Gromnir

Hey, don't make me come over there and give you some freedom. I'm not the one having religious lunatics dictate the political agenda. truth-to-tell, having the religious lunatics dictate the political agenda has worked out very well for us in the past. wisconsin v. yoder were a case in which the amish didn't want their kids to be forced into public education for X years. how can you find against the amish? they is so darn cute. christian scientists, jehovah's witness and faith healing groups has given us a better idea o' the limits o' parental decision making regarding life-saving health measures wherein such measures conflict with s'posed religious obligations. the iskcon (international society o' krishna consciousness) has been at the forefront o' any number o' free speech and free exercise o' religion cases. can hari krishnas loiter in airports to be handing out their pamphlets and collecting money? can they be confined to certain limited locations at a state fair (back by the port-o' johns) if they wish to proselytize and beg? etc. pentecostals, santerians, scientoligists and moonies... theses is the folks that has been the at the front-line o' religious rights battles while the rest o' us sit back and watch with a kinda bemused curiosity. are we really having a 'case 'bout ritualistic slaughter o' chickens in urban neighborhoods? yes, yes we are. yeah, it sounds crazy, but is the folks on the fringe who is always testing the limits o' free speech and religion. nazis in skokie and crips in oakland and koran burning kooks in gainsville. let the nutters test the limits o' freedom is not such a bad way to go. mormons, jews and catholics has suffered persecution and bigotry here in the US from time-to-time and to various degrees o' infamy. word,"muslim" is emotionally charged. have muslims relegated to "religious lunatic" category has not been beyond the realm o' possibility in recent years. regardless, even if hasidic jews and greek orthodox were to suddenly be dismissed as nutters, they would still be getting full First Amendment protection, and that is in part 'cause the serious freaks has been fighting for our freedoms for a very long time. "(Alternately, it could be argued that, for certain folks on the Court, consistent legal reasoning takes a backseat to the "will this make dirty hippies happy or sad?" test.)" rehnquist drove us a little nuts. is many members o' the Court that like to pretend that nobody in the brotherhood is a political animal, but we got a hard time believing such notions. HA! Good Fun!

Peyote does strange things to jurists. yeah, am wondering if Scalia wrote the decision for oregon v. smith while in a peyote filled sweat tent/lodge. that being said, we will be reading hobby very close 'cause after our first few readings, it looks... childish. you got ginsburg claiming that the decision will open the gates o' hell and set lose the dogs o' war on the rights o' women and minorities. alito responds by saying that she is wrong. is very little we can find that gives scope to the decision. http://www.thereason4hope.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/nuh-uh-vs-yes-huh.jpg is actual good for business, but... *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

aside oregon v. smith is a much misunderstood case. the subsequent religious freedom restoration act and its amendments is even more troublesome as is unconstitutional in application to States, and has questionable validity regarding the Fed. is best to think o' oregon v. smith as akin to the free speech case o' united states v. o'brien, 391 U.S. 367... got a cf cite as a matter o' fact. scalia's "hybrid" rationale were puzzling however. regardless, the standard o' review for free exercise since at least 1972 is strict scrutiny. the Court in oregon v. smith were claiming that it weren't actual a true free exercise issue. Scalia rare engages in such fuzzy legal reasoning. were almost a unique decision for him. HA! Good Fun!

"So come 1993, if you have a compelling reason which meets strict scrutiny you can get an exemption to the law for religious reasons." 1993? this been the standard o' judicial review in free exercise cases for a long time... much further back than 1993. lawyers and legal scholars joke, "strict in name, but fatal in practice." with strict scrutiny, Government has burden o' showing that the state action is designed to achieve a compelling government interest by narrowly tailored means and must be using the least restrictive means to achieve the govt's interest. money & cost is never a compelling government interest-- think on that for a second. there is some noteworthy cases wherein government wins when they got strict scrutiny to overcome, but they is few and far between... and is very controversial. the famous japanese internment case were one wherein the government utilized strict scrutiny to uphold government action. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/personality/landmark_korematsu.html rational basis (government wins) and heightened or intermediate scrutiny (black jack odds) is your other options for judicial review o' constitutional questions. nobody knows when or why the Court will create a new category o' heightened scrutiny. gender discrimination gets heightened scrutiny. is some cases where the mentally retarded got heightened scrutiny. is often seeming that heightend scrutiny is the conscience-saving option for the Court when addressing fundamental rights. hobby question were actual quite profound and potential far reaching. the Court decided that a for-profit corporation can gets full protection o' the First Amendment free exercise clause. is not a decision that says ALL for-profit corporations deserve such protections, so am expecting that it will be some time before we know full ramifications o' this case, but regardless, the Court were quite clear that qualities o' for-profit and corporation does not preclude First Amendment protection. once the Court decided that the corporation gots benefit o' strict scrutiny, then government were gonna lose. HA! Good Fun!

