Gender Prejudice

[Giantevilhead]

Considering that this physical difference stems from nature and not society -Yes. Yes, it would.

 

Except physical differences do not stem entirely from nature. If you separate identical twins and have one work on a farm doing hard manual labor and the other sit in an office, they will no longer be physically identical after a while.

Both will still have the same physical potential, however. This doesn't change just because one of them isn't tapping into it.

 

There is practically no difference in physical capabilities between young boys and girls. However, as I mentioned before, their diets begin to diverge at age one. Similarly, their physical activities also begin to diverge at a very young age. Do you honestly not think that contributes to physical differences developed later in life?

 

To say that physical differences stem entirely from nature and is not at all affected by society is extremely, not to mention willfully, ignorant.

The maximum physical potential stems entirely from nature...only what you achieve inside of that potential stems from society...also nature outfitted men with greater potential on the physical level. That's just how it is.

 

And my whole point was that it's rarer for women to achieve their maximum physical potential due to social factors. For example, female athletes have disadvantages other than just their maximum physical potential. From infancy up until they get into their sport, they have different diets and physical regimen than male athletes. After they get into their sports, they get different supplements, not to mention drugs. It's much easier to detect steroid use in female athletes than male athletes.

 

In societies where there is greater separation of gender roles, you would expect greater differences in the physical, and mental, capabilities of men and women compared to societies in which there is less separation of gender roles.

[BSoda]

Considering that this physical difference stems from nature and not society -Yes. Yes, it would.

 

Except physical differences do not stem entirely from nature. If you separate identical twins and have one work on a farm doing hard manual labor and the other sit in an office, they will no longer be physically identical after a while.

Both will still have the same physical potential, however. This doesn't change just because one of them isn't tapping into it.

 

There is practically no difference in physical capabilities between young boys and girls. However, as I mentioned before, their diets begin to diverge at age one. Similarly, their physical activities also begin to diverge at a very young age. Do you honestly not think that contributes to physical differences developed later in life?

 

To say that physical differences stem entirely from nature and is not at all affected by society is extremely, not to mention willfully, ignorant.

The maximum physical potential stems entirely from nature...only what you achieve inside of that potential stems from society...also nature outfitted men with greater potential on the physical level. That's just how it is.

 

And my whole point was that it's rarer for women to achieve their maximum physical potential due to social factors. For example, female athletes have disadvantages other than just their maximum physical potential. From infancy up until they get into their sport, they have different diets and physical regimen than male athletes. After they get into their sports, they get different supplements, not to mention drugs. It's much easier to detect steroid use in female athletes than male athletes.

 

In societies where there is greater separation of gender roles, you would expect greater differences in the physical, and mental, capabilities of men and women compared to societies in which there is less separation of gender roles.

If society would heavily support and push women to greater physical performance the average would certainly shift a bit more in the direction of the male average...and at the end men would still have a greater physical capacity -on average- than women...which than again would lead society to actually push men more into doing physical intense stuff, coming full circle.

[Jarmo]

And my whole point was that it's rarer for women to achieve their maximum physical potential due to social factors. For example, female athletes have disadvantages other than just their maximum physical potential.

...

In societies where there is greater separation of gender roles, you would expect greater differences in the physical, and mental, capabilities of men and women compared to societies in which there is less separation of gender roles.

 

Have to admit I mixed your point with somebody elses. Yes I can absolutely agree with this.

The percentage differences between sexes in our society can't be simply transfered to those in a more equal society,

The diet absolutely has an effect, (I think even the diet of the parents does).

 

I suppose in some amazon society, where men would always be malnutritioned servants, the women would really be stronger.

 

As long as we agree that all things being equal, the same conditions for both, males are bigger and stronger.

[TrashMan]

And my whole point was that it's rarer for women to achieve their maximum physical potential due to social factors. For example, female athletes have disadvantages other than just their maximum physical potential. From infancy up until they get into their sport, they have different diets and physical regimen than male athletes. After they get into their sports, they get different supplements, not to mention drugs. It's much easier to detect steroid use in female athletes than male athletes.

