What happened to the option for disabling women warriors?

[Schmutz]

I don't need to read minds, I just need to read their posts. When they say stuff like
It kind of gives away their feelings on women. They didn't like the sexism because it provides an interesting opportunity for narrative / roleplay, they liked it because they see women as inferior and want media to reflect that.

I used the term in this thread too, so I thought you meant me, but it is not fair to the OP aswell. Your quote of his leading you to this:

It kind of gives away their feelings on women. They didn't like the sexism because it provides an interesting opportunity for narrative / roleplay, they liked it because they see women as inferior and want media to reflect that.

...is some blue hair dye away from revealing you as a mental case and is indeed mindreading.
Sure his statement is exaggerated, but that's just how you use language and the point he wanted to make still stands. The female sex is generally much weaker and historically wasn't a big part in the war machine. If you want the setting to be realisitic according to our nature and history that's fine and doesn't inherently have anything to do with sexism.

 

[CryTek148]

Make men fight men great again ?

 

[mamastoast]

Frankly I'm not bothered either way, but I'd like to point out that just because it's a "fantasy" world doesn't mean that having female warriors is any more logical. Unless stated otherwise we expect the sexes to work somewhat like the real world where men are generally much more physically capable than women and therefore make better warriors. That isn't being sexist, that's just expecting a logical approach to the world.

Now... In some fantasy having female warriors is just fine because perhaps said females belong to another species, aka elves or are otherwise magically enhanced, but in a grounded world like we see in the game, I agree that female warriors may seem a tad forced.

On the other hand... The amount of female warriors in the game is very small, and the majority of them being warlords makes perfect sense seeing as that could be considered more of a political position rather than an actual warrior... I think making a big deal of out if it silly.

I dont know about you guys, but I don't think throwing around "cuck" and "misogynist" belongs on a forum like this... can't we disagree and still keep a decently nice tone?

 

[humility925]

Women are physically inferior, this doesn't mean they are inferior people or have less worth as people. Trying to pretend they are physical equals to men is just delusional.

While women are physically inferior but I find women physically more beautiful, but I do not want women in battle because I don't want to kill women on battle even it's just game, Don't get me wrong, I had no problem women follow, but real man wouldn't let women in battle to keep her safe from harms even chivalry knight will fight on her behalf so she would not put herself in harm way while knight keep her honors and fight for her behalf. Unless women had power or superpower like wonder women or spellcaster or something.

 

[Amorphous]

I don't recall when it became misogynistic to prefer men to fight and die in armed combat so that the women of the nation they're defending wouldn't have to face the atrocities of war.

Good god man, shave that neckbeard. I know we're in a pandemic so grooming standards have been loosened a bit but have some self respect

 

[paddy345]

Female archers would sound more probable but having them fight with swords and axes against physically stronger males would be ridiculous and out of place.

 

[InsaneGoat]

It kind of gives away their feelings on women. They didn't like the sexism because it provides an interesting opportunity for narrative / roleplay, they liked it because they see women as inferior and want media to reflect that.

Facts don't care about feelings. I love women but I also know they can't fight. That doesn't make them any less - it's just nature. Women are great at many things - it just so happens that fighting isn't one of them. This is why they were never warriors and still aren't to this day. A lot of people like to pretend this is the case, and they can pretend all they want, but I don't care to and it's immersion breaking in what is an otherwise realistic game. Only the factions and geography are fictional. This is not a fantasy game (those have magic, dragons, etc.). This is a medieval/feudal political and warfare simulation. There's plenty of space for women to have roles in the game as they did in this era, but fighting wasn't one of those roles.

 

[Vashonn]

Good god man, shave that neckbeard. I know we're in a pandemic so grooming standards have been loosened a bit but have some self respect

I don't see why insulting me is necessary when I state something that medieval society held as a standard. The game is set in a medieval setting, correct? Shouldn't the values of such a society be in lieu with what we understand them to have been in our own world?

 

[paddy345]

Facts don't care about feelings. I love women but I also know they can't fight. That doesn't make them any less - it's just nature. Women are great at many things - it just so happens that fighting isn't one of them. This is why they were never warriors and still aren't to this day. A lot of people like to pretend this is the case, and they can pretend all they want, but I don't care to and it's immersion breaking in what is an otherwise realistic game. Only the factions and geography are fictional. This is not a fantasy game (those have magic, dragons, etc.). This is a medieval/feudal political and warfare simulation. There's plenty of space for women to have roles in the game as they did in this era, but fighting wasn't one of those roles.

