Well, "stereotypes" sort of, but they're statistically solid, usually. Do some research on how people view conversational participation, for a nice clear example. If you have a conversation with a mixed group of roughly equal numbers of men and women, the men will consistently report that women are "dominating" the conversation if the women are talking more than about 30% of the time, as I recall. There's some really fascinating studies on this.
D&D 5E 5e's new gender policy - is it attracting new players?
- Thread starter Wik
- Start date
- Status
Well, "stereotypes" sort of, but they're statistically solid, usually. Do some research on how people view conversational participation, for a nice clear example. If you have a conversation with a mixed group of roughly equal numbers of men and women, the men will consistently report that women are "dominating" the conversation if the women are talking more than about 30% of the time, as I recall. There's some really fascinating studies on this.
Hussar
Legend
For a D&D centric perspective, it would centre around the idea of male dominated artwork, for one. The reaction to the use of female gender pronouns when 3e came out would be a perfect example of this. Do you honestly believe that women would complain about having female gender pronouns in the PHB? It's the existence of boob plate and the hyper sexualization of male figures. It's the complete and utter lack of any female centric material in D&D material for years. Heck, [MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION] just posted Google Analytics about EN World where over 90% of EN World participants are male. Do you honestly believe that an image like this:
is directed at female readership?
TheCosmicKid
Hero
What's "fascinating" is that you assume that I made that assumption, even though I wrote in a post you just read and responded to that any party can say no and that is precisely what makes them a "gatekeeper". What does this suggest about you? How am I supposed to interpret your eagerness to condescend to a strawman?
Hussar
Legend
Didn't you just say that both men and women are gatekeepers? Wouldn't that kinda blow your point out of the water?
And, as far as Alien goes, I'd point out that while the script might not specify gender, the actual movie would be very different with a male lead. Never minding that Aliens would be a totally different movie with a male lead.
Funny thing is, Alien is a typical scream queen horror movie as written. The monster kills the campers one by one until the lead escapes. It's Friday the 13th in space. What sets Alien apart is you have an empowered female lead who is the very obvious leader of the group. And this continues in Aliens as well where you have the female protagonist taking charge while still exhibiting female roles with taking care of Newt. And the proto romance story with Hicks.
It's very much subverting typical roles.
Take a side step to Terminator. Imagine if Sarah Connor was Steve Connor. Totally different movie. If Kyle Reese was Carol Reese it would completely change the tone of the movie.
The idea that gender doesn't greatly impact fiction is pretty easily disproven.
And, as far as Alien goes, I'd point out that while the script might not specify gender, the actual movie would be very different with a male lead. Never minding that Aliens would be a totally different movie with a male lead.
Funny thing is, Alien is a typical scream queen horror movie as written. The monster kills the campers one by one until the lead escapes. It's Friday the 13th in space. What sets Alien apart is you have an empowered female lead who is the very obvious leader of the group. And this continues in Aliens as well where you have the female protagonist taking charge while still exhibiting female roles with taking care of Newt. And the proto romance story with Hicks.
It's very much subverting typical roles.
Take a side step to Terminator. Imagine if Sarah Connor was Steve Connor. Totally different movie. If Kyle Reese was Carol Reese it would completely change the tone of the movie.
The idea that gender doesn't greatly impact fiction is pretty easily disproven.
Hathorym
Explorer
Not to split hairs, but Alien was originally scripted as a male lead through draft four.
http://www.blastr.com/2013-7-30/8-female-sci-fi-roles-were-originally-supposed-be-played-men
I don't know why I had to interject this, I just find it all terribly interesting.
I've been a DM for 24 years, and I've been out even longer. I would just like to say that this thread has been immensely entertaining and fascinating to me. Thank you.
http://www.blastr.com/2013-7-30/8-female-sci-fi-roles-were-originally-supposed-be-played-men
I don't know why I had to interject this, I just find it all terribly interesting.
I've been a DM for 24 years, and I've been out even longer. I would just like to say that this thread has been immensely entertaining and fascinating to me. Thank you.
