Discussion Archives Index

Sexism. kinda long, watch out for spam|U6

_____
Current Index

Posted by Kae on 09/16

I deleted this post for containing an illegal word. The post itself still has valid and interesting points, though, so I copied it first and edited out the offending word. --Darth KAE |U6

From: Kae Saturday, August 09 2003, 04:17AM In net society, where there is still a majority of men (what is it, 3 to 1?), you grow to expect all sort of manifestations of misogyny and simple every-day negative stereotyping of women. I used to play this mud a few years ago and wasn't surprised to find these on legend. Along side with intelligent, educated, resourceful and strong female imms and players, there were regularly male players playing female chars using the stereotypes of women we've all grown familiar with (ever noticed how these female chars are always more beautiful, bitchier and flirtatious than the genuine thing?) That in mob pairs that the female part was always the weaker and lower lvl, was not surprising either, this, btw, is reportedly not true in rl. Women may have less str, but in extreme situations of death and trauma they prove to be the "stronger" sex in most aspects. A couple of months ago I returned to the mud. Plenty has changed: new areas, new eq, new imms. Lots to learns and enjoy. Then I noticed something else was new: as part of a whole campaign to add social acts to mobs, some imm decided it might be great fun to add some new and annoying negative female stereotypes. Strong proud Maev started slapping you when you fight her. Queen Megwan turned into a loathsome creature always yelling for her man and panicking. Set her wimpy high if you like, why does she have to scream and spam so much as well? Right around the corner from them, two charming mobs were added to Tara inn, the scruffy men whose sole purpose it seems in to pinch women and make lewd remarks, what's up with that? I think Tika too has become more female like and hysterical, but don't take my word for it. In spirit with that, the sailors back in indus London have become more crude, and I think the amandas were turned into whores. What Ptah has once created as something subtle and discreet to rightly depict an era and a place, has been turned into something rude and in your face. We always hear that this is a family mud. Cussing on public channels gets you warned. Who in his right mind thinks that the word [four-letter expletive pertaining to certain bodily waste functions deleted by your friendly immortal] is more harmful to young people than providing them with negative stereotypes to adopt and embrace for l for life? Look, I am not a prude and nor do I expect 100% PC around me, but I just don't get it! In a mud imped by and extremely accomplished woman (Kaige), what exactly transpired before those changes were made? Some imm with a grudge for women has an idea: "why not add a few demeaning socials to female mobs, and while I'm at it why not add a few sexually harassing mobs at the most favorite newbie hometown, right at the screen where they first enter our world?" And another imm, one who approves these ideas, said "hmm why not, sounds like a brilliant idea, why don't you get to work on it!. ????? |U6

From: Neo_Tritoch Saturday, August 09 2003, 06:04AM Who wrote it? |U6

From: Kae Saturday, August 09 2003, 07:32AM Err, Maja wrote the original post here. Sowwy. |U6

From: Kae Saturday, August 09 2003, 09:23AM Okay, here's my 2 gold coins on the sexism issue: "LegendMUD is based not on fantasy, and not on SF, but rather on history." Like it or not as we may, it's a fact that probably 90% or more of all societies existing through-out past and present have had cultural differences between the sexes. The majority have been degrading, if not right-out hostile to females. It's not the nicest aspect of history, but it's history nonetheless. When I as a builder attempt to catch the atmosphere of a given site at a given time in history, I have to include the view of women that was dominant at the time and place, whether I personally agree with it or not. That's why you'll find cheap harbor whores in Malta -- because they were there, and becoming one was often the only way for a destitute woman to sustain herself in that time. Similarly you'll find my stereotypical big-nosed stingy Jewish banker because that was the view that people (read Christians) had of Jewish people at the time. Really old players may remember that once, Legend's staff was accused of racism when Lima first featured Jewish banker Abraham, victim of the same prejudices. I have nothing against women or Jews (I'm a woman myself, for starters...). But if I were to pretend that racism and sexism did not take place in Malta in the year 1615 I'd be skewering history to a point where I might as well just write pure fantasy instead. Fantasy at least has the advantage that you can do what you want and not worry about how feasible it would have been in the real world. One of my mortal characters is a rabidly anti-sexism female from a culture where women were in fact dominant to males. I have a party expressing her chauvinist views in response to mob acts -- as well as players often enough -- and getting others to join in on the RP that the situation creates. I don't find that historical correctness takes anything away from my female character -- it gives her something to bounce off on and an excuse to kill a lot of male mobs. After all, the people we play are supposed to be exceptional, and a rabid feminist in Ireland anno 400 A.D. would have been an exception indeed. And on that note, I certainly expect to see suffragettes out campaigning in the London Port expansion when that happens, some day. Women's liberation was not an easy thing to achieve, and it should be a part of an area that happens to occupy the proper time and place in history. --Darth Kae (who managed not to sit on her capslock this time while typing her name) |U6

