[Ward Dragon]

KnightofPhoenix said:

Unequal pay has nothing to do with self-selection and such an issue is present and well documented in North America and Europe. Has nothing to do with a liberal agenda. Same with other statistics, in addition to cases of sexual harassment, difficulty earning promotions, and other impediments that women face in various industries.

I'm against discrimination like that, but I find some of the "solutions" to be just as bad, like affirmative action. I think that's why Ves resonates with me so much. How she reacts to the arena fight is pretty much how I feel about life in general. If I try my best and it isn't good enough, I'd rather fail than have someone go easy on me just because I'm a woman.

KnightofPhoenix said:

I don't know why you keep telling me that, unless it's not targeted at me. I never divided anything into categories and I think you know me well enough to know that I do not oversimplify issues. It is a complex problem, a systemic one, where no one group or individual or indeed policy is responsible. It's an amalgamation of different factors.

It doesn't make the problem any less existent or any less grave.
It doesn't make the patriarchal system any less unjust and in a lot of cases, illogical. ›››

I'm sure it's nothing personal Rather there's not much any one person can do to change an entire culture, so I think the best we can do as individuals is to avoid generalizing and contributing to the problem. If more people become individualistic and evaluate each person on their own merits, then society will gradually change.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I am not a fan of affirmative action (though I understand the rationale) and I am very individualistic, so you won't hear any argument from me when it comes to that.

[dragonbird]

Sirnaq said:

Welp, im hearing from my mother, grandmother, sisters, female friends etc. that men are pigs my whole life, even though it is me that must go for obligatory military training and it is me that will protect my country and die for it in case of war. Females are pretty misandric themselves but most people ignore it or don't want to see it. And witcher game are way more misandric than misogynistic, think about it, how many men do you killed during the game? And how many women you killed during the game? ›››

I was thinking the same thing last night after I made my earlier post, and I think that, as far as video games go, it's a valid point. In some games, a lot of the women are present just to be seen, or used, for sexual entertainment. In almost all games, a lot of the men are present just to be killed by monsters or by Our Hero. In TW2, we are told about a powerful group of female sorceresses who, in order to further a political objective, send a rain of fire onto a battlefield killing large numbers of soldiers, most of whom would have been there through no desire of their own. Gender imbalance? yes, probably. Misogyny/misandry? No, I don't think so. And they're mesh models, not real people.

And what about the worlds portrayed, whether it's the Witcher World or the reality of our own Medieval Europe? Yes, the system discriminated against women in that a woman had, in most countries, reduced rights of inheritance and property ownership compared to men. Margaret Beaufort, who was mentioned earlier, became a kingmaker, but in a "fair" society, she could have been the ruling monarch in her own right. A poor peasant woman, with no husband or father to protect her, may become a whore or a drudge with no rights and no hope. Is that a sign of systemic misogyny? Maybe, but what about the peasant man who was forced to become a soldier and die, not protecting his homeland against the invader, but just because his feudal master wanted more land/power? Or the poor peasants of both sex who were forced to work the land or in mines until dying prematurely? Weren't they abused by those more powerful than themselves too? This wasn't a system that discriminated against women, it was a system that permitted discrimination against anyone weaker than those who made the rules.

To see history, or a video game, as an issue of misogyny is to see only half of the picture.

[KnightofPhoenix]

dragonbird said:

To see history, or a video game, as an issue of misogyny is to see only half of the picture. ›››

Well of course history is far far more complex than to be described as pertaining to one issue. Of course many groups and classes and races and professions and ethnic groups were oppressed and are still oppressed. Of course all societies and systems are multi-faceted, and their injustices always target several kinds of people.

I don't see why anytime someone has to mention misogyny as a serious problem, people have to say "well there are a dozen of other things that are shit." That's true. Doesn't make the former any less real. A system that oppresses several groups of people is still misogynistic if women are part of the demographic that suffers from said oppression because they are women.