actually, we had assumed we would be included as a flatulent xvart or somesuch. the fact that we were included as a "paranoid" dictator who were proven ultimately correct, were far better treatment than we expected. HA! Good Fun! ps amentep were a mod from time to time. might be best to ask him if there were a biowarian or black isle directive to stifle openly homosexual posters. I kinda think that Dave was trolling you when he quoted you instead with "HAH! Good Fun!" and making it a half-orc... but again, it turned out better than we expected. dave had emailed to warn us that they were intending on including Gromnir in bg2. our response was, "do your worst." a mini-boss character in tob with voice-over who were tragically given the Cassandra role? far, Far better than expectations. actual, it woulda' been in biowarian best interest to have simple used Gromnir as comic relief. shoulda' realized that boards would react poorly to significant cameos. HA! Good Fun!

actually, we had assumed we would be included as a flatulent xvart or somesuch. the fact that we were included as a "paranoid" dictator who were proven ultimately correct, were far better treatment than we expected. HA! Good Fun! ps amentep were a mod from time to time. might be best to ask him if there were a biowarian or black isle directive to stifle openly homosexual posters.

if you say so. we used your example. that kinda thing pops up eventual in every romance thread... more than once is common. in the past, the mods and the community itself woulda' ended such "robust, honest and opinionated" debates before they got started. actual honest and opinionated debates were rare a problem. again, Gromnir were there more than five years ago. please keep in mind that there is a particular amusement for us in this context given our history with bioware. am thinking that it is somewhat obvious that Gromnir is a contentious poster. if you honestly believe that the biowarians in 1999 and 2000 would have censored or hindered polite and earnest openly homosexual posters while at same time finding Gromnir funny and/or harmless 'nuff that they were willing to include a character based 'pon our board personality (sorta) in one o' their games, then you is clear deluding self. oh, and we were arguable more adversarial back in 2000. HA! Good Fun!

but we already mentioned that you could post as an open homosexual on the boards pre 5 years ago. so being homosexual and asking for homosexual romance were hardly verboten before you became aware. so what has changed since that time? your example is actual indicative o' the change whether you meant to highlight that point or not. being crude and vulgar 'bout sex on the bio boards is now run-o'-the-mill. is ordinary. the great progress made is that openly homosexual posters is not chastised to any greater degree than is the hetero. so congrats to bio and congrats to bruce. call it a win. HA! Good Fun!

"But I want to focus on the last paragraph, I don't want to give undeserved credit to Bioware but I also think we should recognize that Bioware has created a popular and well known "safe " zone for gay gamers where they can discuss Romance options without fear of ridicule or criticism. And this is important as this is part of the discussion around inclusivity in games and gaming websites "This is not the same thing as websites that won't tolerate Homophobia. My experience around gay Romance discussions is that this is one of the most contentious issues that people battle to accept. For example if I go to any gaming website that is discussing Romance in Bioware games and say "Wow Isabela was hot, nice breasts on that one. I would have loved to tap that ass" the most criticism I would receive is something along the lines of " that's crude"...or " wow you are objectifying women in a crass way " or something similar "Now take that same example but let me rather raise the fact that Anders was hot then describe how I want to have sex with him and I can guarantee you the criticism will be much more personal and vituperative" soooo, bio has changed things for the better. bruce may now be crude and crass when making appeals to "tap that ass" be it the behind of Theodore or Theodora. congrats to you and bioware for giving us this brave new world. in the past such appeals for a gay "romance" (HA!) would have needed to be couched in a respectful and serious tone? now you may be at least moderate vulgar and pre-pubescent in your discussion o' sex o' any flavor without fear o' censorship or recrimination. ... am thinking we coulda' done without such profound social progress. HA! Good Fun!

