>Somehow, supporting a woman's right to suffer does not inspire my feminist
>spirit as much as
>seeking to even the playing field does. IMO, even one female character
dying in
>childbirth is too
>many. I doubt the player of that character would appreciate the gritty reality
>of the situation. It would
>feel arbitrary and unfair. How it could be otherwise? It's arbitrary and
unfair
>in the real World. I don't
>see the need for it in a fantasy world.
If you leave out everything that's arbitrary and unfair in the real world, you leave out most of what's interesting to roleplay. Why bother to specify what sex you're playing at all if you're not going to play out the differences bewteen the sexes? I don't think that women should be heavily burdened with "wimmin's trubbles", but I certainly think that female characters should act differently from male characters. These differences are rooted in the biological differences between men and women, yet have implications far beyond them.
It would also be a mistake to go too far in the other direction by incapacitating female PCs with menstrual cramps, but I could envision a few situations where a menstruating female would give the GM a few scenario ideas (e.g., swimming through shark-infested waters, unless some killjoy tells me that sharks don't go for menstrual fluid...).
Guy Hoyle (guyhoyle_at_chrysalis.org)
If you haven't visited http://www.chrysalis.org/guyhoyle/ since Sept. 13, 1996, then you won't know how I've changed it. Watch out for pop quizzes!
End of Glorantha Digest V3 #197
WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html
Powered by hypermail