 

Where the hell do you get this from?

Rally?This is a bunch of nonsense.

 

Women athletes can determine their own training regimen and diets. No one determines it for them.

 

And you're now brining steriods into the discussion?

[cuteLittleRabbit]

...Back to topic...

 

Some possibilities:

* A quest for a village mayor to help gather recruits for a road patrolling militia, at least 5 but no more than 8 (since it also costs to have them equipped, in addition to them not being able to fulfill their usual tasks all the time):

option 1) The PC only tries to recruit men (because the PC's society thinks road patrolling is a man's job)

option 2) The PC only tries to recruit women (because the PC's society thinks road patrolling is a woman's job)

option 3) The PC does not limit the recruitment effort to a specific gender (because the PC's society wouldn't do that either)

option 4) The PC only tries to recruit men (because the PC finds out what the village's society is like, and this society thinks road patrolling is a man's job)

option 5) The PC only tries to recruit women (because the PC finds out what the village's society is like, and this society thinks road patrolling is a woman's job)

option 6) The PC does not limit the recruitment effort to a specific gender (because the PC finds out what the village's society is like, and this society wouldn't do that either)

option 7) The PC only tries to recruit men (because the village's society thinks road patrolling is a woman's job, and the PC strongly disagrees)

option 8 )The PC only tries to recruit women (because the village's society thinks road patrolling is a man's job, and the PC strongly disagrees)

option 9) The PC does not limit the recruitment effort to a specific gender (because the village's society thinks road patrolling is a man's job/woman's job, and the PC strongly disagrees it should be limited to a specific gender)

...

 

Anything this complex is (probably) too much for a video game, but thinking about it might spark some ideas for building in some gender-related themes into the PE setting & games .

Edited October 3, 2012 by cuteLittleRabbit

[PsychoBlonde]

People have very mistaken notions of what the medieval world was like. Women DID own property, they inherited and passed it on, they worked in trades, they ran major institutions, noblewomen were educated and in the early Middle Ages likely more educated than men overall. In early England, husbands sometimes took their wives' surnames if they were the landed ones. Women outside the Greco-Roman sphere were sometimes warriors. It was the re-discovery of Roman law in Europe that led to property rights degrading, to a loss of economic and political power for women, which only in recent times has been rectified.

 

So I prefer fantasy realms that acknowledge what earlier societies knew better than modernity did- that when it comes to tooth and claw, no one can afford to sit around being primped, everybody works and fights, and if you earn respect you get it.

 

That is some interesting political correct history white washing you got there. This must be the disney version of our history because it sounds too politically correct for the history I read about.

 

Actually that poster is quite right in implying the the modern form of femininity and the role of women didn't really mature until well into industrialization, although as with anything its origins can be found far, far back.

 

Indeed. It wasn't until industrialization first started to take off that it was really economically possible for people to be picky about their roles. That and the financial independence, particularly for working-class women that came about with industrialization created an ENORMOUS cultural backlash. The hyper-prudery of the Victorian era being one such example--the preceding period was in many ways much more liberal. When a large segment of the population exists perpetually on the brink of starvation, nobody cares who plants the potatoes. A lot of people's views of history seem to come from MODERNIZED fairy tales and historical romances which contain an AMAZING preponderance of pathetic, benighted, helpless noblewomen.

 

That's not to say that cases of horrible oppression didn't exist but they were about as statistically significant as the newspaper headlines we have today about gang shootings and serial killers--if you were to get your entire impression of a culture just by reading the headlines you'd wind up assuming these kinds of things, too.

[Nakia]

Human beings whether men or women vary in strength and abilities. I have know women who are very strong, sometimes equal to very strong men. I have known men who are physically weak. I have known good, aring men and bad, uncaring women. Let's not start stereotyping people in our games. Women can be very good and they can be very bad. A female adventurer if she is going to be a warrior weilding swords, axes, hammers should be strong. A mage whether male or female could be weaker. A thief should be dexterous I would prefer to roll the dice and set my character by that or buy points if that is the method used rather than have penalties or bonuses set according to gender.