"I think that gaming is one medium that you can get a certain message across and set a certain narrative. Think about just 7 years ago, the thought of homosexual Romance options in games was unheard of. Now Bioware has bravely and correctly changed this design in the interests of inclusivity. Nowadays its really not acceptable to go to most forums and make comments like " gay people must burn in the fires of hell and the only good gay person is a dead gay person"" you give Way too much credit to bio. seven years ago if you had gone to most any developer crpg message board and posted insulting comments about homosexuals, you woulda' been quickly and soundly chastised. am recalling a number o' nwn communities that developed in anticipation o' that game... and that started development considerable more than seven years ago. alfa were a group we helped with... for bit. http://www.alandfaraway.org/ is still around. had a few Thousand members at one point. there were more than a few openly homosexual members. there were one particularly vocal transsexual member. *shrug* most folks didn't care 'bout sexual orientation of alfa members... and keep in mind that the guy who were elected to be in charge o' alfa at the time were a major in the US army. is not as if nwn were advertised as a gay friendly game neither. interplay, black isle, atari and bioware (nwn had a complicated development) were hardly promoting nwn as a game that were friendly to alternative lifestyle choices, and hasbro, the parent corp o' wotc and d&d were almost comical opposite o' being open 'bout matter sexual. nevertheless, gay bashing woulda' been stopped by community and mods very quick in those days. *shrug* our perspective is different. we do not see bio as successfully promoted gay tolerance in the crpg world. at "best," bio made so that every crpg development must at least need consider and have open debate about gay romance. am s'posing that is a kinda improvement for the lgbt gaming community. if you squint your eyes and kinda look at the situation sideways and optimistic as possible, then such a triviality might appear to be a "win." huzzah? HA! Good Fun!

In a DLC for New Vegas there are members of an unnamed religion that is never specifically labeled as Mormonism and IIRC Josh Sawyer has said it wasn't exactly Mormonism. Yup... I painted it for fun.. I did Keldorn and Aerie too but Minsc's is my favorite. josh made very clear that new canaanites developed from mormonism... even the name, honest hearts, is coming from a Brigham Young quote: "Honest hearts make for honest actions." HA! Good Fun!

am thinking that video games is a particular poor media for advancing social agenda, and if game developers wanna make a genuine difference, they should go freaking volunteer at a soup kitchen or habitat for humanity rather than adding downtrodden elves or gnomes to their game. am thinking that it has become almost cliché for crpgs to deal with racism and slavery and such. more controversial pov: am thinking that such depictions o' racism as typical appear in games actual hurt the cause o' racial equality more than they help. see poor and oppressed __________ being whipped by evil taskmasters and forced to live in functional concentration camps. anybody gonna argue that such is bad? well guess what, that ain't racism--is not racism of today. racism is much more subtle and is far more difficult to end than is slavery. folks can look at typical game racism and say to themselves, "look how far we have come. real racism doesn't exist anymore." *snort* our recommendation to game developers: quit it. is more than enough evils o' the human condition for you to explore without tying to get edgy 'bout racism and sexism. yeah, we get that it is not reasonable to complete ignore racism and sexism in games. such isms is so integral to real world that their complete absence in a game world is jarring and disconcerting-- entered the matrix. nevertheless, game developers has never done anything particular insightful with racism or sexism other than when they try to pretend it don't exist. ironic. HA! Good Fun!

