7155 réponses à ce sujet

[eyezonlyii]

I'd say just leave it be. It'll be just going around in circles, and we'll go more off topic than we really should be. But I hear you. I definitely hear you.

 

 

 

You'll have to pardon me since I hadn't been around much for the origin stories here (I've seen Grand Tourney tossed around, but never really figured where it started in the thread).

 

I had in mind a farm boy or an apprentice smith (I mean, country bumpkins, am I right?) who saw his home, his village, his everything burned to the ground. Not wanting to be caught in the fray, he tried to find his family and get them to safety before bandits could get to them too. Having never seen much battle in his life, he pretty much grabbed the nearest weapon he could find and tried swinging at the assailants every which way while his family made good their escape.

 

PC arrives and hey, encounter and both fight alongside each other. Our novice "knight" looks a little traumatised and promptly leaves to find his family. More stuff happens, Novice Knight crosses paths with PC again, and after living a life on the run and keeping his family safe, he's hardened up as a fighter, but still seems to come off as simple- still wishing life was easy like the life he had before, but because his family is all that he has, he'd be damned if they're taken away as well.

 

What I had in mind was a character who has the makings of a potential knight in shining armour- protective, kindly, eager to serve, brave (well, he's getting there), and physically able (I mean, he does hard labour, right?). But not quite since it's mixed in with the qualities of a protagonist before they embark on this "hero's journey"- wide-eyed, kind of lazy, has a lot to learn, and a bit inexperienced. So... Knight in Peasant's Garbs? Dude's getting there, he just doesn't have the means nor has he figured out that he actually has it in him, yet.

 

I mean, over the course of the game, he slowly starts to "get it" and begins to take charge of his own, rapidly rising through the ranks in your retinue and before you know it, he's seeing himself as your equal and probably would start protecting your player-character.

I think that would work a lot better if the story was over a series instead of one game. Either that or he and the PC would have to start in the same village or whatever and grow together. Otherwise the rapid growth from zero to hero just wouldn't feel organic. hmm...we can combine this...

 

If playing as a human PC, you and Asa (that's what I shall call him) hail from the same village/farm community. It's attacked by bandits, your backstory for him ensues, meanwhile PC and his family are a minor noble family and manage to make it to the nearest larger community. Years later, during the Grand Tourney the PC faces the last man standing, and who is it? Asa the farmboy. He managed to impress a Chevalier enough to become his squire (remember only nobles can be Chevalier). Later it's revealed that the Chevalier in question is actually a relative, thus granting him the ability (through a personal quest) to actually become part of the order. Maybe even participating/sabotaging the infamous "initiation" ritual. With Asa reacting depending on your actions in said ritual (only able to fully participate if you yourself took the Chevalier path).

 

BOOM. Rags to riches and Grand Tourney. 

[Walfan]

Spoiler

I'll do this once. I tried being tactful and patient, and they're not bad traits to have. But you seem set in your ways and there's no way of convincing you. I've read your posts. I disagree. I could go on about why, but I'd just be repeating myself. It's called knowing when to pick your fights, and this one isn't worth it.

 

Sorry.

This I like better, at least you say it to me directly.

[veeia]

This conversation about masculine and feminine coding is interesting, if a bit stressful. As a woman, I can't look at it through the same lens as y'all and so I'll just let actual gay/bi men talk about representation of gay/bi men, haha. 

 

But personally like....for me, while I've talked a bit about how the f/f LI in the games are very femme and I would like something other than that, it doesn't actually reject....that idea of femininity itself. Some of the phrases kicked around here, like "emotional/sensitive", are something that I like in every single human ever, regardless of gender, and something I'm attracted to in any LI....and in terms of ones who have presented that way in Bioware games, they've actually mostly been male. 

[carlo angelo]

I think that would work a lot better if the story was over a series instead of one game. Either that or he and the PC would have to start in the same village or whatever and grow together. Otherwise the rapid growth from zero to hero just wouldn't feel organic. hmm...we can combine this...

 

If playing as a human PC, you and Asa (that's what I shall call him) hail from the same village/farm community. It's attacked by bandits, your backstory for him ensues, meanwhile PC and his family are a minor noble family and manage to make it to the nearest larger community. Years later, during the Grand Tourney the PC faces the last man standing, and who is it? Asa the farmboy. He managed to impress a Chevalier enough to become his squire (remember only nobles can be Chevalier). Later it's revealed that the Chevalier in question is actually a relative, thus granting him the ability (through a personal quest) to actually become part of the order. Maybe even participating/sabotaging the infamous "initiation" ritual. With Asa reacting depending on your actions in said ritual (only able to fully participate if you yourself took the Chevalier path).

