What hiding? The Tranquil are right there. They don't lose their memories, they don't forget how to speak. Didn't any of the other templars ever think to speak to the tranquil?
It's possible most of the Kirkwall templars were decent but if so they were also sodding morons.
That doesn't mean the tranquil wouldn't lie if Alrik threatened them into silence (T'would be a logical course of action, tranquil seem to avoid making a fuss whenever they can)
Well, firstly, it is a majority, and secondly, it's already been explained that it will be a winning cause if you choose to make it so, so I'm not worried.
No it's not. Vivienne says very clearly that the majority of mages were opposed to breaking away, the rebels just did not care and did it anyway. Not one scrap of evidence out there exists that the majority of magi want what the Libertarians are shoving down their throats. Not one.
Tells you what kind of mages these rebels are: selfish, uncooperative, it does not matter to them what most of the other mages want, they will readily throw them under the bus for their own selfish wants. If that's how they treat those most like themselves, it does not bode well for how they will get along with everyone else, especially since public opinion of mages has taken a hit (thanks, Anders). And you, for some strange reason, think that getting rid of Templars is a good idea, so you are taking away the thing that would otherwise stand between the mages and the many people who now want to harm them.
Tevinter 2.0 is in full swing.
Not going to get into a long argument about this, but you are absolutely dead wrong. Women were not treated like that and it was not legal. Stop buying into feminist versions of human history.
So in history, women were never treated as second class citizens? Really? Don't make me list all the civil rights that women didn't have, and had to fight for, or how the majority were treated - and in some parts of the world - are still being treated.
I'm not a "feminist" but I don't appreciate the blinders some men put on when they try to poo poo real concerns from women. Like catcalling a girl when she's simply walking down the street. We've come a long way, but don't ignore the past and try to pretend it doesn't exist.
Edit: Not trying to derail the thread, so I'll go with what Vivienne says, "Run along, dear."
No it's not. Vivienne says very clearly that the majority of mages were opposed to breaking away, the rebels just did not care and did it anyway. Not one scrap of evidence out there exists that the majority of magi want what the Libertarians are shoving down their throats. Not one.
Tells you what kind of mages these rebels are: selfish, uncooperative, it does not matter to them what most of the other mages want, they will readily throw them under the bus for their own selfish wants. If that's how they treat those most like themselves, it does not bode well for how they will get along with everyone else, especially since public opinion of mages has taken a hit (thanks, Anders). And you, for some strange reason, think that getting rid of Templars is a good idea, so you are taking away the thing that would otherwise stand between the mages and the many people who now want to harm them.
Tevinter 2.0 is in full swing.
Well working conditions in the circle where not really tolerable where they. you had rapist , murders unsanctioned tranquillity. There was no armed rebellion until the templars made one by actively waging war on the mages. Perhaps fiona tried to pry concessions from the chantry with her little act. To bad she didnt know the templars where corrupted by good old cory.
If your employee is a dick you go on strike which basically the entire mage rebellion is. untill the templars came and made it a war. good job lambert.
Not going to get into a long argument about this, but you are absolutely dead wrong. Women were not treated like that and it was not legal. Stop buying into feminist versions of human history.
Not wrong at all, young man.
During the early Middle Ages, young women who were given to the landlords to marry men who were much older than them were frequently assaulted and, because of the forceful sexual relations, ended up dead because of internal hemorrage.
In that period, the women were as young as 13 years old and the men, already around his thirties.
Read your History books.
For all the Greeks' speech about democracy, they were a highly discriminating society.
Only a minority that owned lands and was enlightened had any rights at all.
The vast majority could not own land, private property or have an income. Women and slaves could not study, could not participate in politics and could not voice their opinion, unless it agreed with the general consensus, imposed by a tiny minority.
And women were seen as property by her husband.
This was part of the greek culture, widely accepted as normal and supported by the legal system.
There's no feminism in that. It's History. Some people need to close their browser and open their books a bit more. You won't learn those facts only engaging in internet debate.
You dont have to be a super privileged mage to be able to leave the tower , remember Finn from Witch Hunt ? he had a lot of freedom even leaves the tower with you and helps you track Morrigan.
Anyways this is kind of a waste of time for both parties pro mages will continue to blindly defend the mages and the anti mages will do the same . I personally will be supporting Vivienne's cause because i believe she is in the right.
You dont have to be a super privileged mage to be able to leave the tower , remember Finn from Witch Hunt ? he had a lot of freedom even leaves the tower with you and helps you track Morrigan.
