redhorizon09 Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 being a body builder doesn't mean you are strong, Note: " body builders go all for muscle, not for strength. i could be mistaken but from what i been told and hearing. " some skilled small guy and/or women can kick some butt. and how you stand, some cant even pick up a person because of you center of mass, seen it and has be proven. a lot of it depends on the person and what they do with themselves. Its a very big topic to cover. :thumbsup: I'm also aware of what you're talking about. I apologize for being too brief previously, but I still can't see a woman going to toe with someone like Cain Velasquez or Shane Carwin in a pro fight and come out winning. In the modern world, with mechanized infantry and guns, sure. There were plenty of U.S. women in Iraq who went out on patrol - particularly MPs (Military Police). MPs are not technically "combat arms" and a fair percentage of them are women. They would mount up and go patrol, get into firefights, etc, and acquitted themselves very well. E.g. Sgt. Leigh Ann Hester, Silver Star recipient. Even so, doing convoy escort is a far cry from regular infantry, where you spend long hours on foot carrying a hundred pounds of gear, to say nothing of elite infantry like Rangers. While there are women who can do this, the percentage is much smaller than the percentage of men who can do it. Knowing the social problems that occur in co-ed military units, it simply isn't worth causing that much upheaval just for the sake of admitting the few women who really could do the job into those types of units. That might sound unfair, but the military's job is to be an effective fighting force, not a model society. On the other hand, in a world of combat with sword and shield, in real life women simply would not be able to compete whatsoever. The idea of Aela the Huntress using speed and agility to outfight her slower male opponents is 100% myth. The fact is that swords are heavy, armor is heavy, shields are heavy, and moving quickly with that stuff requires brute strength. With modern nutrition, supplements, and a rigorous workout regimen, it's no doubt possible for a small percentage of women to become capable of fighting this way on a regular basis. In a medieval setting, no chance whatsoever. Even the idea of female archers is mostly a myth. It's one thing to shoot at targets or kill a deer with a modern compound bow. An English longbow had a draw weight up to 185 pounds, which is three to four times that of a modern hunting bow. All that being said, we're talking about a fantasy world. You're playing a character who can breathe fire by speaking in Dragon, and there's no reason your svelte female warrior can't be just as strong as a man twice her weight, whether it's because of fantasy physics, dragon genes, or the hand of Talos giving her strength beyond ordinary mortals. I'm aware of that, but my point still stands and what I was talking about wasn't meant to try and relate it to a fantasy setting so I apologize for not being clear on that. I was just meaning to talk about real world possibilities on a separate matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SickFak Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 What? If anything Skyrim is not sexist enough! Come on! It's a game that, though is a fantasy, tries to create/represent a somewhat believable medieval environment (Male dominated Norse culture with Nords and male dominated Rome with Imperials - are the most obvious examples). It's not about being politically correct and whatnot, it's about creating a believable world... Waaaay too many female combatants (bandits, warriors etc.). City guards actually get it right, there are a few female guards here and there, but even in every city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gahnzz Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 ... it's about creating a believable world... A believable world in which you can cast fire from your palms and shout something that gives you temporary invulnerability to all harm... oookkaaaayyyy... Seriously, it's called suspension of disbelief and creating a world that is consistent to it's own internal concepts - regardless of what the actual, physical real world may say or do. And the Greybeards are not a monastic order... all because there are 4 living human Greybards doesn't mean they never had nor never will have a female member. There is nothing in their speech or manners to dictate that they would only accept a member who is male. Female Khajit totally cool. You are the Dragonborn - who are we to deny you membership. Source: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Greybeards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesapien Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 A female Greybeard??? Oh, that's too funny, especially if you're serious. Are you serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faifh Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 (edited) What? If anything Skyrim is not sexist enough! Come on! It's a game that, though is a fantasy, tries to create/represent a somewhat believable medieval environment (Male dominated Norse culture with Nords and male dominated Rome with Imperials - are the most obvious examples). It's not about being politically correct and whatnot, it's about creating a believable world... Waaaay too many female combatants (bandits, warriors etc.). City guards actually get it right, there are a few female guards here and there, but even in every city. Uhh, you think when in a fantasy world, where you should fire from your hands, capture souls and gods exist too many women being to equal makes it "unbelievable"? Dude, give me a break! That cracks me up. Edited January 21, 2012 by faifh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faifh Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 They're a monastic order, this is like complaining that there are no male nuns. A male nun is called "monk". :facepalm: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthWolf Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 It's not just a fantasy world. It's a fantasy world with strong medieval trappings. Just because there are dragons and magic doesn't mean that the medieval trappings are completely lost in the fantasy. I find it rude to berate someone for expecting a degree of sexism in a medieval setting just because it's also a fantasy setting. :confused: Suspension of disbelief is also not some all encompassing thing, different people come to a piece with different expectations. He expected a degree of sexism because of the medieval trappings of the setting, saw none, and saw no explanation for its absence. He found that to ruin some of his immersion. Seems pretty reasonable to me. Personally, I don't care. I don't see a problem with his complaint, though, because he makes a fair point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faifh Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 It's not just a fantasy world. It's a fantasy world with strong medieval trappings. Just because there are dragons and magic doesn't mean that the medieval trappings are completely lost in the fantasy. I find it rude to berate someone for expecting a degree of sexism in a medieval setting just because it's also a fantasy setting. :confused: Suspension of disbelief is also not some all encompassing thing, different people come to a piece with different expectations. He expected a degree of sexism because of the medieval trappings of the setting, saw none, and saw no explanation for its absence. He found that to ruin some of his immersion. Seems pretty reasonable to me. Personally, I don't care. I don't see a problem with his complaint, though, because he makes a fair point. When it comes to sexism the fantasy has to stop. riiiiiight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthWolf Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 (edited) Going after straw men isn't going to prove me wrong. This isn't about sexism. This is about something that's not generally associated with medieval times (gender equality) showing up in a medieval setting. If they had a democratic government, I would be utterly confused as to why democracy is in my medieval setting unless someone wanted to explain this to me so that I could continue to believe in the credibility of the setting. He wants to know why gender neutrality is in the setting, and he has seen no explanation. And Medieval Europe was sexist. And this is largely a setting with those undertones. As I said, I don't care. I'm too busy wondering why my Khajiit can enter cities so easily without being known to be the Dragonborn. Distracts me more than the gender issue, which I wouldn't really care about even if the game didn't have a plethora of other lore issues to reel over. But, feel free to believe what you want. Edited January 21, 2012 by NorthWolf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faifh Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 (edited) Its far more a fantasy world than being medieval. Except from magic and dwemer the technology level is loosely medival technology level, but thats about it, also the politics are vastly different. Its not in any way tring to stick close to medival. Acting Gods ... believableMagic ... believableNo toilets ... believableHumanoid cats ... believableHumanoid lizards ... believableOrcs ... believableWalking skeletons ... believableFighting ghosts ... believableClairvoyant message senders ... believableDragons ... believableShouting fire ... believableNo single really dark place ... believableLess sexism ... unbelievable! Edited January 21, 2012 by faifh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts