Can we have a debate about women without getting it locked?

Users who are viewing this thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Where are the damn mods? Sleeping? All threads like these should be shut down as a pre-caution: after all, this could turn to be much worse than a mud-slinging competition (like death threats). Even worse if the media catches wind of this.

I swear the community wasn't like this before Bannerlord, what happened? A game becoming mainstream causes it to attract a bunch of people looking for trouble? If so, then I am very disappointed at the state of this community.
so what if they catch a whiff?

"turkish company bravely enforces equality on mysoginst gamers amidst death threats"

good headline imo.
 
Where are the damn mods? Sleeping? All threads like these should be shut down as a pre-caution: after all, this could turn to be much worse than a mud-slinging competition (like death threats). Even worse if the media catches wind of this.

I swear the community wasn't like this before Bannerlord, what happened? A game becoming mainstream causes it to attract a bunch of people looking for trouble? If so, then I am very disappointed at the state of this community.
Too much "staying home" people forget they are dealing with other people

And sometimes, others are just assholes for the pleasure of being assholes ascentain their dominance and be "brave men" defending their "idealogy"

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
I think the answer to this should be pretty simple and shouldn't warrant a debate. TW should introduce an option to include historical sexism in the game the same way Warband had. So have it where there's a much smaller proportion of female clan leaders/warriors, inheritance should always go to a son but go to a daughter if no other choice is given and if you play as a female character it should be much harder to gain support etc.

However this should be an option. You must remember that this game does have female players and I can imagine it would be pretty infuriating if you had to be at a significant disadvantage just cos you wanted to play as your gender. This game is very loosely based on historical factions so does not have to follow a historical narrative.

A sexism feature should come with different advantages for female characters and npc's however, such as powers for in intrigue, holding fiefs during times of war and playing politics. Because believe it or not but women did have a large influence over events in history that they are rarely credited for, just look up Eleanor of Aquitaine for a small example. Different factions should hold different belief's too, Vlandia should be more conservative, Empire should give more none war affiliated roles to women and the Khuzait should perhaps be the most liberal just as a few examples from the top of my head (i'm literally thinking this out as I type). Introduction of new policies could also dictate the role of women in kingdoms too.

But yeah I really wasn't bothered when TW didn't have the same mechanic as WB did, it's completely understandable and again, I'd be annoyed if the game was harder just cos I wanted to play as my gender, it's a video game guys, not an educational piece of history. I don't expect TW to change it but there will certainly be mods that do.
certainly agree would it would be a great feature to add to the game and it would solve the ongoing tensions between the community however it would have been nice to see this feature carried over before opening the beta to the public
 
Last edited:
The histrionic medieval gender studies crowd can't handle a debate. They want to claim Medieval society was sexist but want to say that women were accepted as warriors. It makes no sense, you can't debate with someone who has come to their conclusions without any logic. They have been instructed by modern academics to be offended by all of things they view as sexist, history is not safe to alteration. 20 years ago there was no gripe in this area of history, this mantra sprouted up in the last 10 years. It is what it is. Anyone who looks at medieval history knows that women were almost never combatants in warfare. Women in this time period also did not believe it was sexist for them not to fight in wars; again this is also a recent drift in egalitarian views of gender. The "gender is a social construct" argument is an anti western philosophical proposition, that is where this stems from. Most of the kids posting in here don't have enough education (self awareness) to understand this is an ideological battleground.

I suspect you haven't actually met anyone studying women in the medieval period.


For fun, Wearing pink short skirts, often with tights, and heels used to be the height of manly attire. Now a man would be seen as crossdressing if he went out dressed like that.

The fevered rants against academia are always a great start. It's a lot of the reason why places get so messed up, conspiracy theorizing about academics and the blithe dismissal of entire disciplines of study because their assertions or findings don't fit your political beliefs.



Of course, if a fantasy video game offends you then you need help.

Aside from that point, what our society reflects currently is not a spotlight for historical truth. That's my contention. I would never post about this topic if the claims made were not historical assertions that Bannerlord represents the roles of women in the Middle Ages. Because it most certainly does not.

No one except people stuffed with straw think it does.

That's the real issue with this debate. "Those people totally think something" "What people?" "You know 'those' people".

