Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Elder-Basilisk" data-source="post: 1670618" data-attributes="member: 3146">That's a pretty dubious contention. The Greece of Homer and Hesiod is certainly different from the Greece of Plato and Aristotle and that is different from the Greece of Phillip and Alexander, which, of course is different from the Greece of Polycarp, Eusebius, and the early church fathers. Yet in all of those, the greek pantheon appears to remain relatively stable. Artemis is the goddess of Ephesus from very early in its history to the days of Saint Paul. Athena is the patron of Athens from its founding until it became Christian. If that's replacement, it's operating on a geological time scale. From what I've read, it doesn't seem like the pre-socratics were any less sexist than Aristotle. Though Plato made no sex distinctions among the higher castes in his Republic, I see no reason to believe that he represents an older "more egalitarian" form of life.In any event, the idea that Zeus and Apollo "replaced" Aphrodite, Demeter, and Artemis doesn't seem to fit any of the evidence I'm aware of.As far as I can tell, Greek religious practice remained relatively stable for quite a while as did the male dominance and the worship of the godesses in their society. I see very little As if neither the Athenians nor the Spartans would have considered their independence worth fighting for without the Oracle? I'm sure the Oracle and her priesthood were influential. However, you seem to be really pushing the boundaries of plausibility here.What this demonstrates is not that the Greeks were a sexually egalitarian society. They weren't. Nor does it support the thesis that the greeks were in transition from some mythical egalitarian society to immediately pre-Christian Greece. (The battle of Salamis would have to be rather late in this development--hundreds of years after Homer and Hesiod). What it demonstrates is that monolithic patiarchy is a myth.As during the medieval and Renaisance eras, there were a good number of women who wielded significant power (Elanor of Aquitaine, Queen Mary I, and Queen Elizabeth being prominent examples). Even in the tribal cultures of the pre-Islamic arabs, there were influential women. (Mohammed's first wife was apparently quite influential WRT both her society and her husband). In any given medieval city, it was likely that there would be a number of influential widows who occupied their late husbands' seat in the guild or who controlled a significant fortune and who pursued their own agendas. In the Greek era (if Herodotus is to be believed--he's not the most credible of Greek historians though this particular story doesn't seem hard to believe), there were a few women who even led pirate fleets.Getting back onto topic, this should demonstrate that it's not necessary to sacrifice historical credibility on the altar of PC gender equality in order to create a game with opportunities for female PCs. It may well interfere with the pulp Sword and Sorcery feel of any particular game (as I recall from my very limited Conan reading, and my extensive Ffard and the Grey Mouser reading, sexism is one of the genre's defining characteristics; female characters were generally either nude and nubile slave girls, old crones, or seductive princesses but their primary role was to sleep with and titillate the main characters). However, that particular aspect of the Sword and Sorcery genre probably isn't worth keeping.</blockquote>

Verification