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="arscott" data-source="post: 1875652" data-attributes="member: 17969">Two things:I am somewhat concerned by the apparrent obsession over lesbian vampire sorceresses evident in this thread.  I find the concept of a lesbian vampire sorceress to be quite terrifying.  The lesbians that I know tend to be unique individuals rather than sexy stereotypes, and in conversation they regularly use their impeccably sharp wit to dissuade me from my outdated and paternalistic ideas.  The notion that these aquaintances in question (or any ingame analogs) might possess mastery of the arcane arts and the fearsome powers of undeath in addition to the aforementioned sharp wit is best left unconsidered.On to the other matter.  I think that it's worth considering that sexism in both real life and in a campaign might be a two step process.  While it may be the case that a culture as a whole (or at least the individuals dictating the beliefs and practicies of said culture) might believe that women (or men) are simply inferior, I suspect that it's not often the case.  Instead, I believe that a gender's inferiority or superiority is part of a twofold process:First, a society associates specific roles or tasks with specific genders.  While some of these roles are due to obvious physical traits or characteristics (men as warriors, women as primary caregivers, etc.), others are simply a matter of tradition (men as engineers, women as teachers, etc.).Second, a society assigns relative importance to each one of those roles.  So a warrior is more important than a teacher, an engineer is more important than a caregiver, and so on.Following this model, the decline in status of women that accompanied the rise of monotheistic religions can is explained by the declining value of women's corresponding gender roles.  Judeo-Christian belief put little store in  thereforeto important roles such as oracles, witches, and wisewomen, and thus the status of the women fell.  Likewise, polygamous (and even strict monogamous) relationships resulted in a decline in status for the mother and a corresponding rise in status for the father.Similarly, the egalitarian attitudes we see today are a result of both the relaxation of traditional gender roles (as female engineers and stay-at-home dads become increasingly common), and a change in how we value various professions (warriors are accorded less regard, and educators more).What does this mean for your campaign?  Well, for one, it can help explain the egelatarian attidudes that seem to pop up in most campaigns.  Maybe Sasha Silversword had a hard time getting the training and equipment necessary to become a Paladin, but nobody who has seen her in action can doubt her ability or devotion to the cause.  And nobody cares whether or not she's a girl, because the fact that she's a defender of the divine light is more important.Also, this has some interesting implications where the creating of matriarchal societies is concerned.  You can engineer such societies by reversing traditional gender roles, but not changing their importance (i.e., the Greek Amazons, where the women were warriors and the men were forced to stay at home and do the housework).  Or you can have a world where the roles stay the same, but their importance changes (Ancient Assyria, where the sacred prostitutes of the goddess Ishtar were afforded great status and respect), Or some combination of both(Menzobarenzen*, where mothers are accorded more respect than fathers, and the preistesses outrank the warriors and mages).*Or however the hell you spell it.****On second though, the (assumed) misspelling is intentional.  It's so I won't infringe on Wizard's IP</blockquote>

Verification