We have a certain picture of medieval times, shaped by movies and stories, which allways show a heavily male dominated world with mostly male heroes. It just doesen't fit our picture of that, to have so many female lords in the game. Sure, it makes female players more compfortable, but lets be honest here, the vast majority of Bannerlord players are male. I probably can't speak for other males here, but if I'm going to play Bannerlord, I want to recreate this medieval world in my head, I want to dive into a world where I can be a powerful king who rides into battle, slaying enemies, dueling other lords to win the favor of a girl, crafting weapons, raiding villages etc. Say whatever you want, those things are heavily associated with manliness and having a bunch of ladies around you, doing those things just feels artificial and wrong for me. I don't want to dive into a world where I'm a politically correct part of a society where every gender is treated equally.



With this kind of argument you could also justify wizards and dragons in Bannerlord.. The game aims to realism, as much as it is possible, while keeping Mount&Blade gameplay concept/experience alive. For keeping it alive, you "have to" give up some of the realism. For example, if only one of ten lords go into battle, the whole gameplay concept/experience wouldn't work at all, so you need to give up on some realism there, to keep the game concept gameplay concept/experience alive. Having many ladies in the game doesen't add anything to the gameplay concept/experience so it is dispensable. Every element that doesen't add to the gameplay concept/experience of Mount&Blade and diminishes the realism, should get eliminated. The game series lives of exactly that maximum realism with a very unique gameplay concept/experience (which only works when forgoing on some realism). This is what makes them so great and differs it from any others.

I mean most people's pictures of the medieval world is utter bull**** though, so I'm not sure why anyone should follow what pop history thinks of medieval worlds. I have seen enough dull brown dirt and **** covered peasants in dull brown villages in games and films to last me a life time man.

It isn't a human axiom, unalterable, that women must be excluded from war or politics. It's how the majority of historic cultures turned out, but, despite the shouts of gender essentialists, it isn't what must happen to a society. Since Bannerlord states are not, actually, a real historic culture, then it is perfectly acceptable that they have a differing cultural values that put less emphasis on gender roles. Not that much less, since, like, every actual warrior is actually a dude, and it's only female nobles in combat
There's not much of a debate. If TW kept gender the way that it was in Warband, then the game would be open to attack on Twitter.

I don't mind having lots of female leaders, it's interesting in a way. But suspension of disbelief is a real thing. There is always a price to pay when you make something distractingly unrealistic. I wish people simply acknowledged this price rather than pretend it doesn't exist.

Twitter, despite the fevered imaginings of certain political leaders, doesn't have politics. Bannerlord is open to attack on twitter by individuals and groups for having too many or too few women by individuals or groups whose politics are against whatever portrayal bannerlord goes with. There's no winning everyone is happy answer. And, honestly, the chuds are the most active review bombers and **** stirrers in the gaming community.

Bannerlord is the events before warband and so that means that all of the female lords in warband lost their rights in the future strange world this isn't about personal beliefs it's about common sense I'm not saying that we shouldn't have any females in the game i'm just saying that personally I think the ratio is too high at the moment they shouldn't have a number of females that you have to scroll the Encyclopedia to count from my understanding if there where female combatants where rare and I just would like the game to reflect that as it would be a way to pay respect as some of us may actually be related to these people and I don't want to see their legacy washed over as if it was a common thing for women to be on the field in those times

This can happen, and in fact did historically.

Also... what people? Whose legacy?
No, because neither sides can have civilized discussion and at most of the cases, both will come out as pretentious and immature: according to the international law of the internet forums, by page 2 or 3, a flame war must begin regardless of the theme.

If Disneyland forums (yes they do exist) literally can't have a discussion about some mundane attraction without delving into mud-slinging, elitism or "good 'ol times" mentality, then why do we expect a relatively mainstream video game forum to have an actual debate about any topic, especially one that is controversial? It's a fool's errand to even try.

But one side supports equal rights and the other doesn't.

Since it's not a historical game and is only based in a world that is vastly similar (but still different) from our real-world medieval society, I don't have a problem with so many warrior women, though I wouldn't have a problem if there were even fewer of them. (my character would feel even more awesome and exclusive because of that), so I don't have any strong opinions about it.

The many is like, a few dozen. All noble women.

Grave findings of women buried with weapons (nobility status items) is not a proof of women fighting in combat. There's no Nordic cultural tradition or historical source anywhere that verifies this claim. That is not science, that is called speculation; or "gender studies" applied to history. This is a recent phenomenon, people did not think this way even 20 years ago in history classes.

Canton= This type of sardonic lunacy tactic is why people can't have a discussion and the threads gets locked. The histrionics club always does this.

Lampooning the "gender realists" for their adherence to "science" is always great fun though.
 
Last time @stevehoos made the claim that medieval women (Islamic, in this case) never fought on the battlefield, he was wrong then. When I linked and quoted a freely available source, he called it "the hoard of pseudo historic commentary and generalizing."

