Normally, I laugh and "someone was mean to me on another forum" threads and think they are a bit pathetic, but someone was mean to me on another forum (https://www.gamingtavern.eu/tavern/index.php?threads/misogynists-of-the-stone-age-or-wt-actual-f.1367/). Normally, I would have replied to the thread or on the same site, but the thread has been closed by a Moderator and I don't want to open up a new thread to reply to a closed thread. However, The RPG Site has had cross-forum threads in the past.
I do note the vitriol of the OP on the other thread, which is not particularly nice. Also, the claim that I am a misogynist, which is completely untrue.
However, I have posted my response below. If this thread is then closed, fair enough, but I thought I should at least post a response rather than letting it fester inside me.
Quote from: Stronty GirlOk guys, I just need to check - this is almost two decades into the 21st Century, right? I haven't accidentally fallen through a hole in time and ended up in some benighted, misogynist century or ended up in Gilead from The Handmaid's Tale? Because I appear to have purchased some RPGs from there. Specifically two RPGs about the ice age: Land of Ice and Stone (OGL from Wizards of the Coast/Mongoose) and Wurm (Nocturnal).
Land of Ice and Stone is not by Wizards of the Coast, but is by Mongoose.
Quote from: Stronty GirlFirst, Gathering in LoIS. Skip ahead if you've already read my complaint in Roger's RPG forum (link above). LoIS thinks it is being all equal opportunities, but keeps slapping me down every time I might dare to have the expectation that playing a female character might be fun. For instance, here's their description of the Gatherer skill:
QuoteAlthough the typical image of Stone Age people is of a hunting band heroically bringing down a mammoth, the vast majority of food is gathered, not hunted. Most gatherers of the Land of Ice and Stone are women, children, old men and the crippled or infirm. Skilled in the knowledge of plants and animals, they gather nuts, berries, small game, shellfish, and much, much more. (Page 13).
Sorry, but 'skilled' is damning with faint praise, because your underlying message is: women are incompetent and useless. You've just said Gathering is so easy it be done by feeble people, such as a 5 year old child, a frail elderly person or someone with a stinking cold. It is so simple it can be done by incompetent people, such as clueless kids, pensioners with dementia or people suffering from life affecting brain injuries. Also I dare you to climb a tree or cliff to collect bird's eggs or to harvest honey, or even to dig up tubers with a digging stick if you are 'crippled or infirm'. Yes, hunter-gatherer kids get sent to do gathering, but that doesn't mean that all gathering tasks can be done by kids.
That was definitely not the intention. Gatherers are the mainstay of life in the Old Stone Age. They collect most of the food and raw materials used by a Clan. Roots, tubers, nuts, berries and eggs are what keeps people alive. Grass, pieces of wood, scavenged bones and so on provide many of the raw materials of the Old Stone Age, far more than gained by Hunting. Gathering is a very important profession in Land of Ice and Stone.
Men can be Gatherers, of course, and often are. The mention of children being Gatherers just makes them productive members of the Clan and allows them to learn the skills used in Gathering. The elderly and infirm can help with Gathering, as they can do the easy stuff. At no point was this meant to imply that Gathering is an easy thing to do, nor that it is of low value.
Climbing a tree of a cliff in search of birds eggs is difficult and would only be done by experienced Gatherers. I do not say that it isn't, or cannot remember saying this.
Quote from: Stronty GirlMeanwhile, there is no mention in the Crafter skill that it could be done by children, old men and the crippled or infirm. The Hunter skill only mentions men, and says hunters are "self-reliant and brave". Apparently killing small game doesn't count as hunting, because we wouldn't want any implication that women are self-reliant and brave would we?
In Land of Ice and Stone, the cultures have roles that are usually carried out by one gender. In all cases, people of the opposite gender can do those roles, but it is unusual. Where gender is not mentioned, those roles are shared across the genders. So, yes, women can be crafters, as can men. Both can be healers, Wise Ones, Clan Leaders and so on. Hunters are usually men, due to the strength needed, but a physically strong or skilful woman could be a Hunter, or Huntress. In hindsight, I should have included a Huntress as one of the Spirits worshipped.
Quote from: Stronty GirlNope the wimminz won't have any time to be self-reliant and brave, because they'll be too busy having babies. Reproduction must be a major thing in LoIS and Wurm games, because there are game mechanics for getting pregnant (Wurm) and for surviving the pregnancy (both LoIS & Wurm). So, um, why aren't there these sections on pregnancy in games set in the faux-Middle Ages of fantasy RPGs? Or in steampunk or Victorian RPGs? Or in any bleeding RPG set prior to the invention of modern, reliable contraceptives? Basically why is this information about pregnancy even a thing in these games?
LoIS at least makes including character pregnancy and the risk of mother or child dying in the game optional. Which is just as well, because it's fallen into that well known trap of lies, damned lies and games designers who don't understand statistics. Pregnant women have to make three Resilience rolls or they will have some complication. Fumble and mum and child may die. However the probability of NOT having a complication is about 1% for an average woman and 17% for the rufty-tuftiest Neanderthal woman.
In Land of Ice and Stone, nobody understands modern medicine. The best they get is a Lore, handed down from generation to generation. Operations are difficult and rare. Things like a Caesarean are unheard of and would be fatal even if they were known, in Roman times, Caesareans were done to save the baby not the mother. Death in childbirth was extremely common in pre-modern times and I have no reason to think it would be less common in the Old Stone Age.
Maybe the maths is wrong, but for game mechanic purposes it needed to be a problem on a non-succeeded roll. Perhaps a Fumble would have been more appropriate at each stage. There is always a balance between playability and actual fact in RPGs.
Quote from: Stronty GirlAll this pregnancy and childbirth getting you down? Then don't worry - cheer up with a 'Humorous Scenario' (p167) where transgender people are used for laughs (Wurm). LoIS is better on this point and has 'Gender Change' as a possible Background Event for character or NPC backstory, p24, with no overtones of poking fun at trans people.
Why would I poke fun at trans people, or anyone else for that matter?
Quote from: Stronty GirlNext... there is no 'mature players' warning on the cover or back of either book. Which brings me to... Underage sex.
LoIS however head for creepy paedo territory with this:
QuoteBecause of the meat-rich diet, children reach puberty very early, typically between 10 and 13. This means that they will normally be sexually active at the next Summer Festival. Games Masters and players may feel uncomfortable with this and may prefer to raise the maturity age to something more like modern-day levels.
Uncomfortable at the idea of people shagging 10 year olds? No shit, Sherlock. So why even bother including this in the game? Unless you want to corner the creepy paedo market? And where the hell did you get that 10 to 13 figure from? That's not from modern hunter gatherers - they average about 15 years old at onset of puberty. Also, it's not MEAT it's FAT which is the main nutritional factor in reducing age at puberty.
Meat/fat – I am not a Doctor and am only going by things I have read. Puberty has come down in the modern world because the diet includes more meat/fat. A Palaeolithic diet had a lot of meat/fat and puberty would have been earlier. Also, life expectancy was so low that it would have made no sense to delay bearing children until modern-day levels, as most people would have died by then.