To play devil's advocate, I don't remember all the specifics of Witch Hunt, but couldn't that amount to the Warden-Commander / Hero of Fereldan just going "borrowing this mage for a bit, brb" and nobody blinking an eye because they let the guy who saved the world do pretty much whatever he wants.
To play devil's advocate, I don't remember all the specifics of Witch Hunt, but couldn't that amount to the Warden-Commander / Hero of Fereldan just going "borrowing this mage for a bit, brb" and nobody blinking an eye because they let the guy who saved the world do pretty much whatever he wants.
Nope he said he was going to leave the circle to go out and do some research anyways but what could be better than going with you to investigate the eluvian.
So he could have left on his own if he wanted.
Here is an interesting discussion with Finn for those who claim that mages never get to see the outside when they go into the circle
To play devil's advocate, I don't remember all the specifics of Witch Hunt, but couldn't that amount to the Warden-Commander / Hero of Fereldan just going "borrowing this mage for a bit, brb" and nobody blinking an eye because they let the guy who saved the world do pretty much whatever he wants.
Actually Finn says he had received permission to pursue his research outside the Circle some time ago, he just never had a reason to.
Not wrong at all, young man.
During the early Middle Ages, young women who were given to the landlords to marry men who were much older than them were frequently assaulted and, because of the forceful sexual relations, ended up dead because of internal hemorrage.
In that period, the women were as young as 13 years old and the men, already around his thirties.
Read your History books.
I'm going to get into this only once, 'cause as a historian bad history infuriates me. This discussion shows up again in this thread, though, and it will be reported.
Fact one: the age variance between men and women that is often reported is, in fact, false. The vast majority of women were married between eighteen and twenty, and men from twenty-five to thirty. Same as its been for the last five thousand years or so. The reason for this is economic: it costs obscene amounts of money to raise a family in any era, never mind the Early Medieval Period. Men, quite simply, had neither the land (or profession) to marry until they were older. The only major exception to this were the nobility and royalty, who did often marry quite young, but again, those quotes of thirteen year olds marrying thiry year olds is fiction.
Fact two: lords did not have the right of Primae Noctae.
Fact three: Yes, women were raped and some died. Sometimes from internal bleeding, sometimes not.
For all the Greeks' speech about democracy, they were a highly discriminating society.
Only a minority that owned lands and was enlightened had any rights at all.
The vast majority could not own land, private property or have an income. Women and slaves could not study, could not participate in politics and could not voice their opinion, unless it agreed with the general consensus, imposed by a tiny minority.
And women were seen as property by her husband.
This was part of the greek culture, widely accepted as normal and supported by the legal system.
There's no feminism in that. It's History. Some people need to close their browser and open their books a bit more. You won't learn those facts only engaging in internet debate.
While this is closer to accurate, it is still not true. Firstly, it was Athens that claimed to be democratic, not all of Greece. Indeed, there was no Greece at the time, only a collection of diverse city-states that had wildly different cultures and attitudes towards women. Spartan women, for example, were educated, had property rights, could (and did) initiate divorce, and served as the king's regent while they were away on business. The queens, I mean. Not a random women off the streets.
This brings up the second point: Free women in Ancient Greece were very different from slave women in Ancient Greece. While slave women are much as you describe, this was not (necessarily!) true of free women.
Wow, I honestly thought she was Morrigan 2.0, but she is quite charming with a subtle aggression.
I almost wish she was a romance option.
For all the Greeks' speech about democracy, they were a highly discriminating society.
Only a minority that owned lands and was enlightened had any rights at all.
The vast majority could not own land, private property or have an income. Women and slaves could not study, could not participate in politics and could not voice their opinion, unless it agreed with the general consensus, imposed by a tiny minority.
And women were seen as property by her husband.
This was part of the greek culture, widely accepted as normal and supported by the legal system.
There's no feminism in that. It's History. Some people need to close their browser and open their books a bit more. You won't learn those facts only engaging in internet debate.
I'm pretty sure the part the poster was disputing wasn't that women were mistreated, just that they were valued as much as a vase, raped to death frequently without legal consequence, and were the same as slaves. They were not. Actually Athens, which I assume you mean by "Greeks", was unusual in its low treatment of women. Women in other city states may have been barred from political life, but many allowed women to hold property, including land (The most prestigious form of property). Sparta in particular provided education for women and allowed limited participation in athletic events (Admittedly because the Spartans believed strong women produced strong sons)
As a medieval and classical historian as well as a feminist(and a straight male too), let me address both greece and medieval europe
Ancient Greece
First lets start off with the most notable thing. Ancient greece was a collection of city states. They did not get along nor did they share views. Every city state liked to say "my city is the best, and all yours suck" parphrasing of course. Despite popular notion, women in greece were not treated horribly everywhere. In fact one can aruge that it was an athenian custom, not greek(if one can say that in the first place)
Women did have a role in religion, even in Athens. Though they often had much more influence and power else where.