 

BOOM. Rags to riches and Grand Tourney. 

 

For some reason, I just imagined the next DA game may cover a certain number of years in its story (kind of like DAII, but probably less than the nine year span it got), so I just kind of went with it? A part of me is kind of hoping so we see some history in the companions' backstories, but that's just a personal preference of mine and how the Origins story worked. Story starts right after the Fade Rifts opened and your PC's like "ah, the ****?".

 

But yeah, hmm, I like that. I could expand on this character's backstory more and have him pop in and out of encounters, but I guess that'll be too much. He's a companion for some time, then he leaves, you go on a mission, and he's there, and has his issues to deal with, and he's suddenly a squire, and then he leaves, and then you're leading a resistance group, and then the grand tourney, and then he's there, and then he rejoins your group bent on becoming the knight he wanted the PC to see because damn...

 

This conversation about masculine and feminine coding is interesting, if a bit stressful. As a woman, I can't look at it through the same lens as y'all and so I'll just let actual gay/bi men talk about representation of gay/bi men, haha. 

 

But personally like....for me, while I've talked a bit about how the f/f LI in the games are very femme and I would like something other than that, it doesn't actually reject....that idea of femininity itself. Some of the phrases kicked around here, like "emotional/sensitive", are something that I like in every single human ever, regardless of gender, and something I'm attracted to in any LI....and in terms of ones who have presented that way in Bioware games, they've actually mostly been male. 

 

It's ...fun? Not for me when I've got stuff to do while going around on the thread, so not right now, but I would encourage other points of view. I mean, how is it for women? I mean, I can only say what I've seen and heard, but it might be far from the truth. So, what would women here really want to see? I think we may have overtaken the thread a little too much.

[veeia]

Oh! I didn't mean to imply that it was stressful because of the large male perspective, y'all do you, I love reading your thoughts and I don't feel sidelined or anything. Just that talking about it relies on dancing around uncomfortable ideas about gender, which can be stressful, but it's still worthwhile to try which is why I chimed in from my own perspective.

I'm not sure what I want. I mean, really what I want is what's on the tin, a lady KISA f/f LI, but beyond that, it gets tricky to define. Partially perhaps because the longer the thread goes on, I'm not entirely sure what falls into that category. I mean, essentially what I would like is a female LI who has an undeniable physicality of strength and a romantic (capital R/ romantic, idealism) streak, even if that particularly streak is something they don't recognize or struggle with. (I say this because I think idealist people can express themselves in a more pragmatic sense as well, and I think that's fab and I like the tension there)

Most of the women I talk about this with are sort of talking from a post Cass perspective, because the disappointment was strong there, as well as the sort of dialogue around it being a good thing she was straight because of "stereotypes", which was very hurtful at times. So to me, the relative "butchness" or "femmeness" of a LI isn't a huge deal because I am attracted to all women who carry big ass swords.... except it is kind of too. No matter how you slice it, a gay lady warrior is always going to be defined by or in opposition to those concepts. She will always be taken to task for it, she will always be scrutinized more harshly than a man or even a straight woman in that position, she will always be representative of a large, diverse community. So I care, and I don't care, and I'm empathetic to all the voices in the community that disagree with each other and all come from very genuine personal places.

[carlo angelo]

Oh! I didn't mean to imply that it was stressful because of the large male perspective, y'all do you, I love reading your thoughts and I don't feel sidelined or anything. Just that talking about it relies on dancing around uncomfortable ideas about gender, which can be stressful, but it's still worthwhile to try which is why I chimed in from my own perspective.

I'm not sure what I want. I mean, really what I want is what's on the tin, a lady KISA f/f LI, but beyond that, it gets tricky to define. Partially perhaps because the longer the thread goes on, I'm not entirely sure what falls into that category. I mean, essentially what I would like is a female LI who has an undeniable physicality of strength and a romantic (capital R/ romantic, idealism) streak, even if that particularly streak is something they don't recognize or struggle with. (I say this because I think idealist people can express themselves in a more pragmatic sense as well, and I think that's fab and I like the tension there)

Most of the women I talk about this with are sort of talking from a post Cass perspective, because the disappointment was strong there, as well as the sort of dialogue around it being a good thing she was straight because of "stereotypes", which was very hurtful at times. So to me, the relative "butchness" or "femmeness" of a LI isn't a huge deal because I am attracted to all women who carry big ass swords.... except it is kind of too. No matter how you slice it, a gay lady warrior is always going to be defined by or in opposition to those concepts. She will always be taken to task for it, she will always be scrutinized more harshly than a man or even a straight woman in that position, she will always be representative of a large, diverse community. So I care, and I don't care, and I'm empathetic to all the voices in the community that disagree with each other and all come from very genuine personal places.