More often then not, and I am not accusing you of this personally, such arguments are used to avoid discussing the issue and / or minimalizing it.

[Ward Dragon]

dragonbird said:

In TW2, we are told about a powerful group of female sorceresses who, in order to further a political objective, send a rain of fire onto a battlefield killing large numbers of soldiers, most of whom would have been there through no desire of their own. Gender imbalance? yes, probably. Misogyny/misandry? No, I don't think so. ›››

Based upon some of the things that the Lodge members said in the books (mainly Phillipa), I do think misandry played into it. Phillipa seems to view men as inferior and I think that played into how easy it was for her to consign thousands of men to a horrible death just to further her own agenda. Granted she's a sociopath and probably would have supported killing women too if it was really necessary for her plans, but I think she views men as more expendable.

[Veleda]

KnightofPhoenix said:

Unequal pay has nothing to do with self-selection and such an issue is present and well documented in North America and Europe.

Not going to debate you on it, but self-selection does affect the statistics. I've seen the studies, too.

Quote

I don't know why you keep telling me that, unless it's not targeted at me. I never divided anything into categories and I think you know me well enough to know that I do not oversimplify issues. It is a complex problem, a systemic one, where no one group or individual or indeed policy is responsible. It's an amalgamation of different factors.

It doesn't make the problem any less existent or any less grave.
It doesn't make the patriarchal system any less unjust and in a lot of cases, illogical.

Well, honestly I'm not convinced yet from your responses that you aren't oversimplifying. Though I am speaking in general terms and not just to you.

[dragonbird]

KnightofPhoenix said:

More often then not, and I am not accusing you of this personally, such arguments are used to avoid discussing the issue and / or minimalizing it. ›››

I'll actually accept that criticism. I dislike the argument of "How can people get upset about X when Y is a much bigger problem facing the world", but as far as gender rights are concerned, I do find it very difficult to accept the seriousness of the angst in gaming forums when I live in a world where sex tourism, trafficking, denying women access to education or healthcare, biased labour laws and other gender issues still exist.

Quote

I don't see why anytime someone has to mention misogyny as a serious problem, people have to say "well there are a dozen of other things that are shit." That's true.

No, but if someone states that some fact is evidence of discrimination against one particular social group, such as women, when the same or a directly equivalent fact also applies equally to the OPPOSITE social group, the initial argument is void. It's as though a profiler looking into a serial killing sees that 6 of the 10 victims were women and determines that the killer is clearly targeting women. Cherry-picking facts to fit an agenda distorts the truth, it doesn't add to it.

Ward Dragon said:

Based upon some of the things that the Lodge members said in the books (mainly Phillipa), I do think misandry played into it. Phillipa seems to view men as inferior and I think that played into how easy it was for her to consign thousands of men to a horrible death just to further her own agenda. Granted she's a sociopath and probably would have supported killing women too if it was really necessary for her plans, but I think she views men as more expendable. ›››

Definitely. I have no doubts that at least some of the Lodge members consider themselves superior to males, and are therefore guilty of misandry if we're using those definitions. And that they have no problem killing women, if necessary in order to meet their objectives.

[KnightofPhoenix]

dragonbird said:

I'll actually accept that criticism. I dislike the argument of "How can people get upset about X when Y is a much bigger problem facing the world", but as far as gender rights are concerned, I do find it very difficult to accept the seriousness of the angst in gaming forums when I live in a world where sex tourism, trafficking, denying women access to education or healthcare, biased labour laws and other gender issues still exist.

Coming from the Middle East, I can understand that.
It doesn't make the problems women face in the "western" world any less real and any less grave.

Quote

No, but if someone states that some fact is evidence of discrimination against one particular social group, such as women, when the same or a directly equivalent fact also applies equally to the OPPOSITE social group, the initial argument is void. It's as though a profiler looking into a serial killing sees that 6 of the 10 victims were women and determines that the killer is clearly targeting women. Cherry-picking facts to fit an agenda distorts the truth, it doesn't add to it.

