Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Reynard" data-source="post: 2709993" data-attributes="member: 467">A couple things to keep in mind:The presence of powerful female figures or organizations has no bearing on whether a society is sexist or not.  In fact, for a fair number of our own historical examples, the reason we know about them is largely due to the fact that they *were* women.Even given the ability to zorch any man who dares pat you on the behind in a pub, women have a very real biological role.  This is going to affect *any* society, especially those that don't enjoy the adavnaces of short hospital stays and day care.Men and women are different.  No, really.  Talk to a member of the opposite sex for a while.  The other gender is just *wierd* when one gets down to it.  Incomprehensible sometimes.  Trying to eradicate these differences not only destroys the plausibility of a setting, it also makes for very uninsteresting social dynamics.  But note that differences are only connected to inequality through individual and cultural lenses.Fo my part, I tend to use a 'medieval lite' approach to society -- just because it is archetypical -- and then fill it with archetypical characters, some of which are strong female characters that refute society's rules.</blockquote>