The fact that you have to justify that in a medieval settings where fighting was hand to hand which requires enormous physical strength that it wouldn't be realistic for women to engage in this is crazy. There is a reason why in combat sports today male and female are split up, women in modern times are more likely to join the military due to it being firearm based.

Going back to the days where you had to hold a shield against a 200 pound man slamming an axe or mace down on it is a completely different matter. What you are saying is completely rational which is obvious when someone resorts to insults to rebuke you

 

[Jonabob87]

Women are physically inferior, this doesn't mean they are inferior people or have less worth as people. Trying to pretend they are physical equals to men is just delusional.

I don't think inferior is the word you're after. Most women's bodies are better suited to some things and most men's bodies are better suited to other things. Combat and strenuous physical activity are the things men are better at.

There have been societies where women fought throughout history though, folks. Not normally on the front lines but it has happened and while women are at a big physical disadvantage a nice big sword or an axe can be a pretty decent leveller.

 

[Bassario]

Virtue signal all you want but this is just immersion breaking to have so many women fighters. For a game that's so good and getting things right in terms of authenticity this is disappointing. Women weren't warriors in this time period because it was and is physically impossible. This was an option in M&B 1 - I"m simply asking it be continued. If not, will it be able to be modded out? I'm not saying it shouldn't be an option for those that want it - of course that's fine - but those of us who don't should be able to disable the wokeness.

Physically impossible. Surely you must know how ridiculous you sound stating that as your only reasoning. You could have said so many things, maybe start with the truth of how rare female warriors were because of how socially unacceptable it was, even socially speaking given a choice why would you want to spend months/years marching to inevitably die violently. Still better off churning butter at home with kids, being abused and with no social standing.

Regardless of what we might think, the facts do not support your misogyny. There were scores of historically famous people who managed to get their way into armies via unique circumstance or even rogues and leaders of warriors/bandits. The claim 'Physically impossible' immediately paints you as that weedy upset little incel who's never been touched. I would avoid even trying to defend that let alone stating it in future.

 

[yzzdxrdh]

oh ...I want to say I am satisfied with it.

 

[Revverie]

WHY IS PEOPLE ARGUING ABOUT WOMEN PYISIQUE THE SOLDIERS WHO ACTUALLY WENT TO WAR WERE STARVING FARMERS WHO DIED FOR NOTHING

 

[InsaneGoat]

The fact that you have to justify that in a medieval settings where fighting was hand to hand which requires enormous physical strength that it wouldn't be realistic for women to engage in this is crazy. There is a reason why in combat sports today male and female are split up, women in modern times are more likely to join the military due to it being firearm based.

Going back to the days where you had to hold a shield against a 200 pound man slamming an axe or mace down on it is a completely different matter. What you are saying is completely rational which is obvious when someone resorts to insults to rebuke you

Agreed. Even today women are not in front line combat roles. They sometimes get caught up in combat by being in other roles but they aren't going on heavy fighting patrols with the guys. That's just in the movies. It's not degrading to women to say this. This is just how it is. Women are better at other things than men (e.g. they tend to make better doctors many believe).

 

[paddy345]

WHY IS PEOPLE ARGUING ABOUT WOMEN PYISIQUE THE SOLDIERS WHO ACTUALLY WENT TO WAR WERE STARVING FARMERS WHO DIED FOR NOTHING

In medieval times wars consisted of much smaller, more well trained forces. Farmers usually made up more of the militia units which were more rare. Combat in those days required one to be very skilled and with it came a level of prestige

 

[BlackRainZ]

I don't think inferior is the word you're after. Most women's bodies are better suited to some things and most men's bodies are better suited to other things. Combat and strenuous physical activity are the things men are better at.

There have been societies where women fought throughout history though, folks. Not normally on the front lines but it has happened and while women are at a big physical disadvantage a nice big sword or an axe can be a pretty decent leveller.

Well, whatever you want to call it, you get what I am saying.

Physically impossible. Surely you must know how ridiculous you sound stating that as your only reasoning. You could have said so many things, maybe start with the truth of how rare female warriors were because of how socially unacceptable it was, even socially speaking given a choice why would you want to spend months/years marching to inevitably die violently. Still better off churning butter at home with kids, being abused and with no social standing.

