> Tats, runes, hairstyles, bands of dye etc. are associated with lots of
> deities and I believe there may be additional details in ST. I believe
> concern with dress and appearance is shared equally between
> men and women in
> heortling society. Its a status culture - like the ancient
> Irish. Is it
> possible some humakti don't wear black? :)
I am not sure you are reading what I am writing. I am perfectly familiar with the way cults and other interest groups, especially those with a martial or confrontational nature, develop reinforcing identity symbols, chants, secret ceremonies and the like. What I am saying is: how come when MEN do these things, they get to wear woad etc etc, and yet when women do it they get to do things that reinforce gender stereotypes. It is not the fact that the cult has hallmarks which I am objecting to at all.
> Secondary stature according to whom? All the cults have
> different value
> systems and emphases. Vingans do what they do best, for
Yes. Which is why it is so strange that Vinga's influcences are so terribly stereotyped.
> Could it be just possible that the men in the shield war and
> war band also
> care about their kin being murdered, their steads being
> burned and laid
> waste, their children being taken into slavery or worse?
One would have thought so. So why is this only addressed when discussing FEMALE warriors?
Powered by hypermail