Then implied it was modern fake history, when it dated from over a thousand years ago.

Let that inform the merits of his claims.
 
Last edited:
Im down to throw historical accuracy out the window in the case of Lady battle commanders if you are all willing to forget about historical accuracy when I suggest we should have plate armor in the native game.
 
Ignoring thread.


Try this? I don't even know if this still works, but it's something. They don't even try to hide the intent of this mod either, yet so many 'historical' gamers thinks its meant for owning the libz or something lol.
I play 1.5.5 beta version now and none of the mods work. All of them crash the game, even the ones that specifically state they're compatible with the latest beta so I play without any mods for now :sad:

But thanks for the suggestion.
 
This can happen, and in fact did historically.

Also... what people? Whose legacy?
are you saying that the women of the middle ages would have had more power at an earlier time period and lost it as time went on because of sexism I am sorry since I have generally heard that women gain more rights as we progress in the world so I don't really understand what you are saying

also I think you misunderstood what I meant with the last thing I wrote it saying that people are related to the female combatants and it would be disrespectful to exaggerate the amount of woman in combat as it was not the case and if people start thinking it was a common think then it starts to lose it's achievement because women in combat back then where rare
 
The main reason why there is such inflammatory debates on this subject :

"the weapons or armors are not from the time period that inspired the game. The game should be more faithful to be more immersive."
"well, yeah, you might be a bit picky but why not"

"man, that's wrong, you are a commoner but can just come to King's banner and ask him questions on history ? That's just not immersive, class hierarchy should be more strict."
"yeah, sure, that's sort of weird isn't it ?"

"there are too many warrior women, they were not as prevalent, it's not feeling authentic enough."
"LOL YOU ARE A SEXIST PIG, NEED A MISOGYNIST MALE FANTASY FOR YOUR BOYS CLUB IS THAT IT YOU INCEL ?!"

Here is what you see and why there is even a fight. Everyone understand that when you asks for a faithful representation of a stratified society with nobles lording over everyone and peasants being used as fodder on the battlelines, it's about showing the era, not that you're somehow a snob who wants to dominate the lower classes. But if you dare to have the exact same reasoning with the place of women in historical context, somehow suddenly the white knights come and throw insults as if the goal was some sort of deliberate attempt at being sexist.

I'm afraid no dialog is possible with people who have such level of bad faith and seem to have tied their entire self-worth to how much they can posture on the Internet.
 
For me Bannerlord vanilla is pretty much historical medieval europe world and women as warriors just does not fit.

On the other hand real fantasy for me would be Prophesy of Pendon or Perisno. Now there i do not mind seing women as warriors.
 
"the weapons or armors are not from the time period that inspired the game. The game should be more faithful to be more immersive."
"well, yeah, you might be a bit picky but why not"

I haven't seen anyone argue for this. Only that some of the Battanian armors are straight-up dwarven fantasty-tier. The selection of armor was always pretty wide.

But there is definitely the opposite, people asking for armor way out of era, like Maximillian-style plate that's about as close to today, year 2020, as it is to 1084.
 
Last edited:
How the hell is this thread still going on? Every time a new comment gets posted here, I lose a little bit of my braincells and faith in humanity as well.

This is like the world's longest-running kindergarten feud and then people wonder why "gamers" aren't respected at all and characterized as children.

To answer this whole debate in two very simple points:

1.) If you have any problem with women, then there will be almost certainly a mod to change it: either Nexus or LL will have it. Sometimes you will have to wait for it or maybe ask for it, but you will have it. You might need to register to some shady Russian website, but it will be worth it to you, I guess.

2.) If you don't have a problem with women, then ignore all these posts and just enjoy (or don't enjoy depending on your opinion) your life or Bannerlord and don't argue with the people above.

Case closed, go home everyone. I can already hear some journalist writing an article on this, so go before this thread makes that article even worse in tone.
 
Last edited:
Last time @stevehoos made the claim that medieval women (Islamic, in this case) never fought on the battlefield, he was wrong then. When I linked and quoted a freely available source, he called it "the hoard of pseudo historic commentary and generalizing."

Then implied it was modern fake history, when it dated from over a thousand years ago.

Let that inform the merits of his claims.

Medieval gender studies via wikipedia.

There may have been what? A handful of scant accounts (most are activist's visions) of in all of Islamic history. Women were in the Harem dude, they had less influence than early Medieval European societies. So what 99.9998 % were men historical? I think I will stick with my position.
 
30 year old men arguing about women in a video game
giphy.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom