271 réponses à ce sujet

[Hazegurl]

I personally don't get what the big deal is that someone views men as more credible fighters. They simply are. Not saying women can't fight, but I see nothing wrong in admitting the differences between men and women. Fighting prowess, muscle mass, etc are just two of those differences.

Personally, I would like to see games make male and female protagonists fight differently. There are just certain advantages that a female fighter could have over a male, such as agility. so why not use it? Why does a woman *have* to do the same moves as a man just to prove something?

I call bs on a woman flipping big 200lb men over her bony little arms etc.

Ex: FShepard vs Vega

When I think of game protagonists who look like they could straight up kick some a**, most of them are male.

[Xilizhra]

At -no time in history- have women formed a majority of soldiers, leaders, or spies during warfare. I'm sorry if that's inconvenient for your narrative, but it's the truth. They are the -exception-.

I'm sorry, why is this relevant to a video game again? Especially one with vastly different social patterns than our world (such as the prophet of the main human religion being both female and a great general)?

I call bs on a woman flipping big 200lb men over her bony little arms etc.

Ex: FShepard vs Vega

Cybernetic enhancements.

[Heimdall]

Hazegurl wrote...

Ex: FShepard vs Vega

I always assumed that was the cybernetics 

EDIT: 'd, Xil beat me to it.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 12 novembre 2013 - 02:50 .

[TheBlackBaron]

Estelindis wrote...

Personally, I recall the ME codex being a lot more objective than the DA one.  However, I may be misremembering some details.  

Heck, I could be too. 

TheBlackBaron wrote...
 I just know that, when it comes to history with which I am personally familiar - namely, Irish - even in wartime women played a huge role.  In our history books, it's not so well-recorded, but when I turn to my family members, they can often tell me much that the books leave out, e.g. the roles played by male and female family members and acquaintances in conflicts of about a hundred years ago.  And, if we try to look at development of societies as a whole, not just at battles fought, we can see other influences too.

See, I think a lot of it comes down to covering personal histories versus national histories. A lot of families will pass down stories of family members that "were there" at what are thought of as significant moments, and what they did there. 

And while that stuff is almost inevitably fascinating, it's more likely to get covered mainly in a broad strokes sort of way - i.e. women on the Allied home fronts in WWI and WWII. 

[Heimdall]

Xilizhra wrote...

At -no time in history- have women formed a majority of soldiers, leaders, or spies during warfare. I'm sorry if that's inconvenient for your narrative, but it's the truth. They are the -exception-.

I'm sorry, why is this relevant to a video game again? Especially one with vastly different social patterns than our world (such as the prophet of the main human religion being both female and a great general)?

Well, you'll have to ask Silfren about that.  That conversation has moved into real history.

[Hazegurl]

Well she better have some sort of terminator steel arm or something cause that scene looked ridiculous.

[Nole]

Woman, you can watch her naked when you are bored.

[Xilizhra]

Hazegurl wrote...

Well she better have some sort of terminator steel arm or something cause that scene looked ridiculous.

Two applications of heavy muscle weave, as well as some bone weave. I rather liked it, even though I think her model wasn't the world's best-done.

[TheBlackBaron]

Xilizhra wrote...

At -no time in history- have women formed a majority of soldiers, leaders, or spies during warfare. I'm sorry if that's inconvenient for your narrative, but it's the truth. They are the -exception-.

I'm sorry, why is this relevant to a video game again? Especially one with vastly different social patterns than our world (such as the prophet of the main human religion being both female and a great general)?

We're not arguing about video games right now, Xil, do try and keep up. But for the sake of topicality, here was my very first post in the thread:

TheBlackBaron wrote...

Is there really that much of a difference? I tend to play both when the option is presented (DA2 being a rare exception in that I only played as FemHawke), and when it's not, I'm not all that fussed. I've got no problems playing as Geralt and I've got no problems playing as Faith (Mirror's Edge). 

This is an amazingly overblown issue.

[Heimdall]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

See, I think a lot of it comes down to covering personal histories versus national histories. A lot of families will pass down stories of family members that "were there" at what are thought of as significant moments, and what they did there. 

And while that stuff is almost inevitably fascinating, it's more likely to get covered mainly in a broad strokes sort of way - i.e. women on the Allied home fronts in WWI and WWII. 

Totally agree.  Broad stroke history generally boils out most of the interesting anecdotes in favor of large scale movements and leadership figures.  In war, males have overwhelmingly filled those roles.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 12 novembre 2013 - 02:57 .

[Xilizhra]

Is there really that much of a difference? I tend to play both when the option is presented (DA2 being a rare exception in that I only played as FemHawke), and when it's not, I'm not all that fussed. I've got no problems playing as Geralt and I've got no problems playing as Faith (Mirror's Edge).

This is an amazingly overblown issue.

As you like, although while you might not care about it that much, it's not overblown for those who do.

[Volus Warlord]

FreshIstay wrote...