 

If we are talking solely about society then fine have your gender stereotypes in various societies. Woman have rulers, men have been slaves. Joan of Arc lead the French forces. Catherine the Great was ruler of Russia but no saint. Since the game will have multiple gods it is not a reflection of Christian beliefs but pagan. Viking and Celtic women had many rights were much more equal to men than Christian women were. The Greek goddess, Athena, was considered to be more powerful than her father, Zeus.

 

Personally I do not wish to play a game that carries forward the stereotypes and prejudices of our real world. I trust Obsidian to be a bit more innovative than that. This is a fantasy game let it be fantasy.

[Gyges]

So it's a setting with magic and monsters but the realism you absolutely need is sexism?

 

No thanks -.-

 

Women will play this game too and I don't want 'Hey remember you are not as good as guys!' thrown in my face in my escapism as well as real life. I don't want restrictions on my characters just because they have ovaries.

 

I think discrimination should be included in some dialogue, just so you can bash in their faces for it.

[TrashMan]

So it's a setting with magic and monsters but the realism you absolutely need is sexism?

 

No thanks -.-

 

Women will play this game too and I don't want 'Hey remember you are not as good as guys!' thrown in my face in my escapism as well as real life. I don't want restrictions on my characters just because they have ovaries.

 

So what if you're not as good as someone else at something? What does it matter?

 

Are you as a great at math as that mathematical prodigy next door? Nope. Should you be insulted when someoen mentions it?

[Jarmo]

Human beings whether men or women vary in strength and abilities. I have know women who are very strong, sometimes equal to very strong men. I have known men who are physically weak. I have known good, aring men and bad, uncaring women. Let's not start stereotyping people in our games.

 

....

 

This is a fantasy game let it be fantasy.

 

Now, I agree with the last sentence.

Making women equal to men (in strength and size) is fantasy, but fantasy which not many will raise a fuss over.

So it's probably the best course for Obsidian to take and probably the course they will take.

 

But to the first one... sheesh.

 

Suggesting that men tend to be bigger and stronger than women, is not a stereotype. It's a fact.

 

It's not like anyone has suggested all men are strong and all women are weak, or that all men are stronger than any woman.

In my earlier sexist thought I suggested women could have -2 to strength. That'd mean in standard DD rules,

the strongest women would have strength of 16 while the average male has a strength of 10.5,

and a man with the strength of 14 would already be considered a pretty strong guy.

 

This is really sidetracked by the bigger=better thinking.

Edited October 3, 2012 by Jarmo

[TrashMan]

EDIT: Nevermind

Edited October 3, 2012 by TrashMan

[Nakia]

Human beings whether men or women vary in strength and abilities. I have know women who are very strong, sometimes equal to very strong men. I have known men who are physically weak. I have known good, aring men and bad, uncaring women. Let's not start stereotyping people in our games.

 

....

 

This is a fantasy game let it be fantasy.

 

Now, I agree with the last sentence.

Making women equal to men (in strength and size) is fantasy, but fantasy which not many will raise a fuss over.

So it's probably the best course for Obsidian to take and probably the course they will take.

 

But to the first one... sheesh.

 

Suggesting that men tend to be bigger and stronger than women, is not a stereotype. It's a fact.

 

It's not like anyone has suggested all men are strong and all women are weak, or that all men are stronger than any woman.

In my earlier sexist thought I suggested women could have -2 to strength. That'd mean in standard DD rules,

the strongest women would have strength of 16 while the average male has a strength of 10.5,

and a man with the strength of 14 would already be considered a pretty strong guy.

 

Sorry it is a stereotype because it implies that no woman can be as strong as a strong man which simply is not true. There may always be men stronger than she is but they will be very, very, strong. Yes, the strong woman would be an exception but exceptions do exist.

[defragmentor]

Human beings whether men or women vary in strength and abilities. I have know women who are very strong, sometimes equal to very strong men. I have known men who are physically weak. I have known good, aring men and bad, uncaring women. Let's not start stereotyping people in our games.