 

You have nothing to apologise for, you're all good. And you wouldn't be wrong- I mean, discussions about personal identity and societal expectations are bound to be tense.

 

But I definitely hear you. I was living with a room-mate- a woman who's attracted to women, and she's into Dragon Age, and when I told her that Cassandra was an romance option for male inquisitors only, she was pretty disappointed. I could see why. I mean, Cassandra was everything a warrior should be, and she just so happened to be a woman. And yet you have a vocal portion of the gaming populace hell-bent on playing as a male inquistor saying that "Cassandra wasn't all that great" (to put it lightly) and for you guys, the thought was probably like "well, gee, we'd appreciate her more than you would!".

 

It would be real nice to see that kind of character again, and if only they were gay/bisexual/pansexual/what-have-you. Trouble is that now that we have Cassandra and there's a good chance she probably won't be playable again, what kind of female character would fill her slot and be able to tick all the boxes she had? Without being a near copy? An Amazonian Avaar female warrior who's boisterous yet genuinely altruistic and outgoing? A bitter Antivan warrior who's seen too much and wishes things were different in those rare moments of vulnerability?

 

I'd like to see what the next game could pull.

[Steelcan]

After skimming the whole "masc vs fem" debate above, what I want to point out is how ironic it is that the traits that are considered "feminine" are almost all part and parcel to a KISA: kindness, chastity, humility, faith, temperance. All these things are there in our minds when we picture a knight, whether or not we admit or had the words to define them. They are countered by his physical stature, or the visible masculinity: the weapon (melee), the armor (strong but not imposing), and his physical stature (well fed and groomed). We see the physical before we get to the internal, thus the internal femininity takes on a more masculine tone. 

 

At least it's ironic to me. 

I disagree that those are "feminine" traits

 

They are common to codes of conduct, exemplified by medieval knights and the code of Chivalry, a decidedly un-feminine group

[eyezonlyii]

I disagree that those are "feminine" traits
 
They are common to codes of conduct, exemplified by medieval knights and the code of Chivalry, a decidedly un-feminine group

If that's true, what then are "feminine" traits? And on the other hand what are "masculine" traits?

[Grieving Natashina]

Oh boy....

[BabyPuncher]

Traits associated with warriors are generally not going to be considered feminine.

 

Thankfully, masculinity and masculine traits don't compromise a woman's femininity. The reverse is not the case.

[Lady Artifice]

The danger here, as I'd perceive it, is the possible misconception that feminine and masculine traits can fit neatly into separate boxes in a discussion with this many different perspectives, especially in the modern world. 

 

Academics have been analyzing the different portrayals of femininity in media for a very long time, and we can see trends and variations in every culture. The word "feminine" is going to mean something different to everyone here, and even though we can discuss general tendencies of that concept throughout history, it's going to be impossible to reach a consensus even if we all try to be as objective as possible.

[BabyPuncher]

The danger here, as I'd perceive it, is the possible misconception that feminine and masculine traits can fit neatly into separate boxes in a discussion with this many different perspectives, especially in the modern world. 

 

Academics have been analyzing the different portrayals of femininity in media for a very long time, and we can see trends and variations in every culture. The word "feminine" is going to mean something different to everyone here, and even though we can discuss general tendencies of that concept throughout history, it's going to be impossible to reach a consensus even if we all try to be as objective as possible.

 

True enough.

 

And yet the concept endures.
 

[carlo angelo]

Certainly shouldn't take the guys complaining and photoshopping 70s hair onto Cassandra and making it their avatar as representative of all straight guys though. Not saying you're doing that. But it's worth reiterating since those threads are always popping up.

 

No, it's just a sliver of them- those who just don't like their options, who make the loudest noise. And I get that there are guys who, even if they don't exactly find Cassandra appealing, have the decency not to be a dick about it and not raise a stink about it among people who would actually enjoy her character.

[Steelcan]

If that's true, what then are "feminine" traits? And on the other hand what are "masculine" traits?

largely it depends on the culture they are found in.

 

Medieval Knights would have been expected to be courteous to their social betters, respectful to women of the court, just to their own subjects.  On the battlefield honorable conduct was of the utmost importance, such as treating prisoners well (Henry V took quite a bit of flak for killing prisoners at Agincourt) and offering mercy if it is asked for.

 

As for more specific traits?  Strength, honor, diligence, faith, chastity, and such were paramount.

 

Obviously the ideal never matched up with reality.

[o Ventus]

Traits associated with warriors are generally not going to be considered feminine.