Depends on the rationale behind these acts. If a serial killer's victims are 60% women, but he killed them because they were women, then he is misogynistic.

Likewise if in a job a woman is paid less than a man despite having the same qualifications and performance, then it's misogynistic. If a male politician is criticized for his policies while a female politician is criticized for her looks or that she isn't at her house (and this happened in Canada in a case I studied), then there is a misogynistic aspect to it. When a man, no matter how poor and of "low status", is considered a legal person when a woman of even higher ranking is not, then the misogyny is clear.

Problem with your argument and that of others is that when someone says that s society is misogynistic, you jump to the conclusion that we are implying that this is the only thing wrong with it and that women are the only victims of oppression, when no one claimed or even implied that. A society can be misogynistic, racist, aristocratic....etc all at once.
It's like saying that Athens wasn't misogynistic because it not only denied women the right to vote, but also foreigners. Well no, it's both misogynistic and xenophobic all at once.

[dragonbird]

KnightofPhoenix said:

Problem with your argument and that of others is that when someone says that s society is misogynistic, you jump to the conclusion that we are implying that this is the only thing wrong with it and that women are the only victims of oppression, when no one claimed or even implied that. A society can be misogynistic, racist, aristocratic....etc all at once.
It's like saying that Athens wasn't misogynistic because it not only denied women the right to vote, but also foreigners. Well no, it's both misogynistic and xenophobic all at once. ›››

True, but equally, focussing on the label of misogyny and ignoring the xenophobia still gives a distorted picture, and, when we're looking at the modern world, can lead to the wrong measures being applied. For example, sex trafficking isn't just an issue of women being objectified and treated as products to be bought and sold, it's also an economic issue when the women go into it with eyes wide open because this it the only way they can support their family. Those actively working to solve the problem are looking at the whole picture, but once the word "misogyny" is applied to it, it becomes over-simplified, and becomes "evil woman-hating men" instead.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I personally do not use the word in such a fashion and I agree with you, that are several facets to any problem.
I disagree that using the word "misogyny" automatically over-simplifies it.

Perhaps many who use it end up doing so, but I am under no illusion that the issue is simple or one-sided. My usage of the word constitutes no over-simplification.

[dragonbird]

KnightofPhoenix said:

I personally do not use the word in such a fashion and I agree with you, that are several facets to any problem.
I disagree that using the word "misogyny" automatically over-simplifies it.

Perhaps many who use it end up doing so, but I am under no illusion that the issue is simple or one-sided. My usage of the word constitutes no over-simplification. ›››

Fair enough - I didn't really think you'd over-simplify issues anyway. I've read too many of your posts to think that

[Atalyah]

Not focusing on the issue of misogyny does not = supporting it. Beside are you forgetting about Ves and that female elf? They touch on the issue. I think Philippa briefly mentioned it and of course Triss and Saksia espeically are both strong female character though I don't recall them ever bringing up gender issues directly. They aren’t ignoring the issue and it is being brought up but it's not the main thing.
It would be misogynistic if the female characters in the game actually matched the bullshit misogynist beliefs but for the most part they don't.
And if you think the female characters are all whores or saints you haven’t been paying attention because that’s not true at all.

[Wichat]

Wichat said:

That's hard to do. Someone can discute about slavery, autocracy, respect of minority, religion or Gods/esses. assassinations, .. but when someone write the word "Women vs Men" or extremely "misogyny" EVERYBODY puts his/her hands on the head! And this issue will elicit such a reaction because is there a no-writen-pact of keeping this theme taboo.

speaking in general, it doesn't matter to say Murder, because I will never think that you can be a murder, but if I say misoginy it seems that I am accusing you to be a sort of sexist man... Why? Why this angry reaction in front of a comment with this word, and not a quiet discussion like the ones we have when we're talking about crimes, blood, murders?

