Raven Blackwell,
Ask Sutek and Jason- you don't want me ornery. Even I don't wan't me ornery.
lol, I'm sure you are a lovely person, but to be frank, I think I'll be ok if someone on the other side of the world that I have never met gets a little angry at my opinion.
But the fact is, we are both grown ups. There is no need to get angry.
As for athletic records and such I'd argue that's more or less due to the fact few women are not encouraged, not given the resources or choose not to develop their bodies in 'modern' times, unless it be to become little more than thin and attractive eye candy for horny men. And most women accept it, making themselves little less than victims looking for someone to use them gently, or just decide to try to do the whole mindfuck passive/aggressive thing in life. But I digress.
I do sympathise with your second point. My fiance is pregnant at the moment, and should we have a little girl, she will never be a victim for anyone.
However, I think you'd have to admit that your first point is a cop out. There are millions of women in almost every single athletic pursuit from distance running to boxing to swimming that work just as hard as men and are just as talented. And yet men have every single record in almost every single event. Is it because they are simply superior to women, or has 100,000 years of evolution made men and women sufficiently different on a physiological level that men have several advantages based on their historical role in the family structure?
In my experience, I can worker longer than most men of appriciable conditioning, but not lift as heavy loads. I don't sprint well, but can make some serious distance in long distance running.
As a student I'm sure you realise the fallacy of using a single example to represent a whole demographic. Otherwise you could prove anything.
There is also the fact that women do have measurable higher levels of pain tolerance. After all, our gender is designed to suffer hours if not days of excrutating labour in the process of childbirth. Women have the potential for higher levels of endurance- but few choose to exercise that option, just as a lot of men let their muscle tissue rot while sitting on the couch all their lives.
Firstly, men and women register different types of pain differently and have an unequal mix of pain receptors and sensors anyway.
Secondly, the level of hormonal influence. During childbirth a womans body is flooded with natural pain killers. I guess they don't seem to help that much, but the point is the female body is geared towards giving birth. And it's not like you can suddenly decide to stop half way through delivery! The only way for the pain to stop is to finish the job, which is a major psychological consideration I'm sure.
During combat men undergo a massive influx of adrenlines, testosterone and dopamine which has the same effect. In combat, men feel comparatively less pain. Hence all the stories along the lines of,
"I was shot but didn't even feel it... until the shooting stopped."
From what I've been able to gather, it is probably more accurate to say that most women, can handle more of some types of pain, most of the time. However, athletic comptetition and combat or anything else that raises testosterone levels are a different story.
Women also undergo changes in combat. Testosterone in women almost reaches the same level as it would in a man. At least, when that man has had a nice peaceful day at the beach. It never, ever, comes anywhere near the level of a man in combat. Cortisol production seems to be linked to testosterone production in women. This is important because it is, in some ways, testosterone antidote. Both come from the pituitry (IIRC) gland, in men cortisol is swamped by testicular production.
This also feeds into "women are less aggresive than men." Yep, right up till you threaten the kiddies. Under that particular stress it would appear that women have a whole different bunch of pschological and pysiological responses which I unfortunately can't find very much information on at all. I guess it would be pretty hard to research!
"Hi, my name is Dr. Mengele and today we're going to take a spinal tap, then attach you to these diodes before dropping a chunk of concrete on you children. After that, we'll have to take another spinal tap and a blood test. Okay? Good. Well, let's get started then..."
LMAO!
Do I think those uncontrollable factors are enough to even the scales between the genders? Yeah, I do. How many times in history does the smaller force overcome the larger, despite horrid odds? Enough to know that size (and strength
) is not always the deciding factor.
And if you want to discuss qualifications of the one giving their opinion here is also the fact that I possess a degree in Biology and the work necessary for a Masters in Molecular Biology. I think that gives my arguement a little weight here.
Sure it does. But you still have to prove your points. My only university experience is most of a psych degree (I'll finish it when I discharge) but I do work a job where I get to see the comparative differences of athletic young men and woman on a daily basis...
Jason Durall,
Am I correct in guessing that you don't game with any women?
You are.
It's your game, so you can obviously do what you want, but you did come to the forum asking for advice on your rules tweaks (under the header "making combat grittier"), and you seem to want to throw out any criticism on this issue. Ironically, when 90% of the rest of your rules tweaks will make everyone more or less meat for the grinder, you seem to be adamant about further handicapping female characters.
Yeah, I'm an eee-ville old knouckle dragging sexist pig, aren't I?
It would never occur to me to introduce a rule that female characters had a STR penalty but had a CHA bonus into any game, but if I did, it would be disastrous and met with extreme criticism. It's a fantasy game, so why not let folks play the sorts of characters they want to play, and at least make that an optional stat switch?
Of course, but what if the group of players prefers it that way, even if using a female character themselves? What about if a playing group is made up of guys who like the "realism" inherent in the Conan system, and like changes that, based on their real life experience, enhance that realism?
I work as a professional computer game designer (with a female game designer on our team), and have regular contact with female gamers. My weekly RPG game group has two, sometimes three women in it, and as many as three others show up on an occasional basis. I regularly socialize with female gamers. We've done focus groups on female gamers. I meet them at trade shows. I have dated them (prior to my marriage), and I have read endless studies on "things female gamers want to see in the games industry", so I think I can say with some accuracy that the one constant that emerges is gender parity in roles they are allowed to play in games.
You've answered your own point here. I don't have a female gamer in my group. If I did, and she was unhappy with that change, then I'd get rid of it. I agree 100% that a female gamer shouldn't be handicapped in a fantasy game because of real life tendancies. But that isn't what I'm doing. And that's why I've been "throwing out criticism" on this issue; it isn't really important to me.
I can appreciate that it's much more difficult to do in a video game with a mass audience. In that instance, I wouldn't do it either.
Thanks for the replies!