 

Thankfully, masculinity and masculine traits don't compromise a woman's femininity. The reverse is not the case.

 

So masculinity and masculine traits don't compromise a woman's femininity, but the reverse is not true.

 

So... Femininity and feminine traits DO compromise a man's masculinity? wat

[Dreamer]

So masculinity and masculine traits don't compromise a woman's femininity, but the reverse is not true.

 

So... Femininity and feminine traits DO compromise a man's masculinity? wat

 

Yes.

 

A woman exhibiting masculine qualities does not detract from her femininity. Instead of questioning her womanhood, these qualities generally cause her to be seen as "bossy." The reverse--a man displaying feminine qualities--generally has his masculinity (his manhood) questioned; "feminine" men are subjected to greater levels of abuse about their qualities than, say, "masculine" women.

 

This does not diminish "masculine" women being abused for their sharper qualities. However, it does highlight an interesting intersectionality.

[In Exile]

Yes.

 

A woman exhibiting masculine qualities does not detract from her femininity. Instead of questioning her womanhood, these qualities generally cause her to be seen as "bossy." The reverse--a man displaying feminine qualities--generally has his masculinity (his manhood) questioned; "feminine" men are subjected to greater levels of abuse about their qualities than, say, "masculine" women.

 

This does not diminish "masculine" women being abused for their sharper qualities. However, it does highlight an interesting intersectionality.

 

A great deal of this flowing from the fact that to be integrated into the workplace in the 60s-90s women had to adopt a lot of traditionally 'masculine' qualities (for the time period; these are fluid labels) that became, over time due to their adoption, seen as less universally 'male' though always carrying their positive connotations.

 

The issue being that since the move was to claim 'masculine' traits without the associated negative labels, there was no corresponding 'upfliting' of 'feminine' traits. So while the stigma of women having 'masculine' traits was removed culturally speaking, we never had the reverse for feminine traits.

[ladyofpayne]

 

 

Regarding the archetypes of the LI's we've had up to this point, the gay knight in shining armor is one that has yet to be explored. The idea of a strong, virtuous, noble human warrior with strong morals has only been made available for opposite sex romance. (Alistair, Cullen, Blackwall, and Cassandra).  They tend to have a 'cute' and somewhat awkward quality about them concerning romance and the PC is implied to be one of (if not their only) romantic partners. It tends to make them seem more "innocent."  

I can explain you why- those character believe in Lady and knight romances. But Gay KISA looks intresting LI, I'de like to look at him.

[o Ventus]

Yes.

 

A woman exhibiting masculine qualities does not detract from her femininity. Instead of questioning her womanhood, these qualities generally cause her to be seen as "bossy." The reverse--a man displaying feminine qualities--generally has his masculinity (his manhood) questioned; "feminine" men are subjected to greater levels of abuse about their qualities than, say, "masculine" women.

 

This does not diminish "masculine" women being abused for their sharper qualities. However, it does highlight an interesting intersectionality.

 

wat

 

Your average man displaying feminine qualities isn't "generally" questioned about anything, because "generally" nobody cares enough to judge unless they're a homophobe or some other brand of a******e. 

 

Also, the point I responded to was that feminine traits or qualities actively diminish a man's masculinity. This is simply not the case. A man can have feminine qualities and still be unquestionably masculine. Somebody might question his masculinity, but that's because the person doing the questioning is an ignorant tool, not the fault of the man in question.

 

dependent

emotional

passive

sensitive

quiet

graceful

innocent

weak

flirtatious

nurturing

self-critical

soft

sexually submissive

accepting

 

A list of generally accepted feminine traits, as per PlannedParenthood's website. The ones in bold are positive traits to have regardless of sex or gender. The italicized ones are so commonly seen in people of either sex or gender that even bothering to label someone with them as "feminine" is largely redundant. Every single human being in the world will have feminine traits by virtue of being exposed to estrogen in utero. Likewise, every single human being will show masculine traits due to being exposed to testosterone.

 

A man showing feminine traits doesn't actually make him less masculine. Of those traits I listed above, the ones that are underlined fit me personally, yet I'm a guy and I'm obviously masculine.

[Dreamer]

wat

 

Your average man displaying feminine qualities isn't "generally" questioned about anything, because "generally" nobody cares enough to judge unless they're a homophobe or some other brand of a******e. 

 

Also, the point I responded to was that feminine traits or qualities actively diminish a man's masculinity. This is simply not the case. A man can have feminine qualities and still be unquestionably masculine. Somebody might question his masculinity, but that's because the person doing the questioning is an ignorant tool, not the fault of the man in question.