This. The most accurate statement I've seen you make. 

But I highly doubt people here can name many notable male fighters either, We male's live vicariously through legends, God's, and superheroes.

Uh, well, my favorite distiguished heroes are Tony Stark, Clark Kent, Bruce Wayne,

Hm.. what noteworthy military leaders can I think of off the top of my head that are all better than Joan of Arc...

Well, Joan of Arc supposedly gave a few nice speeches, then was betrayed, captured, and executed. Later viewed as a martyr.  More effective dead then alive. 

Doesn't take much to be better than that.

"Mad Anthony"

Patton, WWII

Eisenhower, WWII

Stonewall Jackson, Civil War

Grant the Butcher, Civil War

Robert E. Lee, Civil War

Erwin Rommel, WWII

Saladin, Third Crusade, if you try to correct me on his name I will slap you

[Silfren]

FreshIstay wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Estelindis wrote...

TheBlackBaron wrote...

The fact of the matter is that history textbooks don't go into great detail on this because most people don't need or care to learn about it in great detail.

Part of the inherent bias in all these accounts stems from the judgement of what is most important, what is so essential that it's the part of history that everyone should know.  Without getting into the nitty gritty of the discussion, the idea that most people need to know more about the male side of history than the female side is not unproblematic.

Personally, I think that this is as clear in Thedas as it is in the real world.  The Codex entries all seem to speak from subjective perspectives that put forward one condensed version of events or another.

I think the statement "...because most people don't need or care to learn about it in great deal" is quite illustrative, actually, of my own point.  

It can't not be in there because people don't care to learn about it...unless of course we are pre-judging what a person wants to learn before they ever read the books.  But if it's not there because we don't need to learn about it...why don't we need to learn about it, and who is making that judgment call? 

As you said, both of those thought processes are extremely problematic.  They can't just be dismissed as harmless.

Here's the deal.

Most people don't know of many Notable Male Fighters outside our own present day examples. So your argument should be more towards "We should be learning more about Fighting history in general" not necessarily Female Fighting history. 

My argument in regards to general history has always been that people should have a far more comprehensive and objective view of history.  The only reason I'm focusing here on women fighters is because of the ludicrous suggestion that female fighters are not credible, and the further one that was made suggesting that women fighters are only present in history as extremely rare exceptions.  I've never claimed that women fighters have ever been 50/50 with men, but the fact remains that there are been far more women fighters in history than for anyone to seriously believe that the very concept of them is somehow not credible. 

[Estelindis]

Hazegurl wrote...

Why does a woman *have* to do the same moves as a man just to prove something?

I call bs on a woman flipping big 200lb men over her bony little arms etc.

Ex: FShepard vs Vega 

Oh gosh - I said I was leaving the thread for tonight, to go to bed, but I just have to respond to this.  I have trained in aikido and jujitsu and know plenty of women (including myself) who can do just as you say - but not necessarily with the "same moves."  Women, who typically have less bulk, have to learn to use their bodies in ways that can unbalance heavier, stronger foes.  Man can learn these methods too, but in many cases they feel like they don't have to, because strength can carry them through.  In fact, in the aikido dojo where I train, there are more lower grade male practicioners, but more higher grade female ones, because the women have to learn to make things work at a really deep level in order to succeed at all.  And the smallest woman in the jujitsu dojo weighs seven stone, yet she's so skilled that she can throw guys of almost three times her weight - not in every throw, but in the most fundamental ones.  

I mean, sure, I found the FemShep vs. Vega fights unrealistic, if one doesn't consider the cybernetics, but there's no reason why fights actually have to be like that.

Okay, now it really is time for bed!

[Xilizhra]

My argument in regards to general history has always been that people should have a far more comprehensive and objective view of history. The only reason I'm focusing here on women fighters is because of the ludicrous suggestion that female fighters are not credible, and the further one that was made suggesting that women fighters are only present in history as extremely rare exceptions. I've never claimed that women fighters have ever been 50/50 with men, but the fact remains that there are been far more women fighters in history than for anyone to seriously believe that the very concept of them is somehow not credible.

As mentioned prior, Seboist is a troll. The longer you go on about this, the more you feed him.

[Hazegurl]

Xilizhra wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

Well she better have some sort of terminator steel arm or something cause that scene looked ridiculous.

Two applications of heavy muscle weave, as well as some bone weave. I rather liked it, even though I think her model wasn't the world's best-done.

Ah, now that makes the most sense.

[Silfren]

Xilizhra wrote...

My argument in regards to general history has always been that people should have a far more comprehensive and objective view of history. The only reason I'm focusing here on women fighters is because of the ludicrous suggestion that female fighters are not credible, and the further one that was made suggesting that women fighters are only present in history as extremely rare exceptions. I've never claimed that women fighters have ever been 50/50 with men, but the fact remains that there are been far more women fighters in history than for anyone to seriously believe that the very concept of them is somehow not credible.

