druid, people assume they're female unless you say otherwiseHuh. I can say I've never had that expectation of druids.
What I have learned of real world druids and shamans (the authentic ones, not neopagans), it is believed that they get their power by marrying a nature spirit and they have to dress like transvestites when they handle the forces.
Makes sense to think, why wizards too use long dresses.
Being a druid is considered feminine. When you mention a druid, people assume they're female unless you say otherwiseHuh. I can say I've never had that expectation of druids.What I have learned of real world druids and shamans (the authentic ones, not neopagans), it is believed that they get their power by marrying a nature spirit and they have to dress like transvestites when they handle the forces.
Makes sense to think, why wizards too use long dresses.
I think whoever told you that was using more ergot than the druids...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The reason we read literature or watch movies is usually so that we can relate in some way to the characters, which means there has to be enough similarities in the way that they live/feel as we do. Whether set in the far past or far future, the characters must be human. That doesn't mean they have to be idealistic representations of ourselves, sometimes dark/gritty is cool, too, but most of the time we're interested in stories that mirror our own in some way, hence "modern values" tend to show up.
Tabletop games are even more immersive, by definition, as we're not only observing characters' behavior, but living them. As we act out our characters, their decisions will ultimately be colored by our own morality/values, unless we're making an active effort not to. Even then, it takes a lot of effort to roleplay a set of values much different from our own, as we tend to find it unrelatable.