Quote from: Stronty GirlMeanwhile, when we reach the scenario section, there's a ceremony where the kids who are now hitting puberty (the 10 to 13 year olds) pull a token from a bag to find out which of the "handpicked and trained people of the opposite sex" will relieve them of their virginity. So they don't get to choose who shags them. And they don't get to say "But I'm gay!" And the 'trained people' smacks of a creepy paedo's wet dream.
OK, this is an homage to the Earth's Children series of books, where one of the clans does this. I thought it was a nice idea as a rite of passage. Perhaps I was wrong.
Quote from: Stronty GirlAnd finally we graduate from implied off-screen rape to actual rape as a throwaway plot element. This time it is LoIS which is dazzlingly inappropriate.
ANOTHER SPOILER ALERT.
Then the next part of the scenario arrives. A half-Neanderthal arrives and the PCs can prevent him being attacked by racists and picked on by bullies and superstitious locals. The PCs can help him find acceptance with one of the less racist clans - so it looks like we're on track for a happy ending again. But wait. Here comes the WTF moment:
When Ba'Tan is feeling better, he can stand and walk for a short distance but he has a pronounced limp. One night he gestures to Sa'Tal [the lovelorn Juliet girl from the earlier part of the scenario] and when she does not react, he drags her to him where he begins to couple with her. Do the adventurers try to stop him, or do they leave him alone? If they complain, he says: "She Hearth Woman, she do this."
Complain? Complain??? Don't you mean react with horror and outrage? Don't you mean beat the living shit out of a guy who is raping a girl in public? The girl you obtained a happy ending for last session. I mean even if you are playing a nasty, brutish and short RPG or are showing off your literary credentials by pointing out this is a 'homage' to the scene where Broud rapes Ayla in Clan of the Cave Bear, this act specifically violates the game setting's taboo about having sex with hearth-sisters and hearth-mothers!
In the section of Red Men, it mentions that they have different notions of love and marriage. They have not made the connection between sex and reproduction and sex is just a routine thing for them.
The idea of this part of the scenario was to show that the Red Man was different to the PCs and had a different idea of what was and was not acceptable. The PCs have the chance to educate the Red Man and teach him their ways. Ideally, they would have stopped him. Maybe I should have made that clearer.
Quote from: Stronty GirlIs any of this mentioned? Nope. We cut to the next morning, where the PCs have to escort the rapist to see the tribal elders. A bunch of the girl's relatives are 'spoiling for a fight'. But when the scene with the elders occurs, those elders ask "how Ba'Tan has been and whether he has been any trouble". WTF?
So the scenario assumes that no-one has done anything about the rapist the day before. News hasn't spread like wildfire through the camp, because the elders don't know about it. The girl, her new beloved husband and/or her mother have not been to see the elders. In fact there is no mention of how the girl reacts or feels at all. She becomes Miss Not Appearing in These Scenes. The elders decree:
This must be settled quickly, otherwise there will be trouble at Summer Camp. You will take Ba'Tan back to Black Elk clan today.
Riiiight. There's already BEEN trouble you wanker of a scenario writer! A girl was raped FFS. But the main concern of your elders is to prevent a fuss. So there's no actual punishment for rape. Ba'Tan is just quietly moved to another parish. Sorry, I mean clan.
Life in the Old Stone Age is brutal and short, so there is a taboo on killing people. Even though he is not a member of their clans, he is a guest at the Summer Camp and is subject to that taboo. Exile is a way of getting rid of people without killing them. Quite often, exile is just a longer way of killing the person.
There is a subtext here, that the Black Elk Clan has a sub-clan who are partly Red Men. They accept and welcome Red Men to their clan. The Elders know this and know that he would be happier among the Black Elk clan, as he would have people there who understand him and how he behaves. Again, perhaps I should have spelled this out rather than dropped hints.
Quote from: Stronty GirlNext they are about to depart and...
Ba'Tan points to Sa'Tal and asks: "Pretty woman coming too?"
Mataan {Romeo husband] and Sa'Tal look to the adventurers for their decision, because this is their trip.
Yup, it is not the girl's choice if she wants to accompany her rapist on a trip to another clan's lands. That's the PCs choice.
So the PCs are off on the trip with the rapist, some blokes from the girl's clan (including her newly-wed husband), and some blokes from the clan he's being sent back to. Then we get this...
If Sa'Tal has come with them, then Ba'Tan wants to couple with her most nights; after a few nights the Black Elk hunters want to share her and scold Mataan if he disagrees.
It was at this point that I realised that the writer doesn't think what happened to Sa'Tal is rape and is quite happy with the notion that women have no choice about who shags them.
Ok, I handled that badly.
The Red Men do not consider that as rape, as they don't have that concept. It is accepted that people of the hearth have recreational sex with each other and that is a common and everyday thing. They just don't have the same mindset as we do. Clearly Sa'Tal has a different opinion and that should have been made clearer and that was a mistake on my part.
Quote from: Stronty GirlAnd the rapist's fate when he reaches the new clan? "They hold a feast in celebration of Ba'Tan's arrival". f**k you Simon E. Phipp.
This is part of the sub-text that the Black Elk clan has a substantial number of half-Red Men in their clan and they welcome him as one of their own kind.
His punishment was exile to the Black Elk clan.
Quote from: Stronty GirlLand of Ice and Stone or Wurm: Women are incompetent. Women are property. So best play a Man and just use women as scenery or props.
GURPS Ice Age: People are just, you know, people.
The intention of Land of Ice and Stone was definitely "People are just people." And I apologise if that did not come through.
Quote from: NewtThe author of LoIS, Simon Phipp, got a permaban from me on ever reading or buying any of stuff again after his first RPG release,
Merrie England the Age of Eleanor which came out during the Mongoose RQ1 days. For a book that uses the name of one of the greatest historical figures of the Middle Ages it only details her in the major NPCs section, and there all it says is in effect "in an age where the kidnapping of brides was commonplace, Eleanor was kidnapped a lot". That's it. No mention of her power and influence, her famous marriages or famous offspring - or anything her fucking huge Wikipedia entry (which if even you were a lazy rpg writer of dubious quality you could have easily raided for content).
For me, Eleanor of Aquitaine is one of the most complex and interesting people of that period, which is why I named the supplement after her. I could easily have filled a whole chapter with her history, intrigues, the Court of Love, her support of troubadours, her relationship with her husband and sons, but this was a short supplement and I did not have the space for that. It is something that I have always wanted to do, but have never had the time. Perhaps I should make the time.
As for the bit about kidnapping of brides, that happened and happened a lot. Eleanor was an heiress and an important one. She was married to the King of France's son, to secure her lands, quite probably against her will. The marriage was annulled after 15 years because she had not produced a male heir, on grounds of sanguinity, but nobles of the period often married unsuitable people just so they could have the marriage annulled when it became inconvenient. She married the future Henry II because other noblemen tried to marry her by force.
She backed Henry against France, each of her sons against Henry, Henry against her sons, John against Richard and Richard against John. She was a shrewd politician and used her children as pieces in a long game of chess. She was instrumental in raising Richard's ransom and bringing him back to England.
She scandalised Europe in the Second Crusade, survived two husbands, was the mother of three kings, if you count Henry the Young King, two queens, one duke, one duchess, one count and two countesses. Her influence stretched across Europe and I apologise that I could not include more about her.