 

....

 

This is a fantasy game let it be fantasy.

 

Now, I agree with the last sentence.

Making women equal to men (in strength and size) is fantasy, but fantasy which not many will raise a fuss over.

So it's probably the best course for Obsidian to take and probably the course they will take.

 

But to the first one... sheesh.

 

Suggesting that men tend to be bigger and stronger than women, is not a stereotype. It's a fact.

 

 

I will not dispute that this is a statement of fact. I will say that it is a useless fact. There seems to be a lot of fighting over the right to make that generalisation. However, once you begin to examine any specific scenario and the specifics thereof, there is no value to a generalisation as it could just as easily be the case as not be the case. To use the case in point - it does not matter whether or not on aggregate men are stronger than women if you are dealing with a particularly strong woman.

 

Also, the factors that contribute to strength are many and varied, and statistics that are being used are all being gathered from a scenario where strength is not often valued in women and as such rarely pursued, and when pursued - by only a very small percentage of the total female population. When you are considering factors as changeable as the density of muscles fibres broad generalisation offer nothing but a sound-byte.

 

As for character creation, I imagine you will begin the game 'in medias res' rather than at birth and as such any character (female or otherwise) will have made the decision to pursue a set of skills and abilities, and will have trained and practised appropriately - surely this alone is enough to remove the need to conform to the generalisation?

 

As far as plot points go, I don't see the need to cling on to sexual discrimination and such when there could be so many original reasons to hate people in a fantasy universe. If I roll a female wizard I'd be disappointed if the female part was singled out.

[cuteLittleRabbit]

Just a suggestion peepz: let's stop talking about "differences between men and women in real life" and start talking again about "how societies in a computer game can show prejudice when dealing with different genders, in a way that might make those games even more interesting".

 

Pretty please?

[BSoda]

Just a suggestion peepz: let's stop talking about "differences between men and women in real life" and start talking again about "how societies in a computer game can show prejudice when dealing with different genders, in a way that might make those games even more interesting".

 

Pretty please?

As has been mentioned before I think displays of prejudice (including gender-based) in a cRPG can add to the game. Especially if you can prove them wrong through the actions of your character. That's a basic power-fantasy whose fulfillment plays into the core of what could be considered "fun" in a RPG.

[Troller]

How dare you guys suggest that men and women are different. They have the same physical traits, women were always great warriors throught history(joan darc, the amazons, ona bushi, which is told that one ona bushi in battle was like 10 highly trained samurai men). Women aren't strong like man just because they don't want to, if they wanted they could be stronger, but they prefer finesse, so they have a higher dexterity value, and charisma, and intelligence, and wisdom, which is way more important nowadays anyway, strength won't help you shoot guns dur.

There aren't many women in the army and special forces fighting wars, just because they are smarter than men! So men have to fight and risk their lifes at wars while the women remain at home, chilling.

 

But really guys there is nothing different between the sexes, history has proved this over and over.

[Jarmo]

Societies, well it'd be ok to see some matriarchal and some patriarchal, would add flavour to the world.

But aside someone trying to brush you aside or make snide comments, I can't really see what could be done with them

without going to the disturbing adult stuff the society is built on. And I'm not sure that'd be a good direction to take the game.

 

But I would like to see companions coming from these societies, who'd totally subscribe to the customary thinking.

"Well I didn't think about it that much, as men are not well suited to thinking." Or something.

 

Male pleasure slave/healer from the Amazon Queens court, who totally accepts female superiority.

A former lady in waiting, who firmly believes a womans place is at home, but who's been driven to adventure through occasion.

Edited October 3, 2012 by Jarmo

[utgardloki]

How dare you guys suggest that men and women are different. They have the same physical traits

DO YOU HAVE EYES IN THAT SKU-

Troller

Troller

Troller

woah, almost, but not quite.

Edited October 3, 2012 by utgardloki

[Aysir]

I really liked the initial points that the TC raised, but since then this tread seems to have been heavily derailed by 'man is stronger than woman' talk. Taking it back to a game context it's always interesting to see games that do make a difference and also those that don't.

