DDM: Chicks not in chainmail

[pawsplay]

It's your thread of course so this will be my last reply.

But I expressed an argument that maybe there are so few minis like that because most people just instinctively don't like the idea of women in direct way of being cut to pieces in hand to hand combat. So they don't rush to make figures which represent that kind of thing very often.

You might not agree with that argument, but I still bet that to some degree it is true. An argument doesn't always have to be agreeable to be true.

Call me old-fashioned, too:

 

[Ktulu]

As I stated above, they have provided a number of human female warrior characters. Taking into account WotC's guess of 20% of the market, the fact that there's at least 5 human female warriors with swords (not just minis that look human), seems pretty reasonable.

If you account for all female minis in the current DDM lineup between races, classes, and weapon combinations I think they covered a fairly reasonable array.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

The two of you are arguing different - if similar - things.

Jack is saying "Maybe there's more warrior men and less warrior women because people - like myself - tend to dislike the idea of women on the front lines fighting."

Paws is saying "That's horribly sexist and, well, just overall kinda dumb."

You're both right. It IS horribly sexist and, well, just overall kinda dumb to feel that way. But a lot of people do nevertheless.

 

[shilsen]

Knowing what I know about females I doubt you could tell em much and make it stick if they didn't want it to.

In which case, why try to tell them how their PCs should act in the game, as your posts are doing?

But I was talking about the cultural stereotype and my preferences. I just got no real interest in maimed or dead females.

Why the gender distinction? Are you particularly interested in maimed and dead males?

Pretty or not. And maimed is a lot less pretty than not maimed.

Why is that even relevant? Being maimed, presumably, is a problem for a man just as much as for a woman. Unless you're assuming (as it sounds like you are) that being attractive is an important part of being a woman, which is fairly sexist/misogynist.

So, females doing their job, by all means. Females unnecessarily exposed to danger, not for me.

Whereas men unnecessarily exposed to danger is just fine? If it's dangerous, then it's dangerous whether you're male or female or anything else. And to mark off one gender as incapable of dealing with that danger (which, by the way, is imaginary here) is a good way to marginalize them from the game.

And that probably ain't never gonna change as far as I'm concerned.

That's fairly clear. I'm hopeful that isn't the case with D&D and gaming in general. And, though maybe I'm just being optimistic, I think gaming has got a lot more egalitarian than it was 20 years ago. Just nowhere close to completely so, as pawsplay pointed out.

Oh, I reckon I've survived much worse than that Shil. I'd live through it. I don't think I'd even bother standing up over something like that. Unless a lady entered the room.

I presume that's meant to be humorous, and I'm also guessing you don't really see why someone could see that last sentence as sexist/misogynist. To tie it back to pawsplay's original point, if you start focusing on treating women as ladies (and applying all the silly baggage which comes with that), then it's understandable that you have issues with a woman in the front line wielding a sword. But if you treat a woman as just another person, with their own choices and right to decide what they want to do, then they can be in the front line. Or the back line. Or wherever they choose to be, rather than a position you've chosen for them with some misguided concept of chivalry.

Well, you probably got a point about games. Then again in games nobody ever has to write a letter home to the family, or mop up body parts.

No, they don't. Though I fail to see why writing a letter home to the family of a dead man is any better than writing it to the family of a dead woman, or why mopping up female body parts is any worse than mopping up male body parts.

I guess the fundamental disconnect here is that I seriously believe in treating men and women similarly, and you think one should not. D&D, as this thread indicates, obviously leans much, much closer to your view than to mine. Personally I think that's a significant weakness of the hobby.

Call me old-fashioned, too:

That's just brilliant!

I hate the way people use "old-fashioned" or "traditional" to justify the weirdest things. Ironically, considering this thread, I was discussing just yesterday with my students how people will call themselves "old-fashioned" when being sexist and assume that somehow justifies it, but nobody (well, much fewer people) will be, say, racist and try justifying it because they're "old-fashioned."

 

[Mark]

That's just brilliant!

I'm going to suggest that Greek mythology isn't something to prop up as anti-misogynist.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm going to suggest that Greek mythology isn't something to prop up as anti-misogynist.

I think the point was that Athena (Goddess of War and Wisdom) was wearing something at least resembling functional armor.

 

[Mark]

I think the point was that Athena (Goddess of War and Wisdom) was wearing something at least resembling functional armor.

Oh, I know. Just pointing out the irony.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Oh, I know. Just pointing out the irony.

Given that era, its more likely bronzeony.

 

[joethelawyer]

For what it's worth, I agree with Jack7's point of view. I got into an argument with a professor in lawschool on this very topic, like 15 yrs ago. My position was that women should not be in the front lines of combat---not because they couldn't do the job, but because it would prevent many male soldiers from doing their job effectively. Most men of a certain age tend to be more protective of women, sharing Jack7's and my point of view. So with the majority of combat troops being men, and a good number of those men looking out for a minority of their companions, instead of focusing on getting the job done, it makes the troops overal less effective with women in the ranks. It's not about fairness, equality or justice. Just cold hard practicality that I base the decision on.

 

[Mark]

Given that era, its more likely bronzeony.

Are you trying to steel my thunder?