I'm not particularly intersted in comments, but feel free if you wish.
I suppose I could have put this in a blog somewhere, but nobody would read that.
At least here, people can have a look and dismiss me as some sexist, misogynistic, paedo nut-job, which, although I think pretty far from the mark, is what the OP of the other thread seems to think.
Trying my hardest not to come across as a pathetic, whiny loser, not sure if I have succeeded.
SJWs gotta SocJus. Don't let the bastards get you down.
Wow some serious off base accusations there. Sounds like Land of Ice and Snow is meant to be a relatively realistic historical depiction of life in the stone age.
What's next, complaints that a WW2 game includes Nazis?
For what its worth, I've seen your interactions on several RPG sites (beyond The RPG site :D ) over the years and I've always found your replies polite, helpful and well thought out.
I appreciate the effort and I understand why you would want to respond, but you're basically arguing against a religious zealot, you can literally imagine the woman frothing at the mouth as she deliberately misinterprets the intent of the text.
It's cavemen - interpersonal relationships aren't going to be politically correct. You look at studies of aboriginal peoples today you find worse stuff than Jean Auel for sure. It is what it is. Being called a pedophile is serious, you should contact a lawyer about that.
Newt got you a little bit on Eleanor, would one page have killed you? :D Still, it looks like Newt wasn't pissed because of lack of information, looks like he was offended for her. I didn't know Newt was a card-carrying member.
Sympathies, man. Being attacked for no good reason sucks at the best of times.
How dare you attempt to write a game that aims for historical authenticity for the period which it covers! If anything you've been tame, where were the complaints about commonplace infanticide?
I really hate it when ignorant people think their burning desire for "social justice" is a substitute for educating themselves on a topic they choose to expound upon.
There is no reason she can't create a whole new world and fantasy setting that espouses her beliefs. Blue Rose is a good example of such. Historical settings are going to relate to history (duh); where women were not held in high-esteem. If anything, these settings should remind us, that in the 21st century we know better and can CHOOSE to act/believe differently. If you don't want that in your game, seek out a setting you like.
Ignore the haters. She's angry and needs to vent. In the end it's only going to prevent sales to people who would not have enjoyed these books anyways. The irony is that feminists are seeking equality and fair/respectful treatment. No special oppressive rules. So, in this quest, she angrily shits on your books AND sets up special oppressive rules against historical settings. I keep bringing up the pendulum. Society has these swings. Eventually, the more reasonable people are left standing while the extremists have burnt themselves out from teeth-gnashing and fist-pounding. Be patient. This too shall pass.
Well I had never heard of The Tavern before and after reading the posters attack on the game. I do not want to ever hear of that site again if they all act that mad dog insane.
Quote from: CRKrueger;1058361Newt got you a little bit on Eleanor, would one page have killed you? :D Still, it looks like Newt wasn't pissed because of lack of information, looks like he was offended for her. I didn't know Newt was a card-carrying member.
Quote from: Merrie EnglandEleanor was the Duchess of Aquitaine and Countess of Poitiers as her birthright and held those lands even after marriage. She married Louis of France, heir to the Holy Roman Emperor, and then to Henry, Prince of England. She was Queen Consort of the Franks,
Queen Consort of England, Queen Mother and regent of England. She had two daughters by Louis, five sons and three daughters by Henry. Her daughters married kings, counts and dukes, her sons were princes, dukes and kings. Eleanor spoke French and Latin, although her native tongue was Poitevin, one of the langues d'oil or langues d'oc spoken in the south of France. She was literate and well educated, versed in music and literature, skilled in riding, hawking and hunting. A great beauty and a rich and powerful heiress, Eleanor was in danger of being abducted and married to powerful men, as was often the custom of the time. She was married to both Louis and Henry to avoid being kidnapped.
Queen Eleanor was famous for promoting the ideas of Chivalry and Courtly Love. Indeed, her court of Poitiers was a veritable Camelot. These ideas were spread by the troubadours and minstrels across the Angevin realm and soon reached Merrie England where they were embraced by the nobles.
There is a view that the idea of Courtly Love was partly responsible for transforming the Barony of Merrie England from a bunch of Robber Barons to a chivalric collection of knights. Certainly this process was started during the life of Queen Eleanor.
Richard I composed several poems in his Occitan dialect and the Angevin Kings, and Queen Eleanor in particular, were patrons and supporters of Troubadours.
There is more in Merrie England:Age of Chivalry, which mentions the Courts of Love. Admittedly, I would have liked more.
Don't worry, Simon. With worse art and layout, Newt would've loved it.
Quote from: soltakss;1058344Meat/fat – I am not a Doctor and am only going by things I have read. Puberty has come down in the modern world because the diet includes more meat/fat. A Palaeolithic diet had a lot of meat/fat and puberty would have been earlier. Also, life expectancy was so low that it would have made no sense to delay bearing children until modern-day levels, as most people would have died by then.
Meat, sure. High-latitude H/Gs might well have had a pretty high proportion of meat in the diet. Less true the further south you go, but based on the title, this is all about high-latitude H/Gs, so fine. Lotsa meat.
But fat? Unless these H/Gs are whaling or sealing, their game is going to be pretty lean most of the year. And so will the H/Gs! despite all efforts to extract every little bit of fat from the carcasses and preserve and stockpile it if possible, it will never seem like it's enough. Fat will always be at a premium, scarce and desirable.
Age of puberty AFAICT seems to be clinal with later further north, earlier further south, independent of meat & fat consumption. I'd expect Ice Age hunter gatherers to have puberty pretty late. I guess one could research the Eskimo & Inuit tribes for this sort of stuff.
Hunting vs Gathering - again it is clinal, the further south you go, the more Gathering dominates. In the far north there is often little or nothing to Gather and so Hunting dominates as source of calories.
Quote from: Eisenmann;1058383Don't worry, Simon. With worse art and layout, Newt would've loved it.
:)
I am not a fan of OpenQuest to be honest, but I still buy it to support D100 Gaming and because I can use parts of some of the Scenarios. I also recommend it to other people who are looking for a slimmed down D100. I could easily have permabanned OpenQuest, but that isn't in my nature.
Quote from: Stronty GirlAnd finally we graduate from implied off-screen rape to actual rape as a throwaway plot element. This time it is LoIS which is dazzlingly inappropriate.
ANOTHER SPOILER ALERT.
Then the next part of the scenario arrives. A half-Neanderthal arrives and the PCs can prevent him being attacked by racists and picked on by bullies and superstitious locals. The PCs can help him find acceptance with one of the less racist clans - so it looks like we're on track for a happy ending again. But wait. Here comes the WTF moment:
When Ba'Tan is feeling better, he can stand and walk for a short distance but he has a pronounced limp. One night he gestures to Sa'Tal [the lovelorn Juliet girl from the earlier part of the scenario] and when she does not react, he drags her to him where he begins to couple with her. Do the adventurers try to stop him, or do they leave him alone? If they complain, he says: "She Hearth Woman, she do this."