Last edited:
Well, I guess it would be the part where you said specifically that women were the gatekeepers to sex. Those were the exact words I quoted: "women are the gatekeepers to sex."
I did not feel it was a strawman to respond to the actual thing you had said in the post I was responding to.
Clearly, if any party can say no, and that makes all of them equally "gatekeepers", then women are not the gatekeepers.
More practically: The world is full of books men have written on how to pressure women into agreeing to have sex; if you want to be particularly horrified, read the strategies promoted by "pick-up artists" and suchlike. There's a lot of work that goes very specifically into getting women to agree to have sex, and it has very little to do with understanding how women think in any more general sense. And the people writing them appear to feel that they are Not Getting Enough Sex, which suggests that perhaps their strategies aren't as good as they think.
TheCosmicKid
Hero
I think this is directed at me...? If so, no, it actually reinforces the point. @I'm A Banana said that women have to learn how men think because the men can refuse access to things the women want very badly. All I meant to do was point out that women can also refuse access to things that men want very badly, so this argument does not support the larger thesis being bandied about that women have better insight into male characters than vice versa. In short: if both sexes are gatekeepers, both sexes have equal incentive to learn how the other thinks. (I suppose that instead of learning how the other thinks they could just negotiate an exchange of services. But in practice, "I like sex, you like sex, so let's have sex together" is hardly the basis for a real relationship.)
My point exactly. We, the audience, interpret the movie very differently even if the actions and dialogue are exactly the same. It's our cultural baggage, not anything intrinsically masculine or feminine about how the character behaves.
Okay. You really need to stop digging yourself deeper now. Think about what you're doing here: You're trying to tell another person what his words mean, and you are doing so by fixating on a single definite article of all things, disregarding the rest of what he wrote and the context in which he wrote it. (For the record: The "the" was there to parallel @I'm A Banana's wording.) You made a mistake. Don't pretend you didn't. Own it, learn from it, move forward.
For my part, my initial objection should not have been so snippy. There are much more civil ways I could have let you know you had misinterpreted me. I'm sorry for that.
So these men don't think they need to understand women... and they're wrong. Isn't this exactly what I've been saying? I'm not sure what your point is here.
Last edited:
Hussar
Legend
No, it is not simply "cultural baggage" which causes the difference interpretations. The actual presentation is different as well. If, to pick an 80's action star, Harrison Ford had played Ripley, it wouldn't simply be my cultural baggage that would cause me to interpret the character differently. That character would actually BE a different character. Gender plays a huge role in both how you are interpreted by others, but, also, in how you act. Never mind basic physiological things like men and women move differently, have different posture and whatnot, there are deeper elements as well.
A couple of thousand years of culture takes a huge back seat to 40000 years of monkey politics on the Serengeti Plains. Primate politics informs far too much of our behaviour to be simply waved away as "cultural baggage".
CosmicKid: I was not telling you what you meant. I was telling you what the words of the post I responded to meant. It's reasonable for you to say "that is not what I meant, here is a clarification". It's not reasonable to accuse me of constructing a "straw man" when I was replying to the actual thing you said in the post I responded to. You have since clarified that the post in question did not correctly state your position, which is fine by me. I'm not arguing that you really hold that position; I'm just pointing out that it is unfair to accuse someone of being deceptive or dishonest in responding to the words you actually used.
The point of "the gatekeepers of power" is that men have overwhelming control and dominance in matters of who gets to have power and what kind of power. You can obtain power without learning or caring about how women think; you cannot obtain power without learning or caring about how men think. So it was precisely that your wording was parallel to that wording that caused me to assume you were stating something very oddly one-sided.
The point of "the gatekeepers of power" is that men have overwhelming control and dominance in matters of who gets to have power and what kind of power. You can obtain power without learning or caring about how women think; you cannot obtain power without learning or caring about how men think. So it was precisely that your wording was parallel to that wording that caused me to assume you were stating something very oddly one-sided.
is directed at female readership?
I think it is directed at people who find females attractive (and ships, treasure, and pirate hats). That is mostly, but not entirely, men.
I am all for inclusiveness and equality, but trying to create a society where we deny our basic attractions is stupid and unhealthy.
- Status