we is suggesting that if you want realistic misogyny in the game, you should offer a choice to the historical victims. you is the one not offering a choice. 'cause o' your desire to fulfill personal aesthetic, or 'cause o a naive desire to promote a social agenda, you wants women players, who has historically been the victims o' misogyny, to endure such in a Fantasy Game. you, however, don't believe they deserve a choice 'cause absence o' misogyny would be lacking realism. Fantasy-- as this is a fantasy game, there is absolute no reason to assume that all aspects o' feudalism in real world europe will be the same as in poe world. we can again give examples o' why this is the case, but we see no need. should be obvious. Game-- as poe is a game, having the historical victims o' real world misogyny bear the brunt o' simulated misogyny in poe strikes us a poor considered game feature. most developers has done their utmost to avoid gender bias. create a functional gender bias in gameplay of poe strikes us as a poor considered game feature-- same as making women characters weaker. am not seeing how these obvious qualities o' the media ain't getting through to you. and yeah, past games dealing with a feudal setting has not forced misogyny 'pon players as a way to educate or to enhance realism. has it occurred to you that doing so were a conscious and informed decision on the part o' the developers? advantages o' including is enhancing verisimilitude and promoting awareness o' sexism in feudal europe... ? okie dokie. as others has said, you ain't adding anything new to collective awareness by showing folks that women were treated worse than men in feudal europe. developers don't even include weighty gold anymore, and you want them to add an aspect to the Game that would result in women players having their characters (characters they is meant to identify with) be treated to realistic style european misogyny, and you wanna do this for sake o' realism and/or your paternalistic notions o' sexism? the folks who has been historic victims o' misogyny in real life gets to play a Fantasy Game wherein they is treated worse than their male counter-parts... simply 'cause they choose to play as a woman, and you is not seeing how this could be a bad idea? am much in favor o' doing games that does harsh and ugly side o' human nature. am in favor o' challenging players with content. am in favor o' developers not taking ez route. nevertheless, what you want is... stupid. if goal is realism for its own sake, we gots an enormous list o' possible features that impact all players equal so that nobody feels like they is getting singled-out 'cause o' real world "racism, slavery, war, murder." do realistic class struggle and slavery in a Fantasy Game is hardly controversial and is not gonna cheese-off any specific and identifiable group o' potential buyers. treat modern women players to feudal european misogyny doesn't strike you as different? obsidian is willing to add controversial content. mormonism coulda' been a touchy subject in honest hearts. obsidian tried to do justice to mormon faith. 'course, am suspecting most folks didn't care--read through some o' those tedious mormon-centric dialogues was not making game better for Gromnir. click. click. click. is it over yet? regardless, there were no option in game whereby you were able to play as a mormon or native american. if such options had existed, and if such a choice led to ubiquitous mistreatment and insult, we suspect the euro misogyny feature would be more analogous. obsidian chose not to do so. as we noted above, many o' the guys working on poe worked on fallout. nevertheless, there ain't no real world racism. replicate 1950s Americana and don't do civil rights movement is not an accident. were a conscious move. the fallout developers created ghouls to get racism into fallout. think on that for a moment. so, why not racism against african americans? do way-back machine and we sees that the guys who poked fun of scientology in fallout 2 is working on this game. perhaps it were insensitive o' us to laugh at hubologists, but we thought it were funny. am s'posing that scientoligists didn't see the humor, but from a practical pov, how many scientlogist gamers is there? ultimately, am simply perplexed by how dogged you is in not recognizing that what you is asking for is different than obsidian dealing with feudal european class struggle in a more realistic manner than is typical in crpgs. you keeps lumping together and yet they is clear different. is there any serfs in current real world that play video games? if "serf" is a character generation option in poe, and serfs get treated like crap... and if you can find any modern serf gamers, then we got analogous scenarios. ridiculous. yeah, is ridiculous. HA! Good Fun!

I have to honest, I was perhaps a bit premature to say the article was "excellent" I do find it interesting and it does raise good points but I am also finding several flaws in the writers thinking process am gonna concede that as a minority in America, we has gotten damn tired o' having to deal with the race "issue" all the freaking time. we, perhaps naively, did not take advantage o' affirmative action opportunities when looking to gain admittance to university, or when looking to pay for education. were stupid o' us in retrospect, but we didn't want to be defined by race. every time an acquaintance would make a remotely racist comment and then suddenly pull up short and kinda peak at us sidelong to see if we were offended, we would indeed be offended, but not so much by the slur. example heard last week: "f***ers can become a super power overnight, but they can't even get the starch in my shirts right." colleague makes a silly off-hand quip about his chinese launderer. comment were dumb, but why the hell should he look at Gromnir as if checking to see if we were angry? it does piss us off more than a little that we gotta constant deal with race... everywhere. yeah, when we go into a hardware store and we see shop owner keeping a particular close eye on us to make sure we don't steal nothing, we has eye-roll moment. is little moments o' racism we deal with all the time. perhaps we should be more concerned. however, if we never had to see discussions/debates o' race or sex in games, we would be relieved. yeah, it may be more relevant than Gromnir wishes it to be, but we got more than a stomach full o' such bile. HA! Good Fun!