Complain? Complain??? Don't you mean react with horror and outrage? Don't you mean beat the living shit out of a guy who is raping a girl in public? The girl you obtained a happy ending for last session. I mean even if you are playing a nasty, brutish and short RPG or are showing off your literary credentials by pointing out this is a 'homage' to the scene where Broud rapes Ayla in Clan of the Cave Bear, this act specifically violates the game setting's taboo about having sex with hearth-sisters and hearth-mothers!
I'm surprised she didn't also denounce this as anti-immigration rhetoric.
First of all, regarding cross-forum response in general. The thread in The Gaming Tavern is closed, but I think it would only be fair to invite Stronty Girl to the discussion, rather than trying to discuss stuff behind her back.
Quote from: S'mon;1058394Age of puberty AFAICT seems to be clinal with later further north, earlier further south, independent of meat & fat consumption. I'd expect Ice Age hunter gatherers to have puberty pretty late. I guess one could research the Eskimo & Inuit tribes for this sort of stuff.
Hunting vs Gathering - again it is clinal, the further south you go, the more Gathering dominates. In the far north there is often little or nothing to Gather and so Hunting dominates as source of calories.
There's disagreement about age of puberty - the old dominant theory was that it went with climate, but I think at this point there are competing theories and it seems likely that there are multiple factors - including fat and/or protein in the diet, overall BMI, general good health, as well as climate. From what I see, Inuit children of north Alaska have age of menarche at 13 to 14. For example, the link below says 13.68 +- 0.79 years.
https://books.google.com/books?id=0OFkK9JSWYMC&pg=PA53&lpg=PA53&dq=inuit+age+of+menarche&source=bl&ots=d36SYTDhhc&sig=45oU_7UQbPUTVP6DGO3qcjh76xo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjDxefFtuPdAhUCOKwKHZTkAesQ6AEwBnoECAYQAQ#v=onepage&q=inuit%20age%20of%20menarche&f=false
In general - I haven't read "Land of Ice and Stone", so take this with a grain of salt. Historical realism does mean that women have many problems - but games are often very selective in their realism. So, for example, in a hypothetical game - women characters have to deal with a high chance of death from complications or infection in childbirth - but male characters don't have to deal with a high chance of death from infected wounds.
Quote from: jhkim;1058449Historical realism does mean that women have many problems - but games are often very selective in their realism. So, for example, in a hypothetical game - women characters have to deal with a high chance of death from complications or infection in childbirth - but male characters don't have to deal with a high chance of death from infected wounds.
I think there's some truth in this but most games avoid long term consequences such as crippling injuries, and wound infection tends to go in there. So you might see a chance for death in childbirth (just like death in battle, probably without a detailed 'giving birth' subsystem!) but you'll rarely see rules imposing long term injuries, infertility etc just as you won't see long term combat injury rules.
Quote from: jhkim;1058449First of all, regarding cross-forum response in general. The thread in The Gaming Tavern is closed, but I think it would only be fair to invite Stronty Girl to the discussion, rather than trying to discuss stuff behind her back.
There's disagreement about age of puberty - the old dominant theory was that it went with climate, but I think at this point there are competing theories and it seems likely that there are multiple factors - including fat and/or protein in the diet, overall BMI, general good health, as well as climate. From what I see, Inuit children of north Alaska have age of menarche at 13 to 14. For example, the link below says 13.68 +- 0.79 years.
Sure. That sounds quite late to me, anyway. Sounds like a reasonable number (ca 13 to 14.5) to use for a Stone Age setting, anyway.
BTW my impression is that Arctic populations tend to limit fertility, and one way of doing that is late marriage, as well as monogamy. I remember reading stuff about this possibly influencing Cro Magnon evolution. I think it would be quite plausible to have a stone age Ice Age population where people weren't having babies until 18+ or even later. I don't think the modern tropical hunter gatherer populations much studied by anthropologists are likely to be a good fit.
Quote from: jhkim;1058449In general - I haven't read "Land of Ice and Stone", so take this with a grain of salt. Historical realism does mean that women have many problems - but games are often very selective in their realism. So, for example, in a hypothetical game - women characters have to deal with a high chance of death from complications or infection in childbirth - but male characters don't have to deal with a high chance of death from infected wounds.
Few RPGs have one and not the other. And D&D has had rules for infections in various modules for quite a long time now. Think Wilderness Survival Guide had some rules as well? There is also been rules for long term injury in some editions. Broken limbs and other hazards. But older editions of D&D may have baked infection into the recovery rules. PCs brought down to 0 HP were in really bad shape afterwards and recovery took quite a while where they were effectively bedridden. Not to mention AD&D had rules for diseases.
As for the whole puberty thing. Most large primates seem to hit puberty around 15 according to research so 15 for cave men types seems reasonable. Some research suggests they might be fertile earlier than that. But for whatever reasons apparently tend not to start being active till they hit the mid teens? At a guess that is when the body actually matures enough to actually have a chance at successfully bringing a child to term. Assume primitive humans were probably the same.
I remember a time when The Tavern was a nice, low-traffic place where you could talk about fun games.
Oh well...
I haven't read your book, but they've made the same idiotic claims about Lion & Dragon. Apparently being historically accurate is now 'misogyny'.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1058649Apparently being historically accurate is now 'misogyny'.
Because the very notion of Post-Modernism can't make the distinction between subject or object. History and anyone trying to portray it realisitically, is part of the very problem they pretend to be outraged about. They do not understand *how* we evolved to get from there to here, but they pretend they do.
It's much easier to simply be outraged and blame you for their self-loathing.
Quote from: tenbones;1058698Because the very notion of Post-Modernism can't make the distinction between subject or object.
Correct. That's the structural reason they want to destroy history. The ideological reason is of course that without history, no one will know what they're lying about or how it's all happened before or how it turned out the last times people like them were allowed to be in control (gulags and killing fields).
Quote from: jhkim;1058449First of all, regarding cross-forum response in general. The thread in The Gaming Tavern is closed, but I think it would only be fair to invite Stronty Girl to the discussion, rather than trying to discuss stuff behind her back.
Nobody invited me to that thread, so I didn't get the chance to respond. I don't want to open up a thread on a forum in response to a banned thread on that forum. However, if someone else wants to invite her in then that's fine by me.
So I still haven't read Land of Ice and Stone, so still no comment on that. If it seems on-topic for you, soltakss, I did want to comment on general historical accuracy vs. misogyny.
Quote from: RPGPunditApparently being historically accurate is now 'misogyny'.
Quote from: tenbones;1058698Because the very notion of Post-Modernism can't make the distinction between subject or object. History and anyone trying to portray it realisitically, is part of the very problem they pretend to be outraged about. They do not understand *how* we evolved to get from there to here, but they pretend they do.
It's much easier to simply be outraged and blame you for their self-loathing.
I agree that historical accuracy isn't misogyny - but I have encountered misogyny masquerading as historical accuracy. A number of years ago, I picked up "The Greenland Saga" module for D20 because I was running a related semi-historical game about settlers from Greenland. However, despite recommendations of it as being historically accurate in a number of forum discussion and reviews, I would definitely qualify it as being misogynist rather than historically accurate. Below was my analysis of women in the module.
QuoteThis is a module put out by by Avalanche Press. Two others of Avalanche's D20 historical series in 2001 were awarded for Origins Awards (one of them twice). It received good reviews in Dungeon Crawler Magazine and rpg.net. I bought it thinking it might have useful material for a related RuneQuest campaign which I was GMing.
