Sexism in your campaign settings

[Drifter Bob]

Closer to gender equality doesn't necessarily mean much. The question is what their practices were and how they influenced Mycenian society. (snip) ...both Poseidon and Bacchus are male).

Ok, this is my last post in this argument. Poseidon and bacchus are just two examples of dieties who have been traced to Crete, mainly through etymology. On Crete they appear to have actually been the adolescent male consorts of major female deities. This was just an example of this earth god to sky god transition I was mentioning.

In any event, a lot of people think Minoan society was actually matriarchal, though I personally believe it was probably more balanced. I reccomend you read up on it a bit, you will undoubtedly be surprised by what you read. From what they know, it is a fascinating society, if hardly perfect. Certainly much more egalitarian and free than ancient Greece... aesthetically appealing if nothing else!

My point is that your retelling of the story--the oracle pushed Athens and Sparta into fighting the war--makes it seems like the oracle forced or manipulated them to do something against their will.

I understand your point, I'm not saying they manipulated them like puppets, but they were quite influential, or so it appears.

hyperventilating about your unbiasedness is only going to make me more suspicious of bias rather than less.

I'm basically something of a contrarian and a devils advocate, but you'll come to figure that out over time assuming we both hang around ENworld.

And I can remember one where they rape a female "ghoul." (Really a human with transparent skin). I'm sure most people will understand that the latter makes more of an impression than the former.

Thats why I love Leiber, un PC to the core, on either side of the coin

DB

 

[StalkingBlue]

To me, this sounds like the greater part of the problem. If the other PCs were backing your character up and supporting her in political and social situations, she would be able to exert a greater influence in these situations and you probably wouldn't feel so frustrated. For example, if a point you made was ignored by a male NPC, a fellow PC could back you up with something like "Yes, StalkingBlue has a good point, an alliance with XYZ would be very beneficial, what do you say to that?"

So I need other PCs/players to back me up to have a voice in the game? That doesn't sound like fun to me, not when they don't need me to back them up in return.

Good luck.

Thanks for good wishes.

 

[Thanee]

I think what S'mon should consider is changing the attitude of the NPCs towards these specific characters.

They are 15th level and must have achieved something by that time, which has been noted. And probably, many of their deeds have furthered the country as well.

These are individuals, who risk their life for the country and they obviously can make a difference there.

I'd probably just have the NPCs see beyond their borders of traditionalism somewhat and see them as experienced veterans and valuable consultants, male of female, fighter or spellcaster, that shouldn't make a whole lot of difference at this point, where they already have proven their usefulness (which is more of a guess, of course ).

Bye
Thanee

 

[StalkingBlue]

There must be some constructive way in which you can role-play asserting your power as a female in a male warrior society. Don't take any lip off those pig-headed males.

That's what I generally tend to do, yup. Works ok in real life, too. In this case it didn't get me anywhere. By now we're at a stage where I'm being referred to as withdrawn and reluctant to speak up, so easy to overlook. Believe me, it isn't my natural state of being.

 

[StalkingBlue]

I think what S'mon should consider is changing the attitude of the NPCs towards these specific characters.

They are 15th level and must have achieved something by that time, which has been noted. And probably, many of their deeds have furthered the country as well.

These are individuals, who risk their life for the country and they obviously can make a difference there.

I'd probably just have the NPCs see beyond their borders of traditionalism somewhat and see them as experienced veterans and valuable consultants, male of female, fighter or spellcaster, that shouldn't make a whole lot of difference at this point, where they already have proven their usefulness (which is more of a guess, of course ).

That would be cool of course.


After discussion with S'mon I'm thinking that maybe also I should change my attitude to NPCs in the game. The few women in positions of power in our campaign region don't look like they have any actual impact to me (and most seem to derive their power from dead husbands and the like), but it is possible that things were to look a bit different if I knew more about what is going on behind the scenes. I'll make a point of seeking some female NPCs out the next chance I get, and try to get a feel for how much power of their own they actually have - who knows but I may be pleasantly surprised!

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Now this is just silly. We can get rid of the Black Death, the one Church, the lack of magic, throw in elves and dwarves and real dragons, and let adventurers wander around subject no king--but allowing females to be treated as more or less equal? Now you go too far!

I find this argument interesting. I suppose I see a difference between adding or subtracting elements to the world as we know it and changing them. It's the difference between saying "My game world features a new metal called mithral that weighs no more than wood" and "In my world, iron weighs the same as wood." But more than that, you're talking about changing human nature, the touchstone for our understanding of this (or any) fantasy world.