there ain't enough games that cater to 40-something, self-important native american lawyers. so, fight the dominant paradigm. hasta la victoria siempre, fifty-four forty or fight. etc. uh, what? stupid article. HA! Good Fun! ps to alter content for naive notions that doing so benefits a disfranchised group or necessarily promotes a social agenda that demands attention strikes us as profoundly myopic and more than a little insulting

If the Inquisition in Dragon Age lived up to its namesake, would that make the PC like Herr Otto Flick of the Gestapo and Cassandra his Helga? Inquisitor: "Zhe Inquisition has vays of making zhem talk. Cassandra! Bring me my sharp Inquisition sword." Cassandra: "I find your piercing gaze and your commanding presence quite alluring. May I kiss you?" Inquisitor: "Certainly." the term, "inquisitor" gets a bad rap. first person we think o' in such contexts is Barbara Jordan kinda personal hero o' ours in spite o' fact that her legal philosophy conflicted with ours. her keynote speech from 1976 democratic national convention is arguably one o' the greatest speeches in american history. the speech is worth listening to as it shows how much has changed (race and sexism) since 1976, and at same time, how much has stayed the same (poverty, unemployment, health care, tax reform, etc.) her popularity with the bsn crowd would rise substantial with the recognition that she were in a 20+ year relationship with another woman... although she never confirmed that she were lesbian. and o'course, she were an inquisitor. btw, watch video and try to figure out what kinda American accent she has. is sure as hell not texan. HA! Good Fun!

agreed, but real world french and quebecers frequent inspire in us the same urge, soooo... *shrug* her accent isn't all that different from anne paillaud when she does english-speaking films. no doubt you can find clips o' the man in the iron mask or innocent blood. is not an excuse as Gromnir has never been a particular fan o' the french accent, faux french accents, jaunty beret, crêpes, or poor showings in world wars neither. HA! Good Fun!

""Anyways, I suspect you’re only asking this because you seem to wrongfully believe women have unanimously decided that depicting sexist structures as sexist IS sexist and thus it is far better to pretend it never happened then actually have some settings explore how and why such structures existed and persisted. recent baro post were mostly nonsense, but this bit is actual worthy o' a response... and so we shall. we believe that depictions o' sexism is appropriate in many forms o' media. there is no doubt various examples o' media that would benefit from the admitted very limited example o' realistic depictions o' sexism in feudal societies. a documentary or history lesson would benefit from such. is no doubt other kinds o' media. that being said, we surely has no idea what women has 'unanimously' decided, but we do believe that it is the women players o' poe who deserve the choice regarding whether they should be subjected to realistic european feudal misogyny in a game. forcing a female player, or those who play as females, to have their character treated to the inequities o' misogyny 'cause o' the social agenda or aesthetic notions o' baro and others strikes us as more than a little paternalistic. we don't know 'unanimously' any more than does baro, but we ain't so arrogant as to think we should get to decide for women that they should be victimized in a game. nevertheless, you is right, we don't know 'unanimously.' as such, if baro and/or the developers can devise a way to give each and every woman player the opportunity to decided for themselves if they will be tormented in the game, we would not mind such depictions. is a crpg, and crpgs is 'bout making choices. this would seem to be a feature (snort) that could easily offend, so give choice to women would be a good idea, yes? got any ideas for such inclusion? we don't and that is reason why we posted the following so many posts ago: "and while Gromnir would not be bothered if PoE had gender disparity in which women or men were treated poorly, we sure as heck would not recommend that the developers make it so that a gender were suffering some kinda functional penalty by playing their own gender. seems the better part of valor to avoid altogether. what would be point? so developers could be teh rheal? to show that gender inequality is bad? we already know that gender inequality is bad." 'course we is repeating self. nevertheless, it does seem the better part o' valor to avoid. as for your "melodrama"... am honestly at a loss with what you were trying to accomplish with going the route of the absurd. was that your genuine attempt at mocking mimicry o' some kind? *shrug* okie dokie. HA! Good Fun!