The adventure begins with a 7-page introduction to the historical setting for the game: 15th century Scandanavia, and Greenland in particular. This includes a quarter-page section on women which presents a reasonably balanced view of women's social status in the time period. However, in terms of rules mechanics, there are only three adjustments which it suggests for D&D character creation. These are:
- Remove all weapon/armor proficiencies and spell use from clerics (to reflect Roman Catholicism).
- Females have -3 Strength, +1 Dexterity, and +1 Constitution. (This is in a sidebar which ends with the text: "Life is not fair. Deal with it.").
- Triple the cost of the Swim skill.
While each of these is individually justifiable as realistic, the module suggests no changes for bards, druids, sorcerers, or wizards -- all of which I think have far more effect on historical accuracy than females with average Str, Dex, and Con. So the selection is significant.
Interestingly, the adventure itself flatly contradicts the historical introduction on many points. The introduction describes how the Icelanders are organized in extended clans, which is true. However, the adventure itself has the colony devoid of families or even explicitly married couples. The only extended community described is a group of men, of which the adventure notes: "No women are present, and the men of the Five Hundred speak often of sex and women in crude and sophmoric terms. However, if any female adventurers or NPCs come to Brattahild with the party, the men of the Five Hundred will show themselves to be painfully shy around them."
Of the 31 NPCs in the adventure, three are female. The first two, Elisabeth and Sigurd, have charisma 19 and 20, respectively. They are both beautiful, high-level, unmarried noblewomen (7th-level Aristocrat and 7th-level Aristocrat / 2nd-level Sorceror, in an adventure for 2-4 level). The third, Katrina, is the "long-time companion" of a man subtitled "Norse Trash", and has the following notes accompanying her stat block:
Special: Barbarian Rage. For a period of three days, every 28 days, Katrina is able to invoke barbarian-like rage. During this period, her strength increases to 13 and she is also able to use the Improved Bull Rush feat. Changing Charisma. Katrina actually cleans up quite nicely - her charisma rises considerably (from 6 to 14) if she is bathed and out of the presence of Snorri (her "long-time companion"). Illiteracy. Katrina cannot read or write, though she could learn to do so with intensive training. Lust: Katrina is consumed with lust for any male of reasonable age and appearance who is not Snorri. This obsession rules her actions.
And as if the reference to menstruation weren't enough, her description further notes that: "If Snorri is not watching, she 'accidentally' allows her blouse to fall open as she leans over near male members of the party, exposing her small and very dirty breasts."
What is notable here is how the gender roles manifest. It is absolutely not the case of making women conform to historical roles. To the contrary, the women have no duties as mothers or nurturers. Instead, we have a contrast. Elisabeth and Sigurd are ultra-beautiful and powerful but inaccessible. As the module describes Sigurd: Sigurd's intelligence and beauty have long made her stand out among her fellow Greenlanders. Over the years this has given her an arrogant turn of mind. She does not suffer fools easily, and reacts with ill-concealed contempt to what she considers silly questions or statements. There are many frustrated suitors among the Greenlanders who will bitterly claim that she considers herself too good for any of them. They're right, but so is she.
The other is Elisabeth Elisabeth Camilla, a 7th Level Aristocrat and titled as "Ruthless Merchant Princess". She appears in the beginning as the one who finances the PC's expedition. Her description begins: She will appear very soon after the guard departs, a rather short but undeniably beautiful red-haired woman. In her wake will come several more strapping young men she calls her "entourage." Intensity radiates from her, and she is much more abrupt and focused than the genteel Marcello, moving directly to her offer with a speed verging on rudeness.
In contrast, Katrina is extremely accessible (as explicitly noted in her stat block!), but is also pathetic. Again, this is not caused by the historical period -- quite the opposite! There are no women who would be normal for the period: i.e. wives and mothers. Instead there are aloof beauties and trashy sluts.
I didn't use the word misogyny originally, but I have no trouble applying it in this case. It has been passed off as historical accuracy, but it is not.
Quote from: jhkim;1059192I didn't use the word misogyny originally, but I have no trouble applying it in this case. It has been passed off as historical accuracy, but it is not.
Yes, but...
The SJW is inclined to see
every historical RPG supplement as an Avalanche Press product in disguise. :D
Quote from: Omega;1058370Well I had never heard of The Tavern before and after reading the posters attack on the game. I do not want to ever hear of that site again if they all act that mad dog insane.
This. Also I'm posting to subscribe.
Quote from: S'mon;1059198Yes, but...
The SJW is inclined to see every historical RPG supplement as an Avalanche Press product in disguise. :D
And there are others who will defend even the indefensible.
Which is the problem really. It's becoming increasingly difficult to have any reasonable discussion anywhere around these issues. If you don't take one extreme position you end up getting accused of holding the other.
Quote from: TJS;1059228And there are others who will defend even the indefensible.
Which is the problem really. It's becoming increasingly difficult to have any reasonable discussion anywhere around these issues. If you don't take one extreme position you end up getting accused of holding the other.
Greetings!
TJS, you know, your commentary made me smile. You are very right! It made me think, especially your second two sentences, it reminds me of how pathetically stupid and deeply *UNEDUCATED* the left morons truly are--and some idiots on the right, as well. You know, in some basic Philosophy classes you learn about two major fallacies--one is "Arguing from the Extreme" and the other one is making a "Straw Man" argument. Arguing from the Extreme is fairly self-explanatory; however, the Straw Man is making the argument against an opponent, accusing them of arguing in favor of "A", and this is why they are wrong hateful nazis. Oh, wait, the problem is, the opponent was not arguing "A" at all, but was arguing in favor of "B". Leftists do this all the damn time, engaging in both of these fallacies. They especially like doing it when there is an audience or crowd. They get to emotionally whip up support for their claims, and if you're the opponent, you now look like Attila the Hun. Most importantly, the argument is really entirely irrelevant to your leftist opponent--these antics are done specifically to win over the crowd against you, and to get you to shut the fuck up, back down, and go away, crushed in defeat.
I can't tell you how many times I have seen and experienced this kind of scenario. Honestly, when I was in college dealing with this, I realised that liberals by and large are so brainwashed and choked with ideological jelly, they cannot comprehend reason, facts, logic, evidence, and possessing a sincere respect for philosophical rules long established through logic, and a comprehension and respect for TRUTH. They just don't have it, and don't care. It is all an ideological war for them.
And another point, I remember learning all this from a good Philosophy professor that insisted we actually learn logic and critical thinking, and the "rules of logic and philosophy" which have been established so we can actually use logic and critical thinking, as intellectual tools, to increase our understanding of whatever and actually solve problems or come up with solutions. God, I know that's a mouthful, and probably like too much syrup on the brain, lol--but these principles of logic and critical thinking are just essential for you (a person) to actually cultivate an intellectual capacity beyond that of a fucking ape.