I'm not saying that The witcher is or not misoginist, but the fact that misogynist is far more insulting and hurtful than any other immoral or criminal act that may be mentioned in this forum. ›››

I reapeat my post here! It seems that the situation of women are accepeted as normal, no one word saying "yes, there's some
actittud which we have to change in our culture" but a lot of "life is so, don't complain" "you're wrong is you want to disclaim about this point" etc, etc. This arrangement to "why change?", it works equally even if it is wrong. That's very sad.

And I repeat too, a one thousands years ago men and women physical constitution were different to the one we's assolate today. Once more the poor estereotype that women only could be whorse and men soldier... Medieval life were most more complex of that. Men in general can be smither, stable worker, innkeeper, tanner, tailor, farmer, construction peon ... no single soldier. And the same for women who could be cooks, laundresses, stitchers, midwives, inkeepers, waitress, shepherds, farmers. All of them touching the slavery of being hired by owners, but were offices.

[Wichat]

Some part of culture forgotten





That after, with occidental cultures ideolgies, the fact that women lost their presence in the world of warriors does not mean that they were (are) not prepared for it.
East Europe and West East were lands of female and male warriors.

Among the prototypes of Peruvian women warriors highlights. Few societies so openly accepted the presence of women fighters, equipped with strong personality. They appear in our earliest myths and reproduce until today.

U.S. and Guatemalan archaeologists discovered the body of a warrior queen century Maya 7 in an ancient metropolis in the jungle of Peten, Guatemala, said Wednesday the scientific teams in conference.
Kalomt is `K` e abel, wife of King Waka, K `inich Bahlam II.

Please, change your xip of people with XXI century culture and open your mind to another way of life and thinking.

I ask, When and Why it is write that women cannot be warriors?

[Demut]

I think nobody (or at least few) said that. The point made was that the world of “The Witcher” was based on European medieval society in which there were no female warriors to speak of which would make them seem out of place. Kinda like a role-reversed society (hunting/fighting women, cooking/“maternal” men et cetera) would seem out of place even though these did exist at some point in some part of the world (South America for instance). Also, this isn’t really on topic given that this has its own, active thread already.

Ward Dragon said:

Phillipa seems to view men as inferior [...]

Well, after all, she is homosexual on top of that so men don’t even interest her in that regard.

[Wichat]

Demut said:

Well, after all, she is homosexual on top of that so men don’t even interest her in that regard. ›››

The fact she is homosexual is the reason why men don't consider her as a strong female character?

[dragonbird]

Wichat said:

I reapeat my post here! It seems that the situation of women are accepeted as normal, no one word saying "yes, there's some actittud which we have to change in our culture" but a lot of "life is so, don't complain" "you're wrong is you want to disclaim about this point" etc, etc. This arrangement to "why change?", it works equally even if it is wrong. That's very sad. ›››

I'm sorry, but I don't think that anybody has said that.

Wichat said:

The fact she is homosexual is the reason why men don't consider her as a strong female character? ›››

Nor has anyone said that.

[Wichat]

Yes, nobody has said let's change that at least in this forum, you're right. (Except KoP)

About Phillipa, I correct myself, sorry, Demut.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Just a quick note on women in wars.

A few days ago I was conversing with Costin and we started talking about WW2.
We ended up saying "the USSR was saved thanks in large part to its women."

I believe women can and should play an instrumental part in warfare, as all able-bodied citizens should if the need requires it.

[Guy N'wah]

KnightofPhoenix said:

Just a quick note on women in wars.

A few days ago I was conversing with Costin and we started talking about WW2.
We ended up saying "the USSR was saved thanks in large part to its women." ›››

I agree with that. Indeed, the USSR's use of women in combat was probably the most effective of any time or place. They were assigned to roles where sheer strength and size were not decisive, but fitness and a cool head under fire were: pilots, medics, snipers. Some women also distinguished themselves as partisans: "There are two hundred million of us; you can’t hang us all!" [Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya, 1941]