You say that women can't own property, which is false as we have historical records of women from Sparta, Delphi, Gortyn, Thessaly, and Megara holding property. As in documents. Two of the major philosphical schools, the cynics and the stoics supported equality for women. the cynics even supported equal learning for women, the stoics thought that men and women should wear the same clothes.
Besides Sparta, other city states were supportive of women in the greater greek world, Tarentum, Locri, Sybaris, and several other city states. Here are two documents on them.
Polybios' histories on the Epizephyrii Locrians
Athenaeus' Deipnosophists section on Sybaris.
Women played roles in plenty of importnat circles from religion, which even athens had priestess, to intellectual life. In religion there were actually a number of festivals only for women, of course a number of other festivals were limited to just men as well. people might be familar with Sapho, but she wasn't the only female poet in ancient greece. Women also took part in science and philosphy. from the cynics to the Pythagoreans.
Antipater of Thessalonica's Palatine Anthology listing women poets
Life of Pythagoras by Iamblichos detailing a list of important pythagorean women.
Athenian women on the other hand were treated like crap. They were unable to enter into contracts that were greater then a medimnos of barely, which was about enough food to last a week. They had no way to repersent themselves, they had to have a male guardian. In short the women of athens were treated like crap compared to the rest of greece.
It was Athens where we tend to look at first and look at the records from. Though one can argue that athens might be the exception of ancient greece. This isn't to say that life for women was great in the other city states, in many places it still could be rather patriatihacal. But to view every city state by the lens of the Athenians is wrong.
Medieval Europe
First the age is wrong. we have documents that like most of history marriage occured between women around the age of 18-20s and men who were in their twenties. Nobility could be different in age, but even then this rule is the general rule of the time frame. The idea that prima-noctia existed is false, no such right existed. No noble would allow such a right to exist in the first place.
Unlike ancient Greece, most of the documents do support much more horrible treatment to women in this era. Women were often viewed for their political marriageability and little else among the nobility. They were definitely second class citizens. They were not regarded highly during this era. Property rights could rarely go to women, and only when their were no men.
yet, despite that, there were women who pushed things forward. You had noble women such as Matildia of Tuscany and Eleanor of Aquatine. You had religious women such as St. Clair who ended up founding her own monastic order of nuns after francis said no, she also was bald. You had women involved on both sides of heresy during this time frame as well.
you had numerous writers, probaly one of the most important IMO is Anna Comnena of the roman empire during the byzantine era Anna was a princess of byzantium, her father was Alexius the Ist. She penned the Alexiad, a detailed account of her father's reign as emperor. Not to mention other works, but that work is one of the best works on the roman empire during this era. Here for example is a huge biblography for other women authors during this period that might be illuminating.
To just say women had it horrible in the middle ages and nothing more does not show that women did live and exist and some even managed to push the boundries. We should not just wipe away their successes, and their achievements because of the general attitude of the time.
Can we PLEASE keep the discussion of Vivienne and not derail this topic with further discussion on the history of women's rights? Real life's treatment of women =/= how mages are treated in Thedas. Take the topic elsewhere if you are so intent on discussing the matter.
No it's not. Vivienne says very clearly that the majority of mages were opposed to breaking away, the rebels just did not care and did it anyway. Not one scrap of evidence out there exists that the majority of magi want what the Libertarians are shoving down their throats. Not one.
Tells you what kind of mages these rebels are: selfish, uncooperative, it does not matter to them what most of the other mages want, they will readily throw them under the bus for their own selfish wants. If that's how they treat those most like themselves, it does not bode well for how they will get along with everyone else, especially since public opinion of mages has taken a hit (thanks, Anders). And you, for some strange reason, think that getting rid of Templars is a good idea, so you are taking away the thing that would otherwise stand between the mages and the many people who now want to harm them.
Tevinter 2.0 is in full swing.
Actually, she said that the independence vote succeeded by a small margin, which would imply a majority.
Also, the templars are the main group trying to harm the mages. And my Inquisition will happily step up to do the job that they failed to.
Retour en haut