From: Maja Saturday, August 09 2003, 12:36PM I suppose that the imms who originally built the areas mentioned DID study the history of the place they were building and still did not find fit to add those socials. Those were added at a later stage by somebody else who added socials to areas systematically (I'm guessing one person but I wouldn't know). I somehow don't see that action as "bringing the mud closer to history" type of thing. So I do believe that the old "historically accurate explanation" is only an excuse added in retrospect. Can you really tell me that whoever added those recent changes was concerned with historical accuracy? You mention Abraham of Lima in your comment. That Abraham is the money lender makes historical sense. If he had a stereotypical desc (long nose, little eyes?) that would be a problem. But no, he was given a profession occupied by Jews. That's a historical fact. That Queen Megwan had two elite guards to guard her may be historicaly accurate, I don't know. That she screams in hysteria, that's a stereotype. Can you spot the difference? And one last thing, can you show me somewhere in books that at inns of ancient Ireland it was common prcatice to pinch lady guests? I don't know. Historical accuracy seems to pop up when needed and be ignored when not. Not convincing. |U6

From: Kaige Saturday, August 09 2003, 12:39PM If you're wondering who is in charge of maintaining an area, the easiest way to do this is check the AREAINFO command. -Kaige |U6

From: Kaige Saturday, August 09 2003, 01:45PM Ok, now to respond to a couple of these: > Queen Megwan turned into a loathsome creature always yelling for her > man and panicking. Set her wimpy high if you like, why does she have to > scream and spam so much as well? A couple bugs there have been fixed for next reboot. Also lowered chance for her to yell. However, while she's a strong woman and ruling through Cian, it doesn't mean she's got the battle strength that he does, else why would she have those big warriors protecting her in the first place? > Right around the corner from them, two charming mobs were added to Tara > inn, the scruffy men whose sole purpose it seems in to pinch women and > make lewd remarks, what's up with that? Those mobs have always been represented as there in Tika's acts: Tika says to you, 'YES! That's it! Here, let me show ye.' Tika hands you a tray laden with mugs and greasy stew. Tika says to you, That would be going to those nasty men over there. Tika points to a group of scruffy-looking men over by the fire. Tika wispers to you, 'Watch out, they pinch.' Tika says, 'Well, since ye be taking over now, I'll just be sitting here enjoying me break.' Tika wishes you good luck. Tika says to you, 'Have fun!' Tika sits down at a table. Someone suggested they get added for real. So they were, doing basically what Fionn had described them doing. Where's the historical text that proves there were men sitting in ancient irish inns doing this? Do we really need one? I mean they're obviously not the most savory of gentlemen, and human nature hasn't changed so much since then. Think of them as the construction workers of their day... oh dear.. is that another stereotype creeping in? BTW, they behave pretty much the same way as the sailors in London and elsewhere with the same fixes mentioned below. > I think Tika too has become more female like and hysterical, but > don't take my word for it. I'm not sure how to respond to the "more female like" -- I mean.. she is female... and? As far as her being hysterical over the mice? Big deal. Even some men will shriek at the sight of one. And honestly... it's pretty much how I react to having one in my house. Do I mind them in cages? No. Do I like them sneaking up on me and suddenly popping out on me? No. Do I consider myself to be stereotyped because of it? Hardly. > In spirit with that, the sailors back in indus London have become more > crude, and I think the amandas were turned into whores. What Ptah has > once created as something subtle and discreet to rightly depict an era > and a place, has been turned into something rude and in your face. The generic women there... the Amandas as you call them... haven't changed since Ptah wrote them except for some responses to questions posed them or handing back items given to them. And showing worry and concern over someone being bleed to death doesn't seem whorish to me. As for the sailors... they've actually gotten LESS RUDE. They actually ignore any females with the keywords "child" or "kid" now and they also set a flag on the people they're rude to and leave them alone for a while now. And I fixed a bug with that as well, so it'll save over renting and will even take longer to wear off. And that flag prevents others of the same type from bothering the same person again. On the topic of historical accuracy vs representation and giving depth and character to various mobs... I think you're reading WAY too much into the exaggerations resulting from a couple of bugs in a couple of the examples you cited. And I have to agree with Kae's approach as a player... if something a mob does offends either your (or your character's) sensibilities... kill them, repeatedly. Take a stand in-game over it. But there's no way we can win a PC debate and rip everything that might offend someone -- very little of the mud would remain. -Kaige |U6

From: Maloth Saturday, August 09 2003, 02:57PM I agree with Kae on this. Legend is based in history and as history shows women were supposed to act like delicate flowers, and therefore they did. (with the exception of the prostitutes etc... but they actually were there too). As a female player, I really havent noticed too much sexism in the actual game. It never occured to me to be upset about Megwan screaming for Cian's help, possibly because Cian screamed for his guards help already... and because shes a Queen and if the Queen dies then the whole kingdom would be in an uproar and it would just be better for her to live. Anyway, enough of my rambling, I just dont think that things that are more than likely historically accurate should be taken to heart the way they were.

From: Kae Saturday, August 09 2003, 03:42PM I am a hobby historian and I take my research incredibly serious -- in fact so serious that I often get teased by the other builders about my tendency to nitpick about details that really don't strike anyone else as being even remotely relevant. If you feel that I'm merely saying that to defend another builder's choices in the acts she uses in the areas she maintains, then that's of course your choice, and there is little I can add or say to it. |U6

From: Romanti Tuesday, September 16 2003, 12:46PM Thank You for clarifying this nonsense Kae I am not a misogynist but I do believe you must u7nderstand your enviroment before you can try to change it obviously this person didnt know legendMUD is a HISTORICAL mud. :) |U6

_____

Current Index