I hope my commentary made some kind of sense. Sometimes I think faster than I type, and I get things jerked around. The sad thing is--so many liberals go to college, they claim to be so educated and well-read...and yet, they fanatically insist on holding forth on ideas and behavior that would get them absolutely fucking flunked with an F in a basic Logic class. I lament how deeply uneducated so many people are. The state of our education system is a fucking toilet I'm sad to say. Absolutely disgusting what this bullshit is doing to our entire society. It's like a psychological disease is being spread into the minds of all of these people, day in, day out. *sigh*
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: TJS;1059228And there are others who will defend even the indefensible.
Yes, and Left-extremism has spawned a reactionary Right-extremism, with both sides prone to purity spiralling.
Quote from: S'mon;1059239Yes, and Left-extremism has spawned a reactionary Right-extremism, with both sides prone to purity spiralling.
Is SJW always from the left, though? I am very left-leaning in many ways, in fact most Americans would think of me as almost a pinko-commie. However, I try to see things objectively.
For example, I have argued on several forums that women adventurers, women fighters and so on are historically accurate and should be a normal part of RPGs, in fact I think that Professions should not be forbidden by gender based on ability, but can be restricted based on cultural issues. There are exceptions, so a man cannot be a Wet Nurse, for example.
Quote from: soltakss;1059241Is SJW always from the left, though? I am very left-leaning in many ways, in fact most Americans would think of me as almost a pinko-commie. However, I try to see things objectively.
For example, I have argued on several forums that women adventurers, women fighters and so on are historically accurate and should be a normal part of RPGs, in fact I think that Professions should not be forbidden by gender based on ability, but can be restricted based on cultural issues. There are exceptions, so a man cannot be a Wet Nurse, for example.
It depends on what you mean by left. Definitely it's not associated with the right (although of course other types of puritanism traditionally are). Many on this forum seem to see the left as a continuum with SJW as it's most radical end - but that doesn't seem right to me.
Most of those who would be regarded as SJWs don't really show much interest in traditional left wing economic goals, or class, or wealth equality. And this seems to be increasingly the case (not surprising really once you start getting corporations like Starbucks on side with things like diversity training any real left-wing goals start becoming decidedly murky - it's not as if they're about to stop being economically neo-liberal and embrace unionism). It was Hilary Clinton who suggested breaking up the banks won't end racism or sexism. (With the subtext that she's happy to keep society's current divisions and just change some of the actors - in the light of which it's hardly surprising that a lot of working class voters who supported Sanders thought she had noting to offer them.)
I'm increasingly seeing critiques of identity politics coming out of the radical left. (In the older sense of the radical left). Things like this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=0lcYP_zOOXg).
Quote from: soltakss;1059241Is SJW always from the left, though? I am very left-leaning in many ways, in fact most Americans would think of me as almost a pinko-commie. However, I try to see things objectively.
For example, I have argued on several forums that women adventurers, women fighters and so on are historically accurate and should be a normal part of RPGs, in fact I think that Professions should not be forbidden by gender based on ability, but can be restricted based on cultural issues. There are exceptions, so a man cannot be a Wet Nurse, for example.
I would say the SJW are all Leftists...but not all Leftists are SJW.
In your case you claim to be a "pinko commie."
I may despise that economic/political outlook but I will still treat you as a human being that I can argue/disagree objectively about that with. SJW are incapable of arguing objectively, because they base their opinions on emotions not logic.
In the US I know a number of Bernie supporters who believed his policies were viable. I may think they are stupid about that but I won't fault their 'principles', because they don't think I should be terrorized for voting for Trump. These people also decided not to vote for Hillary because of her level of corruption. The SJW brigade would dump them in the same awful 'misogynist' group as me even though the only thing we agreed on was her unfitness due to a lack of ethics.
True Marxists/Communists/etc. don't judge people based on what the have between their thighs, who they want to sleep with or how much melanin is in their skin. Therefore I can have an honest discussion with those people on the merits of their proposed policies.
Personal Side Note: Even though I disagreed with him, I actually respected Bernie as being somewhat honest for a politician. Up until he took the money and ran when the DNC screwed him over. Evidently his "principles" weren't worth fighting for...
On the original topic: Throughout history, humans have differentiated jobs based on sex. Those separations were based on the actual physical differences between the sexes. In general terms, men are physically larger and stronger than women. Therefore the more arduous physical tasks would be relegated to them...primitive hunting versus gathering. An individual man can produce more children and do so at a faster rate than a woman, because he is not "out of action" for 9 months at a time. This would make individual women more valuable than individual men for propagation of the culture in a primitive society, leading women to be the 'protected' sex.
Those are simple facts. Denying them simply makes the denier look like an idiot. Arguing about how 'bad' an
RPG based on primitive society is for including this, moves that person from 'Idiot' to a category I affectionately refer to as "Stupider than my wife's dog."
btw...What about a wet nurse who identifies as a man?
...and also this: Soltakiss, your economic/social policies suck!! :p
(but that discussion should be in the other part of the forum.)
Quote from: moonsweeper;1059250btw...What about a wet nurse who identifies as a man?
That's fine, I have no problem with that kind of thing.
Quote from: moonsweeper;1059250...and also this: Soltakiss, your economic/social policies suck!! :p
(but that discussion should be in the other part of the forum.)
Fortunately, I don't go to that part of the Forum. I just have this sense that people shouldn't be left to starve or die homeless on the streets in the modern world. I know, mad, isn't it?
Quote from: moonsweeper;1059250On the original topic: Throughout history, humans have differentiated jobs based on sex. Those separations were based on the actual physical differences between the sexes. In general terms, men are physically larger and stronger than women. Therefore the more arduous physical tasks would be relegated to them...primitive hunting versus gathering. An individual man can produce more children and do so at a faster rate than a woman, because he is not "out of action" for 9 months at a time. This would make individual women more valuable than individual men for propagation of the culture in a primitive society, leading women to be the 'protected' sex.
Those are simple facts. Denying them simply makes the denier look like an idiot. Arguing about how 'bad' an RPG based on primitive society is for including this, moves that person from 'Idiot' to a category I affectionately refer to as "Stupider than my wife's dog."
I'm not sure who you're arguing with here. I didn't see anything in Stronty Girl's argument being about gender roles or physical differences in Land of Ice and Stone. I did express a problem with the rules changes in The Greenland Saga, though. What I said was -
QuoteThe adventure begins with a 7-page introduction to the historical setting for the game: 15th century Scandinavia, and Greenland in particular. This includes a quarter-page section on women which presents a reasonably balanced view of women's social status in the time period. However, in terms of rules mechanics, there are only three adjustments which it suggests for D&D character creation. These are:
- Remove all weapon/armor proficiencies and spell use from clerics (to reflect Roman Catholicism).
- Females have -3 Strength, +1 Dexterity, and +1 Constitution. (This is in a sidebar which ends with the text: "Life is not fair. Deal with it.").
- Triple the cost of the Swim skill.
While each of these is individually justifiable as realistic, the module suggests no changes for bards, druids, sorcerers, or wizards -- all of which I think have far more effect on historical accuracy than females with average Str, Dex, and Con. So the selection is significant.
I am not denying historical reality here, but I do think that this is being extremely selective in what parts of reality it enforces. The base D20 rules are very far from historical reality in a lot of ways, and I think that choosing only these to enforce does reflect sexism. And I think there is plenty of corroborating evidence in the rest of the module of that sexism.