 

dependent

emotional

passive

sensitive

quiet

graceful

innocent

weak

flirtatious

nurturing

self-critical

soft

sexually submissive

accepting

 

A list of generally accepted feminine traits, as per PlannedParenthood's website. The ones in bold are positive traits to have regardless of sex or gender. The italicized ones are so commonly seen in people of either sex or gender that even bothering to label someone with them as "feminine" is largely redundant. Every single human being in the world will have feminine traits by virtue of being exposed to estrogen in utero. Likewise, every single human being will show masculine traits due to being exposed to testosterone.

 

A man showing feminine traits doesn't actually make him less masculine. Of those traits I listed above, the ones that are underlined fit me personally, yet I'm a guy and I'm obviously masculine.

 

As a man with feminine traits, I can tell you we do, in fact, have our masculinity questioned. Often. By both men and women.

 

No one is arguing that cross-gender behavioral traits actually make someone less male or female, only that those traits diminish the impression of their masculinity or femininity.

[In Exile]

wat

 

Your average man displaying feminine qualities isn't "generally" questioned about anything, because "generally" nobody cares enough to judge unless they're a homophobe or some other brand of a******e. 

 

Also, the point I responded to was that feminine traits or qualities actively diminish a man's masculinity. This is simply not the case. A man can have feminine qualities and still be unquestionably masculine. Somebody might question his masculinity, but that's because the person doing the questioning is an ignorant tool, not the fault of the man in question.

 

dependent

emotional

passive

sensitive

quiet

graceful

innocent

weak

flirtatious

nurturing

self-critical

soft

sexually submissive

accepting

 

A list of generally accepted feminine traits, as per PlannedParenthood's website. The ones in bold are positive traits to have regardless of sex or gender. The italicized ones are so commonly seen in people of either sex or gender that even bothering to label someone with them as "feminine" is largely redundant. Every single human being in the world will have feminine traits by virtue of being exposed to estrogen in utero. Likewise, every single human being will show masculine traits due to being exposed to testosterone.

 

A man showing feminine traits doesn't actually make him less masculine. Of those traits I listed above, the ones that are underlined fit me personally, yet I'm a guy and I'm obviously masculine.

 

You're absolutely wrong. None of these are my own views, they are all stereotypical, and they are meant to be extreme charicatures. Let me illustrate:

 

"Sensitive": Oh, someone said something mean to you and now you're crying about it? Sack up.

"Graceful": Oh, great, a ballerina. Maybe next you can take up cheerleading.

"Nurting": LOL, stay at home dad. Get a real job, like a man.

"Self-critical": Have some confidence. Big deal, you got rejected once.

"Accepting": Oh, great, a SJW.

 

The problem isn't that they're common. The problem is that they're used as attacks when they're seen as being inappropriately held in contradiction to whatever social convention is in force at the time.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

You're absolutely wrong. None of these are my own views, they are all stereotypical, and they are meant to be extreme charicatures. Let me illustrate:

 

"Sensitive": Oh, someone said something mean to you and know you're crying about it? Sack up.

"Graceful": Oh, great, a ballerina. Maybe next you can take up cheerleading.

"Nurting": LOL, stay at home dad. Get a real job, like a man.

"Self-critical": Have some confidence. Big deal, you got rejected once.

"Accepting": Oh, great, a SJW.

 

The problem isn't that they're common. The problem is that they're used as attacks when they're seen as being inappropriately held in contradiction to whatever social convention is in force at the time.

To be fair, everything can be a negative stereotype. I can't think of a single attribute that doesn't has an insulting retort like the ones you gave. 

[o Ventus]

You're absolutely wrong. None of these are my own views, they are all stereotypical, and they are meant to be extreme charicatures. Let me illustrate:

 

"Sensitive": Oh, someone said something mean to you and know you're crying about it? Sack up.

"Graceful": Oh, great, a ballerina. Maybe next you can take up cheerleading.

"Nurting": LOL, stay at home dad. Get a real job, like a man.

"Self-critical": Have some confidence. Big deal, you got rejected once.

"Accepting": Oh, great, a SJW.

 

The problem isn't that they're common. The problem is that they're used as attacks when they're seen as being inappropriately held in contradiction to whatever social convention is in force at the time.

 

So I'm wrong because.... You decided to give those traits a negative connotation? The hostile remarks you're making don't even have to do with femininity as much as it's just one person being a d***head to another person.

[In Exile]

To be fair, everything can be a negative stereotype. I can't think of a single attribute that doesn't has an insulting retort like the ones you gave. 

Well, certainly. The issue is whether the negative stereotype is (1) tied to gender and (2) in particular to men having qualities traditionally seen as feminine.