As mentioned prior, Seboist is a troll. The longer you go on about this, the more you feed him.

LOL.  I l haven't been arguing with Seboist for a while; I left him behind a long time ago.  But I did take this thread into a huge off-topic real-world discussion, so I'm bowing out now.  

Modifié par Silfren, 12 novembre 2013 - 03:07 .

[Heimdall]

Volus Warlord wrote...
Uh, well, my favorite distiguished heroes are Tony Stark, Clark Kent, Bruce Wayne,

Hm.. what noteworthy military leaders can I think of off the top of my head that are all better than Joan of Arc...

Well, Joan of Arc supposedly gave a few nice speeches, then was betrayed, captured, and executed. Later viewed as a martyr.  More effective dead then alive.

Military leaders is one thing, but how many front line soldiers?

Personally, I will always remember Jack Churchill, the WWII British special forces commando with the only confirmed enemy kill with a longbow... Because he was a crazy sonuva****.  What sort of man charges ****s with his bagpipes?

And I will always remember the final lesson of American Civil War Union General Sedgewick, who while telling his men that the enemy couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, was shot in the face by a sharpshooter mid sentence...  That's why you don't lead from the front, general.

As to female soldiers, the only one I have personal knowledge of is Deborah Samson, my aforementioned relative that disguised herself as a man during the Ameican Revolution.  There's one story that she extracted two musket balls from her leg with a letter opener because she feared a surgeon would discover her ruse.  She only managed to get one out and had a limp the rest of her life, but damn, that takes toughness.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 12 novembre 2013 - 03:14 .

[Hazegurl]

Estelindis wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

Why does a woman *have* to do the same moves as a man just to prove something?

I call bs on a woman flipping big 200lb men over her bony little arms etc.

Ex: FShepard vs Vega 

Oh gosh - I said I was leaving the thread for tonight, to go to bed, but I just have to respond to this.  I have trained in aikido and jujitsu and know plenty of women (including myself) who can do just as you say - but not necessarily with the "same moves."  Women, who typically have less bulk, have to learn to use their bodies in ways that can unbalance heavier, stronger foes.  Man can learn these methods too, but in many cases they feel like they don't have to, because strength can carry them through.  In fact, in the aikido dojo where I train, there are more lower grade male practicioners, but more higher grade female ones, because the women have to learn to make things work at a really deep level in order to succeed at all.  And the smallest woman in the jujitsu dojo weighs seven stone, yet she's so skilled that she can throw guys of almost three times her weight - not in every throw, but in the most fundamental ones.  

I mean, sure, I found the FemShep vs. Vega fights unrealistic, if one doesn't consider the cybernetics, but there's no reason why fights actually have to be like that.

Okay, now it really is time for bed!

What I bolded is pretty much what I said about showing women and men fighting differently. Sure a woman may be able to flip large men but they don't possess the strength to do it multiple times and at the drop of a hat like the Fshep and Vega fight, in most cases they can't do it at all.  Women have other advantages such as speed and agility. What is so wrong with just acknowledging this?

[Xilizhra]

What I bolded is pretty much what I said about showing women and men fighting differently. Sure a woman may be able to flip large men but they don't possess the strength to do it multiple times and at the drop of a hat like the Fshep and Vega fight, in most cases they can't do it at all. Women have other advantages such as speed and agility. What is so wrong with just acknowledging this?

Do you want to create completely different animations and fighting styles for male and female models?

[TheBlackBaron]

Estelindis wrote...

I mean, sure, I found the FemShep vs. Vega fights unrealistic, if one doesn't consider the cybernetics, but there's no reason why fights actually have to be like that.

Okay, now it really is time for bed!

I think it's more because FemShep is, well, kind of a twig. 

Given that she's an elite special forces operator (or so the game informs us about Shepard, male or female), I'd expect she'd have a physique more like an MMA fighter or something. In which case the sparring match with Vega would make a lot more sense, especially if she's trained in the manner you talked about. 

[Volus Warlord]

Xilizhra wrote...

What I bolded is pretty much what I said about showing women and men fighting differently. Sure a woman may be able to flip large men but they don't possess the strength to do it multiple times and at the drop of a hat like the Fshep and Vega fight, in most cases they can't do it at all. Women have other advantages such as speed and agility. What is so wrong with just acknowledging this?

Do you want to create completely different animations and fighting styles for male and female models?

That's really not too unreasonable tbh. Female doing male animations often look terrilarious. 

[Heimdall]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

I think it's more because FemShep is, well, kind of a twig. 

Well, that and Vega's built like a tank.

[TheBlackBaron]

Lord Aesir wrote...

TheBlackBaron wrote...

I think it's more because FemShep is, well, kind of a twig. 

Well, that and Vega's built like a tank.

James looks like he stepped out of Gears of War. 

Not saying that's a bad thing, I liked Vega, but he's pretty darn ripped.