Get rid of the Black Death? It's like our earth without that bacterium. Get rid of the One Church? It's like our earth at a different point in history, or with a few historical events changed. Adding magic and active gods? You have the world that most of our ancestors believed they lived in, with plenty of myths illustrating how humans might react. But to say that there are no sexist societies, when sexism seems to have evolved independently in so many cultures in our history, you are postulating a radically changed human nature. It's like saying "And over here we have a large kingdom where everybody is so altruistic and law-abiding that there is no poverty and no crime." Now, some fantasy stories do have that - LOTR and Roddenberry Star Trek spring to mind - so it's not impossible. You can remove prejudice from the human heart, or greed, or sloth, or rage, or self-interest and cost-benefit analysis. But it will require you to consider the extent of the changes to human nature in your game.

My preference in games and most genre fiction is to have basic human nature exist as close as possible to what we know it, adjusted by the logical reactions to the cultures and realities of the fantasy world. I don't like worlds where humanity as a whole are simply and for no real reason just better people than we are here in our world (my problem with early ST:TNG).

I also disagree with the argument that the lack of sexual dimorphism means that prejudice wouldn't exist. It seems to imply that there was a rational basis for sexism in the real world, which clearly isn't true. For example, sexism and racism have often been due to assumed differences in mental abilities, even though there really are no significant differences.

 

[Camarath]

I don't know if I've become more sexist over time (I'm 31 now, was maybe 14 then), or just thoughtless in the way I've presented my world.

Have any other players/GMs had similar experiences? How did you handle it?

Most of the prejudice and discrimination in the game I run is based on level rather than race or sex. This is because I do not understand why minor differences would matter to most people in a world where one level ten character is worth more than a several dozen level one characters. I usally ignore gender as a factor in NPC attitude unless one of the players brings it into play or it is a big part of who the NPC is. I think this is partly because I forget about how gender interactions subtlely influence interpersonal interactions when I am running NPCs and also because my players do not seem very interested in playing up the more personal or sexual side of their charcters. All and all my current campaign is pretty pragmatic in attitude. The campaign also lacks Alignments but has a personally relative Honor system and a Taint system (both adapted from UA). The different groups in my game tend to usually be more concerned with power and ideology than types and categories of those who serve them. Some groups do have racist or sexist attitudes but these view are a minority position and do not usally affect the PCs. I guess what I am trying to say it that I tried to make my game feel internally consistent and pervasive prejudices based on relatively minor differences in the face of huge fundamental differences based on experience just did not fit in my game.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

I like to use a paradigm similar to the one you can find in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, (and I'm sure it's source material, though I don't read Chinese so I can't say for certain.) Namely that "adventurers" are an outsider class just like the Giang-Hu in the movie. So while a woman may be confined to a traditional role in normal society, she can escape that role by earning a place in the adventurer/Giang-Hu world, which values excellence regardless of gender. But that has a cost for both men and women, as Giang-Hu fighters are the lowest caste, given no respect or station in normal society.

In this way, one can preserve the sexist tendancies that a lot of cultures develop (either patri- or matriarchal), while at the same time affording female PCs the same RP experience as their male companions.

In the end, I think it's important to note that playing in a sexist culture is inherently sexist in real life, because it forces a female gamer to choose between playing her own sex, or being treated as an equal in the game world, while a male player can play his own sex without any negative RP repercussions.

 

[Talon5]

I have read through about half of this thread and find it comical to a point and sad to another.

Prejudice is a state of mind- you are or you arn't.

Women (and different nationalities, races, etc) are of lesser status only because we place them there. Treat them as equals and they are, and they will see themselves as equals because we treat them as equals.

(Sadly the truth is the world views some as weak and worthless and wome as stronger. Race, nationality, sex, religious beliefs, all sounds like reasons for wars to be started- no, I mean why wars have been started. We get rid of prejudice and 90% of the reasons for war will disappear.)

Campaign wise I tend to have the prejudice types in campaigns, but treat everyone (for the most part) all the same. A few societies have women dominated ruling classes, some times they are very narrow minded- "men are worthless," but it's about equal as far as men to women. Unless it's part of the campaign then I don't bother with it.

An example is the Heironian Paladin/Cleric that didn't like the female Sorc- because she was in a man's profession- adventuring. It makes for interesting static in the campaign, and group- meaning its good role playing.

The female players in my group are very strong women and won't stand for being surpressed or pushed down. I like women that way- equals; I don't like sheep that will take being pushed about.

Have fun, be at peace, treat everyone like you want to be treated and you will do well in life. Laters all.

ps- sorry about the preachy nature of this post, I just- prejudice just rubs me wrong, no matter who is the target/vic

 

[S'mon]

What's interesting about the grand old man of sword and sorcery, Robert E. Howard, is that he wrote women as characters rather than props. Of course his central characters were men, but he also wrote about strong, interesting women who were worthy to attract the attention of Conan (who himself was rather clever, not a muscle-bound goon).

Yes - in fact my female players seem rather happier in my Hyborian Conan game (OGL Conan - very strongly based on the original stories) than in my more eclectic D&D campaign. In many ways 1930s sword & sorcery fiction seems more egalitarian than that of the '50s or '70s.