RPGs with 100% historical accuracy don't sell worth a damn. So you'll never see a company like Obsidian making one. Besides, can you imagine how *dull* such a game would be? That is so very irrelevant. He's arguing for something which would, if anything, increase the intrigue in the game. As for the other point being made, I would like to hear an actual woman's opinion on whether having the sexist environment in PoE that Barothmuk described would make them feel uncomfortable or not. Somehow I doubt it would. If it would make some women uncomfortable, should there not be racism in the game then too? It might make real minorities feel uncomfortable. Also, also. RPGs with historical accuracy can and do sell woth a damn, just saying. woman's opinion: video games are escapist fantasy so i would like a little break from all the crap that i deal with every day. If I want to experience sexism in a video game I will just go play literally any other game ever made. clearly you is being chauvinistic. ... hmmm. might be a flaw in the reasoning seeing as how ashtonw would appear to be a female gamer. *shrug* women were not treated simple bad in feudal europe. women were treated horrible. am thinking even if you wanna explore issues o' sexism, then trying to replicate the realism o' feudal european misogyny is not gonna be the best route... and is not even gonna be realistic for reasons we will discuss as other noted, there is a host o' other intelligent species running 'round, and their cultures coulda' developed much different... which would in turn influence human culture. the example dwarf ranger is female, yes? that alone at least suggests differences. we already mentioned magic. am thinking it takes more than a little willful ignorance to assume a feudal Fantasy society with ubiquitous magic is gonna develop along the same lines as a real world feudal european society. we gave one very plausible game changer: safe and reliable birth control. add dozens and hundreds o' magical changes and am thinking it is a bit unreasonable to expect that PoE feudal would operate identical to real world european. oh, and btw, gods is real in PoE. the guys who told us that we were getting a PoE world that were kinda entering a transitional period at tail end o' feudal also offered us http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Cadegund we is told that the gods is silent about animism, but perhaps they ain't so silent 'bout sexism? at the very least we got knowledge that women is part o' the priesthood o' a major deity, which is already an enormous departure from feudal european norms. and again, all of this is ignoring that PoE is a Game. am not seeing much value in making women endure misogyny in a game, but supposedly that makes us a chauvinist. HA! Good Fun!

Quite a crass depiction of my point. You chauvinistically assume all women do not wish to explore themes of sexism inherent to feudal societies and you naively believe people only play as their own sex. Anyways I too am tired of this argument (for tonight at least) and am going to bed. To be fair Gromnir he isn't saying that actually no, he ain't. we offered alternatives earlier. sexism as a theme can be explored quite easily without subjecting those who has been historical victims o' misogyny to simulated misogyny. he wants realism. you said: This brings me to my next question, what is the reason you are asking for this? Is it purely because you want a realistic game that captures the real themes of the feudal system? he said More or less. It was part of the structure hence I'd rather explore it rather than ignore it. Outside of that it's also because I'm a feminist and I find the history gender inequality and its structural manifestations interesting and worthy of examination. HA! Good Fun! I know it may seem that he his contradicting himself but I don't think he is. He is a feminist and but wants a realistic feudal themed game. Sexism was part of the feudal system but just because he is asking for that it doesn't mean he is supporting it. These types of issues raise awareness we ain't saying he is aware o' what he is doing. that is what makes it kinda sad. is so few places in real life that women gets treated complete equal, so why subject 'em to misogyny in a fantasy game? 'cause is maybe realistic in a Fantasy feudal setting? 'cause somebody has a social agenda that they is promoting? fallout were set in an alternative future reimagined from 1950s Americana. http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/civil-rights-movement woulda' been a very different game. would it have been a better game? heck, as opposed to racism, sexism coulda' been just as easily a major theme o' fallout. you honestly think that fallout woulda been better if players who choose an african american or female avatar woulda' gotten "special" treatments more in line with 1950s America? and even if you genuine were thinking that game woulda' been better that way, do you really think that adding such woulda' been fair to female and african american gamers? some might appreciate the honest portrayal, but you think lack o' choice would have gone over well? do you think such disparate treatment woulda' gained some negative attention for fallout in press and elsewhere? to make fallout and not have race be a central issue actual took effort. ask self why the developer/publisher chose that route. HA! Good Fun!

