Re: What's a Keyword? Gender Issues

From: donald_at_...
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 23:52:49 GMT


In message <20070116171238.18169.qmail_at_...> Jane Williams writes:
>--- donald_at_... wrote:
>> So Tarshite culture is so different from Sartarite
>> that women learn a specialist fighter's weapon as
>> opposed to none at all? Personally I think Tarshite
>> men learn spear & shield combat more often than axe
>> & shield.
>
>I don't know enough about Tarshites to say, but if the
>weapon mentioned in the *homeland* keyword is axe,
>then presumably that's the standard weapon, not the
>specialist one. If it isn't, then for "axe", read
>"spear".

I suspect the homeland keyword is reflecting a distinctive weapon rather than a typical one. If you look at the list of units in Tarsh in Flames far more infantry have spears than axes. Although there seem to be a lot of units with both sword and axe and the Kingslayers have two-handed axes, swords, axes and spears!

>> The axe is the Tarshite warrior's weapon just as the
>> sword is for Sartarites.
>
>Well, if you discount the idea that Vingans get
>*spear* magic specifically. I've never understood why,
>myself, just assumed that in that case Sartarite
>fighting style must in some way make a spear just as
>useful a weapon as a sword for a full-time warrior. Or
>ignored the whole "Vingans specialise in spears"
>invention, since they never used to, and there's no
>reason given.

How about that the male warriors hogged all the swords. So Vinga was left with a spear and proved that she could fight just as well with the "inferior" weapon. A sword is a relatively expensive item to make and a lot of the fyrd won't have one so it's seen as a warriors' weapon. An established Vingan will have a sword but there's probably still some reluctance to let a girl have one.

>> I'd agree that upper class DH women are very unlikely
>> to even learn how to use a dagger but in the rougher
>> parts of the cities I'm sure many woman learn to use
>> a knife or dagger for self defence.
>
>I agree that that would be the sensible thing to do,
>but we're talking about Darra Happans :(

I don't see the DH's as stupid - hidebound, prejudiced and overly status conscious but no more stupid than any other culture. There's probably a pretence that women don't fight "Yes officer, that's my eating knife. No, I don't know how it got his blood on it".

>Unless the "proper combat skill" is something like
>formal rapier duelling, and the fight is in fact a
>brawl :)

True.

>> I don't think this approach is useful in dealing with
>> gender keywords. A steadwife could easily be stronger
>> than a male sage and I'm sure Heortling women boast
>> - just about different things. I'd restrict the gender
>> keyword to physical absolutes.
>
>Men being (on average) stronger (and taller) than
>women is pretty much a physical absolute, isn't it?

On average isn't an absolute. And the range of strengths would make more sense to relate it to occupation than gender. A farmer will generally be stronger than a steadwife who will generally be stronger than a sage.

>> As far a cultural
>> differences go even for DH culture a single homeland
>> keyword with the differences spelt out, as the
>> Heortling one does, should be sufficent.
>
>Well, much of what I'm suggesting is that except in
>extreme cases like Dara Happa, the homeland keyword
>should *not* have gender differences.

So the existing Heortling difference of men having "Spear & Shield Combat" while women having "Spinning and Weaving" should be dropped? I'd rather go the other way and include a few gender variations in all keywords. There are few if any societies which have achieved total gender equality.

>Though in that case I start to wonder where to put
>"boastful", "coldhearted", and other
>Heortling-specific gender differences. Hmm. This is
>always going to be harder and more complicated than it
>looks :(

I'm sure there are coldhearted men in Sartar. It may be seen as feminine but that's why personality traits need to be optional. If a player wants a coldhearted man it needs to go in the writeup.

>Yes. Very good point. And I think having the homeland
>lower than the profession is often sensible, too:
>well, vary the proportion depending on the character's
>experience, perhaps.

The more experienced the character the more the difference grows. You get better at the skills you use not the ones you don't. Indeed neglect a skill and it tends to fade away - think of all the stuff you did at school that you can't even remember now.

-- 
Donald Oddy
http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/

Powered by hypermail