I know most people may not be familiar with game on all platforms, but Persona 3 Portable added the choice of a female protagonist and added a lot of changes based on that decision. As a female MC you get different choices from social links (friends), you also often get treated differently and one of the male squad mates develops a problem with having a girl in charge.

I think just having a few differences here and there is enough. Not as few as Mass Effect or Dragon Age - where only your hetero-romance options are the only difference.

[Teslacrashed]

To be fair, in context, we are already talking about a world were we know people do prejudice already based on souls, something completely outside the power of an individual to control, much like race or gender.

 

something to consider for this conversation.

[Troller]

I know that if I don't see a gender slider in my character creation screen I will immediately turn into the Uninstall Wizard.

[Guts]

Gender doesn't need to affect stats in the game, it's a minor thing. It should affect dialogue and the first impressions you make on different groups and individuals.

 

Also, anyone who claims that men are not stronger ON AVERAGE than women is a delusional fool.

Edited October 3, 2012 by Guts

[Troller]

Gender doesn't need to affect stats in the game, it's a minor thing. It should affect dialogue and the first impressions you make on different groups and individuals.

 

Also, anyone who claims that men are not stronger ON AVERAGE than women is a delusional fool.

Or it's just a very weak man, or small children, I remember when I was a kid and living with my mother I used to think she was strong, and all women were strong too.

[Wombat]

I don't think all the male here, for example, can match trained female martial artists.

Not only strength but also timing is the key for maximized impact. If you include submission holds, it also negates quite a huge part of sheer physical strength, too.

 

Even historically, there is a quite famous female samurai called Tomoe, depicted in the Tales of the Heike. Even if she is "a match for thousands" is an exaggeration, she could even ripped off the head of a male samurai, making use of the strengths of horses they were riding. Indeed, Kiso, her lover and lord dismiss her for being female in his final fight but it's unlikely that he valued her worth as a warrior lowly. Even at the end of Tokugawa Shogunate, at battle of Aizu, there were a bunch of female fighters who fought male warriors, head to head. Although boy warriors called Byakkotai is more famous, the female warriors were capable of fighting for days against the terribly bad odds even for male warriors (Consider why Aizu needed the help of boys and women in the first place).

 

As for possible presentations of femininity in role-playing game, it was O.K. by me that the treatment of femininity in the world such as Arcanum, for example. In fact, my character, a "proper lady" with silver tongue easily prove her worth in the fashion of "the pen is mightier than the sword" and I, personally, find it a good way to make a twist to the social discrimination (that patronizing "fairer sex" way of thinking), which suited the setting well. However, quite many female players found the rule as restricting.

 

Throwing my eyes to Glorantha, there are quite many presentations of femininity/sexuality. Although typical earth cult's role (goddesses of Earth) is more submissive to male cultures there are some exceptions.

 

Babeester Gor, goddess of vengeance, her cult is unique with its combatant nature among feminine and "weak" Earth temple. Well, however, her worshipers have this habit of hanging male genitals and heads of the defeated from their axes as trophies, so, some factors may need be toned down to the major audiences. Quite a bloodthirsty cult but they have their places in Earth cult of various places.

 

If Tolat cult's amazons find any male, what they would do is enslaving them. However, compared with Babeester Gor's sisters, they tend to appear as NPCs since their society is very closed. The cult is most likely based on the conventional image of amazons.

 

In any case, focusing on a single factor, male/female contrast in this case, may drift off too much from the possible theme of the main story. So, even if the designers are trying to shed some lights on this aspect of humanity, probably, it shouldn't be so restrictive to the main character, at least.

[Wintersong]

To be fair, in context, we are already talking about a world were we know people do prejudice already based on souls, something completely outside the power of an individual to control, much like race or gender.

 

something to consider for this conversation.

A dwarven female soul that remembers her previous life but that currently inhabits a male elven body that lives in a racist and sexist human society. There, Obsidian, I just gave you a companion idea. For free.