Regardless of what we might think, the facts do not support your misogyny. There were scores of historically famous people who managed to get their way into armies via unique circumstance or even rogues and leaders of warriors/bandits. The claim 'Physically impossible' immediately paints you as that weedy upset little incel who's never been touched. I would avoid even trying to defend that let alone stating it in future.

Saying it is physically impossible is wrong. Obviously there are women who fought in wars and as warriors. However, let's not try to pretend there are that many examples. The fact that people have to literally look for a needle in a haystack to find examples just shows this. There are examples of female warriors, especially among certain tribes and such, but in reality what percent in history of warriors/soldiers were women? You could say that it was due to being socially unacceptable and this is true that it was socially unacceptable, but there are much more practical reasons. The simple fact that men who are physically stronger when it comes to combat used their strength to dominate society is the reality. If women were stronger physically, then perhaps they would have done the same thing. This isn't a good thing, but this is how it was.

 

[CryTek148]

yikes

Can you explaine whats difference betwen being called incel that nobody wants to touch and my reply? First one isnt yikes?

 

[BlazingScribe]

Can you explaine whats difference betwen being called incel that nobody wants to touch and my reply? First one isnt yikes?

Personally this whole thread if a bit yikes to me. Like. Jesus people have gotten really upset about this across the board.

Can we please just bury the hatchet? If not the Mods will probably, and rightfully, shut down this thread as it turns into a full blown war.

Some people's expectations of this game's settings were different than others. That's fine. No one is hating women by thinking the vast majority of all warriors and major figures were male, because that is largely true, and that history has not changed until comparatively recently. One reason why figures like Joan of Arc, Catherine the Great, and Boudicca are so well known compared to many of their male counterparts is because they were women, and did incredible things when many of their peers expected so little. However, these were exceptions. Awesome exceptions that should be treasured and remembered forever, and that should absolutely be used for inspiration if it calls for it, but still exceptions. And if someone goes into a game that claims to have historical inspiration, it is reasonable to assume that, on average, the demographics they encounter should represent that of the real history to some degree. Pointing out that disconnect is entirely innocent. So long as it is done in good faith at least.

However. It is equally innocent to get excited when you see those exceptions in a game like this, and to hope to see more of them. As I said previously, I thought it was pretty cool fighting alongside Sein, a Battanian Lord and a woman. Plus, some people just like seeing women in things, or like female characters. Adding a few more than the supposed average would imply is an innocent enough way to add variety to what is ultimately a fictional world, and one with a known history of female rulers (albeit rare ones). Frankly I could never and still cannot keep most of the lords straight in Warband, so having a bit more to differentiate them is appreciated.

In short. Please calm down. I think at this point the argument is less about the game and more about slights, both real and perceived. And the internet has enough of those as it is.

 

[CryTek148]

Personally this whole thread if a bit yikes to me. Like. Jesus people have gotten really upset about this across the board.

Totaly fair i agree that whole thread is toxic but it became hostile when sjw arrived people were haveing normal discussion about features of a game ffs

 

[InsaneGoat]

Well, whatever you want to call it, you get what I am saying.


Saying it is physically impossible is wrong. Obviously there are women who fought in wars and as warriors. However, let's not try to pretend there are that many examples. The fact that people have to literally look for a needle in a haystack to find examples just shows this. There are examples of female warriors, especially among certain tribes and such, but in reality what percent in history of warriors/soldiers were women? You could say that it was due to being socially unacceptable and this is true that it was socially unacceptable, but there are much more practical reasons. The simple fact that men who are physically stronger when it comes to combat used their strength to dominate society is the reality. If women were stronger physically, then perhaps they would have done the same thing. This isn't a good thing, but this is how it was.

I stand by physically impossible. I don't believe these BS historical accounts that so conveniently came to light along with the feminist movement (which I was on board with when it was about equality of opportunity - now it's equality of outcome). The men who became warriors were the toughest of the men. I don't believe any woman could have made it. Anyone knows you could find a woman somewhere that could probably win against a sickly or genetically very small man but those men did not become warriors. A minimum level of genetics (aka upper body strength and size) and training was required. And as for the accusations of being an incel - I'm a happily married man with children and have great relationships with many women, especially my wife. Most women I know don't feel the need to pretend they can physically overpower a man. It's completely unimportant in the modern world and they are confident - as they should be - they have their own strengths.