Quote from: soltakss;1059241Is SJW always from the left, though?
Yes, Social Justice Warriors are always from the Left.
National Socialist Justice Warriors, OTOH...
This was not posted in the OP, but it betray's Stronty Girls motivations.
QuoteI like prehistoric fiction for a variety of reasons:
I've always been interested in prehistory, palaeontology and archaeology. My interest in history pretty much ends with the Romans pulling out of the UK and doesn't get engaged again until WW1 or WW2.
It's a time period where everyone has to have survival skills and know practical stuff like how to make stone tools or splint a broken leg, which I find very appealing. I have zero interest in historical heroines (or heroes) whose whole skill set is embroidery, small talk over tea with the vicar and identifying the most fashionable hat at Ascot, while off-screen an army of servants does all the work to feed and clothe them.
Prehistoric fiction has enough fantasy in it (spirit power, curses, shamanic visions) to make it magical, but doesn't have all the high fantasy/epic fantasy tropes which annoy me (elves, orcs and other standard fantasy races, dark lords with undead armies, lost heirs to kingdoms, Vancian magic, etc). Magic and religion are one and the same thing, rather than being split into two separate areas of life.
The inter- and intra-tribal politics can be complex and nefarious, but there are not so many strata of society, or factions and subgroups within society that you need a Game of Thrones style glossary at the start of the book to remind you who the hell all these nations, clans and/or people are.
As mentioned in the OP, there are female protagonists and female coming of age stories in abundance. The women are not coming of age with an their only end point being defined in relationship to a guy: "Tom's sister", "Dick's wife" or "Harry's mother". Even in the slushy romantic ones where finally being able to marry your Twu Wuv is a main plot thread.
As to how many Ice Age RPGs do you need... you can never have too many RPGs, of any genre. :)
Sounds like she is really calling these games out for bad wrong fun. They failed to check with her about what she wants in a historical game.
I'd also like to know why she feels children, the elderly and infirm have nothing to offer this world. ;)
QuoteSorry, but 'skilled' is damning with faint praise, because your underlying message is: women are incompetent and useless. You've just said Gathering is so easy it be done by feeble people, such as a 5 year old child, a frail elderly person or someone with a stinking cold. It is so simple it can be done by incompetent people, such as clueless kids, pensioners with dementia or people suffering from life affecting brain injuries.
It is pretty clear to me from this bit alone that the OP (Stonty Girl) is not being honest with her criticisms.
Quote from: jhkim;1059274I'm not sure who you're arguing with here. I didn't see anything in Stronty Girl's argument being about gender roles or physical differences in Land of Ice and Stone. I did express a problem with the rules changes in The Greenland Saga, though. What I said was -
I am not denying historical reality here, but I do think that this is being extremely selective in what parts of reality it enforces. The base D20 rules are very far from historical reality in a lot of ways, and I think that choosing only these to enforce does reflect sexism. And I think there is plenty of corroborating evidence in the rest of the module of that sexism.
Why are you looking to connect the game in the OP with games that have issues? Are there games that handle gender poorly, sure.
There are posters over there making comparisons to FATAL, so you might want to either read the game in question and address actual issues with
it or step your game up if you want to poke at the game from ignorance. As it stands currently you are doing it wrong from either angle. :p
Quote from: Toadmaster;1059287Why are you looking to connect the game in the OP with games that have issues?
I'm never sure if Kim is coming from a position of Wormtongue-ish cunning, or just Aspergers. :p Sorry Kim but Toadmaster's point is dead on, you do this all the darn time!
Quote from: Toadmaster;1059287Why are you looking to connect the game in the OP with games that have issues? Are there games that handle gender poorly, sure.
There are posters over there making comparisons to FATAL, so you might want to either read the game in question and address actual issues with it or step your game up if you want to poke at the game from ignorance. As it stands currently you are doing it wrong from either angle. :p
As far as I can tell, no one posting here - other than the author - has demonstrated having actually read Land of Ice and Stone. However, many posters have made blanket points about the idiocy of feminist critique of historical games.
For those who have read Land of Ice and Stone - please speak up now and discuss Stronty Girl's actual points.
If you haven't, then at least be fucking honest like me and say that you haven't read it.
Quote from: soltakss;1059272Fortunately, I don't go to that part of the Forum. I just have this sense that people shouldn't be left to starve or die homeless on the streets in the modern world. I know, mad, isn't it?
That's not 'pinko-commie' that's caring for your fellow human being, which I'm finding very lacking in this day and age of regressivism. Hell, most stone age societies took care of their own, even the infirm, as best they could. Because the CARED for each other.
Quote from: jhkim;1059293As far as I can tell, no one posting here - other than the author - has demonstrated having actually read Land of Ice and Stone. However, many posters have made blanket points about the idiocy of feminist critique of historical games.
For those who have read Land of Ice and Stone - please speak up now and discuss Stronty Girl's actual points.
If you haven't, then at least be fucking honest like me and say that you haven't read it.
I'm basing my comments on the fairly obvious hyperbole of Stronty Girls post. It is clear from the language that she uses that she has an axe to grind and will not let something like facts get in her way.
Not posted by Simon, but there was also this
QuoteAnd while each of the games have nice bits here and there, they are both just an epic, epic fail on appealing to women. (Or indeed in some places of appealing to decent human beings of any gender). Which is really bizarre because if you know anything about the prehistoric fiction genre, you know that a metric f**k tonne of it is aimed at women.
That does a pretty nice job of highlighting that she is not interested in historical accuracy, but rather a game that ignores all that historical baggage about gender roles to focus on attracting female players. That is fine, that is a perfectly reasonable thing to look for in a game. It does not mean that games which don't focus on attracting women by excluding some of the negative features of the past are anti-woman.
I also have some knowledge of Simon's work and his history of posting on several RPG sites.
He also point by point explains why the issues brought forward were done and accepts responsibility in some areas where he concedes that he might have presented some things more delicately.
Personally I feel his biggest mistake was in assuming players of a historically based game were educated adults, always a foolish assumption.
Your initial comments seem in line with those of others if coming from another view point (yes some do dismiss these kinds of claims quite lightly). I take no issue with that. However you seem to ignore the author's comments on how and why things were done.
I specifically mentioned your repeated pointing at a game product that has no relation to Simon's game except for tangentially the genre (Greenland during the 15th Century vs stone age in a non specified but cold climate).
In a general misogyny in gaming thread, that would be on topic, but to keep going back to a specific game product that has no connection to the author, game in question or even a common publisher makes about as much sense as discussing how D&D is screwed up because Runequest.
Quote from: jhkim;1059274I'm not sure who you're arguing with here. I didn't see anything in Stronty Girl's argument being about gender roles or physical differences in Land of Ice and Stone.
I wasn't arguing with anyone. I was simply stating my opinion based on how disingenuous Stronty Girl was with her arguments to Soltakss. Soltakss has the important quotes in post #2.
First she sets up a strawman that Soltakss equates women to the same usefulness as children and the infirm because they all have the "Gathering" skill and somehow he is implying that they are all equally worthless. Then she dares a crippled person to climb a tree in an attempt to show that he is wrong, when in fact he made no such claim. All he did was have the various uses headed under a single skill. (hence a "strawman" on her part)
Next we have her issue with childbearing/pregnancy where she asks "Why is it even in there?"...uh, because it's about a stone age tribal culture centered around survival.