Quite a crass depiction of my point. You chauvinistically assume all women do not wish to explore themes of sexism inherent to feudal societies and you naively believe people only play as their own sex. Anyways I too am tired of this argument (for tonight at least) and am going to bed. To be fair Gromnir he isn't saying that actually no, he ain't. we offered alternatives earlier. sexism as a theme can be explored quite easily without subjecting those who has been historical victims o' misogyny to simulated misogyny. he wants realism. you said: This brings me to my next question, what is the reason you are asking for this? Is it purely because you want a realistic game that captures the real themes of the feudal system? he said More or less. It was part of the structure hence I'd rather explore it rather than ignore it. Outside of that it's also because I'm a feminist and I find the history gender inequality and its structural manifestations interesting and worthy of examination. HA! Good Fun!

Quite a crass depiction of my point. You chauvinistically assume all women do not wish to explore themes of sexism inherent to feudal societies and you naively believe people only play as their own sex. Anyways I too am tired of this argument (for tonight at least) and am going to bed. and you chauvinistically believe that they should have misogyny forced 'pon them in the game? being confronted with your own hypocrisy is a hoot, no? HA! Good Fun! ps how many people do you actually see being specific interested in sexism in feudal societies?

the "feminist" says he wants women gamers to have their characters experience misogyny... 'cause that's real... er, real in a fantasy world. we already crossed over into the twilight zone, so don't feel bad. HA! Good Fun!

such attitudes is not necessarily inherent o' a fantasy feudal system (you know, one with powerful women mages, safe and reliable birth control, etc.) and such attitudes simple might not be advantageous in a game with a fantasy feudal system. *shrug* but as you say, no common ground. HA! Good Fun!

Advocating? I have never seen such a thing. Instead they will dismiss the setting will say "Oh but we don't have X" all the while still having the internal contradictions. None the less, as you are a firm believer in the "fantasy ergo anything" mentality whereas I am completely the opposite I believe we simply lack enough common ground to bother continuing. am not advocating that anything goes in fantasy. but with imagination and some small effort, internal rational is not so great a hurdle. but again, it is a Fantasy Game. fantasy, by its very nature requires deviation from reality. the fact that poe is a game also requires concessions. but yeah. we lack common ground if you can't recognize why in a fantasy setting it is just as plausible to have fantasy feudal system that is matriarchal or quasi-matriarchal or complete equal as one that victimizes women. give women the magic and suddenly everything is turned upside down or backward or... whatever. am also lacking common ground if you cannot recognize that as poe is a Game with women players, forcing them to endure endemic misogyny might be a poor choice for developers. *shrug* reality is rare a sufficient reason to include anything in a fantasy game. realistic combats? realistic flora and fauna? realistic disease and infection? realistic economy? make any o' the aforementioned genuine real in a Fantasy Game, and the whole thing collapses. so why the need for genuine society that has no possible genuine analog in a fantasy setting with magic and undead and freaking monster? is there advantages to some kinds o' verisimilitude? sure is, but realism itself should no more be a goal than being different. HA! Good Fun! ps just for the hell of it, consider one tiny change made possible by magic: safe and reliable birth control. is something seeming incredible small, but imagine the impact on primitive societies all the way up to industrial age. women is no longer forced by nature to spend many o' their adult years either pregnant or rearing children. possible decreased birth rates impact societies how? women is more likely to be getting educated and using education as adults. etc. if we insert reliable birth control into poe via magic, literal everything changes. and that is just one change. am thinking magic can makes more o' a difference than some people might s'pose.