Then she goes on to the puberty argument, where she both attempts to apply a modern moral code to a stone age survival culture and attempts to slap down Soltakss' research and knowledge with the fat vs meat argument...what, now she is trying to establish academic credentials??
Everything after this was simply Stronty Girl brow-beating him with all of the current ultra new wave feminist rape culture talking points.
The icing on the cake is the section that Toadmaster quoted in post #39 where she said she had an interest in prehistoric history, archaeology, etc. but her interest in history ends with the Romans leaving England and doesn't start up again until WW I...Apparently Joan of Arc, Elizabeth I and Lucretia Borgia only had skill sets consisting of talking with the vicar over tea, embroidery, etc...Hell, at this point I'm surprised she didn't miss Boudica.
Like I said, disingenuous...especially if she actually has any 'real' knowledge of those cultures.
@ Soltakss...Do not apologize to her. Maybe you could have made a few things clearer, but she wasn't reading those things objectively anyway. From the way she laid out her arguments she was only going to interpret them in the worst possible light.
...Also, I was only yanking your chain with the wet nurse comment.
Quote from: moonsweeper;1059329I wasn't arguing with anyone. I was simply stating my opinion based on how disingenuous Stronty Girl was with her arguments to Soltakss. Soltakss has the important quotes in post #2.
First she sets up a strawman that Soltakss equates women to the same usefulness as children and the infirm because they all have the "Gathering" skill and somehow he is implying that they are all equally worthless. Then she dares a crippled person to climb a tree in an attempt to show that he is wrong, when in fact he made no such claim. All he did was have the various uses headed under a single skill. (hence a "strawman" on her part)
Next we have her issue with childbearing/pregnancy where she asks "Why is it even in there?"...uh, because it's about a stone age tribal culture centered around survival.
Then she goes on to the puberty argument, where she both attempts to apply a modern moral code to a stone age survival culture and attempts to slap down Soltakss' research and knowledge with the fat vs meat argument...what, now she is trying to establish academic credentials??
Everything after this was simply Stronty Girl brow-beating him with all of the current ultra new wave feminist rape culture talking points.
The icing on the cake is the section that Toadmaster quoted in post #39 where she said she had an interest in prehistoric history, archaeology, etc. but her interest in history ends with the Romans leaving England and doesn't start up again until WW I...Apparently Joan of Arc, Elizabeth I and Lucretia Borgia only had skill sets consisting of talking with the vicar over tea, embroidery, etc...Hell, at this point I'm surprised she didn't miss Boudica.
Like I said, disingenuous...especially if she actually has any 'real' knowledge of those cultures.
@ Soltakss...Do not apologize to her. Maybe you could have made a few things clearer, but she wasn't reading those things objectively anyway. From the way she laid out her arguments she was only going to interpret them in the worst possible light.
...Also, I was only yanking your chain with the wet nurse comment.
Greetings!
That's right, Moonsweeper! I love your dissection of *Strontygirl's* pathetic, though insidious argument. You took the words right outta my mouth. LOL.
Well done.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: Stronty GirlAnd while each of the games have nice bits here and there, they are both just an epic, epic fail on appealing to women. (Or indeed in some places of appealing to decent human beings of any gender). Which is really bizarre because if you know anything about the prehistoric fiction genre, you know that a metric f**k tonne of it is aimed at women.
Quote from: Toadmaster;1059313That does a pretty nice job of highlighting that she is not interested in historical accuracy, but rather a game that ignores all that historical baggage about gender roles to focus on attracting female players. That is fine, that is a perfectly reasonable thing to look for in a game. It does not mean that games which don't focus on attracting women by excluding some of the negative features of the past are anti-woman.
OK, I'm not interested in speaking for Stronty Girl. I don't know what she is interested in.
But your assumption here is that "appealing to women players" is the same as "ignoring historical baggage about gender roles". I don't think that is the case. I haven't run a prehistoric campaign, but I've run a number of campaigns set in the past that still appealed to women players.
Speaking for myself - if I were running a realistic prehistoric game, I would want to make it appealing to women players. And that's not by ignoring the baggage or making it unrealistic - it's by working within the reality to make play fun.
For example, within hunter gatherer societies - rape of a woman by her husband is often tolerated, but rape of a woman by an outsider likely means beating or killing the offender. The latter plot is just as realistic as protecting the outsider rapist and escorting him to where he will be welcomed. If I was going to include a rape plot at all in the core book (which could easily be avoided, I think), then the latter would work better for many players - men and women.
The last 15 or so posts in this thread seem to have taken a hard right turn away from the Land of Ice and Stone and into the shit that is usually confined to another forum on this site.
So what about LoIaS?
Quote from: SHARK;1059331Greetings!
That's right, Moonsweeper! I love your dissection of *Strontygirl's* pathetic, though insidious argument. You took the words right outta my mouth. LOL.
Well done.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Greetings!
to yourself as well SHARK
and thank you for your service.
Quote from: Bren;1059462The last 15 or so posts in this thread seem to have taken a hard right turn away from the Land of Ice and Stone and into the shit that is usually confined to another forum on this site.
So what about LoIaS?
Well in fairness, from the first post the thread wasn't about the game but rather a particular critique of the game, and the following posts have naturally focused on the critique rather than the game.
Anyhoo, I'll admit to not having read it either. So what kind of "palaeolithic" are we talking here? "Palaeolithic" covers a lot ground and an enormous timespan (literally millions of years), including modern humans, and also some pretty darn distant relatives of modern H. sapiens sapiens....
Quote from: moonsweeper;1059507Greetings!
to yourself as well SHARK
and thank you for your service.
Greetings!
Thank you, Moonsweeper! OOH-RAH!!!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: jhkim;1059293As far as I can tell, no one posting here - other than the author - has demonstrated having actually read Land of Ice and Stone. However, many posters have made blanket points about the idiocy of feminist critique of historical games.
For those who have read Land of Ice and Stone - please speak up now and discuss Stronty Girl's actual points.
If you haven't, then at least be fucking honest like me and say that you haven't read it.
... and ...
Quote from: Bren;1059462The last 15 or so posts in this thread seem to have taken a hard right turn away from the Land of Ice and Stone and into the shit that is usually confined to another forum on this site.
So what about LoIaS?
I have read it!
You could all go out and buy a PDF copy to read and then tell me how wrong I am!
Kidding of course, this thread is not an advert for Land of Ice and Stone.
I haven't read the rules and (sadly for the author/publisher) I don't need another game. If I were to run a stone age setting, I'd dust off my old RQ rules and my notes from my early 1980s campaign set in Balazar. Fun times.
Quote from: S'mon;1059198Yes, but...
The SJW is inclined to see every historical RPG supplement as an Avalanche Press product in disguise. :D
Hats off to you, sir. That's a fantastic reference.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1060244Hats off to you, sir. That's a fantastic reference.
Well it was Kim whose response to the OP was "Wattabout Avalanche Press's
Greenland Saga??" - so not a huge leap!
Fair enough, didn't see that.