Lesbian Archers for Rei

quote:

---

Are you kidding?

​

Haven't you seen "Lord of the Rings"? Haven't you played any fantasy video games? Dungeons and Dragons? The basic, generic swords-n-sorcery fantasy world is easliy avaliable to us, as it's a staple of genre fiction and video games. So don't hide behind this "we don't know about her world" excuse. There's nothing about that picture to suggest that she belongs to anything but your basic fantasy world.

---

Ok, Crash, tell me: Is her world more like Slayers or like Escaflone? More like LoTR or like Final Fantasy? Need I go on? There are thousands of fantasy series out there. Which one is it? Do you know? If you don't, why do *you* get to pick and choose? They're all different.

quote:

---

quote:

---

The only context that we have is our reality's historic context of knights and other armored warriors.

---

​

Except that she's not wearing armor that has appeared in history at any time. ("It's not period" would be the SCA phrase.) So we can reject the historical context immediately.

---

Excuse me, but what is unapplicable about her armor?

quote:

---

quote:

---

I'll repeat, and hope again for a straight answer: is aggressiveness typically considered a masculine or feminine trait?

---

​

Masculine in men. Feminine in women. That's as straight as it gets.

---

I think you'll find that the vast majority of the world disagrees with you on whether aggressiveness is a masculine or feminine trait.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Oh really? Have you asked the team?

---

​

Yes.

---

And how did you word this, exactly?

quote:

---

quote:

---

And have you asked any of the all GLBT-teams there?

---

​

Do you believe that these teams represent the majority of female hockey players?

---

It's just yet another example. By the way, I wasn't joking about my basketball example; and not coincidentally, roxrkool experienced the same thing at his school.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If the world applied your standards, gay people would almost never hook up.

---

​

Well, they're clearly more insightful than you, aren't they? Somehow they hook up just fine and yet avoid coming on to every woman in armor.

---

Most people aren't brain-dead enough to not be able to understand the concept of "context" (i.e., a "costume" context, vs. "her job is a professional warrior, and doesn't present herself in a feminine manner" context)

quote:

---

quote:

---

We're not talking about a kevlar jacket or a hockey mask: We're talking about full-fledged heavy combat armor. It's silly to make such an analogy.

---

​

You misunderstood. No, I'm not saying that she's taking part in those activities (except for perhaps enforcing the laws of her world, who knows?) What I'm saying is that there's two appropriate contexts in which to assess her apparent sexuality - the context of our world, and the context of the generic fantasy world she inhabits.

---

You're ignoring the history of armor use in our reality, which has been almost exclusively through men. It's just as if she wore a tuxedo - and not to a costume party.

quote:

---

In our world, the majority of women who do what she's doing are straight.

---

Wrong. In our reality, the majority of people who have worn armor *seriously* (as she appears to be doing) are men - i.e., if she were in our reality, she would be taking up a stereotypically masculine job role. That alone doesn't mean that she's a lesbian, but it is one indicative factor.

quote:

---

In her world, the vast majority of women who do what she's doing are straight.

---

Once again: what is her world? For example, if her world was the fantasy world of Escaflowne, I'd strongly have to disagree. Think Dilandu vs. hitomi.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Actually, no, in the type of world represented by the picture (from my experience with anime), a vast majority of adventuring women wearing armor look like this:

---

​

That's what I thought. Your only experience with the fantasy genre is anime and Boris Vallejo calendars.

---

Who? And anime is not my only exposure to fantasy genres; I've also taken part in RPGs (ADD, various whitewolf systems, a couple custom systems), I'm familiar with the LoTR universe, the different Final Fantasy universes, etc.

quote:

---

So, you don't have experience with women's hockey.

---

And you don't have experience with the GLBT community. Which is more applicable?

quote:

---

You don't have experience with mediveal/fantasy reenactors.

---

How many times have I had to mention that she is quite obviously not a mediveal/fantasy reenactor?However many it is, add 1 to the number for me.

quote:

---

You don't have experience with various incarnations of the fantasy genre

---

.False. You love making assumptions about me, don't you?

quote:

---

What exactly thinks you're qualified to accurately make assesments about the socio-sexual situation of this woman?

---

Experience in the real world having to make such judgements, perhaps?

quote:

---

quote:

---

Besides, I've stated before, I'm judging against the context of our reality:

---

​

And we've established why that's an inappropriate context - this woman is clearly not a historical figure. No such armor has ever been worn in history, except in costume in this century.

---

1) Name her context
2) Describe what features of the armor are not seen in history.
3) Describe why the particular armor features are relevant, as it is quite obviously armor and she is quite obviously taking up a knight role.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If you think that armor isn't stereotypically a "male" thing outside of a costume context, I don't know how to reason with you.

---

​

I know that you don't know how to reason with me. It's obvious you don't have any experience with what we're talking about.

---

Have you *ever* read a *single* book about the middle ages? Answer the question: What percent of knights - give me an even remotely rough estimate - were female. You've skipped this entire issue several times.

quote:

---

Your argument has always seemed to be "if you saw a woman dressed like that, wouldn't you think she was gay?" And the answer is "no, I wouldn't, because I don't share your bogus stereotypes."

---

You wouldn't recognize a gay person in San Francisco at the pride parade.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."[This message has been edited by Rei, 12-03-2003][This message has been edited by Rei, 12-03-2003]

One of the differences between us is that I *have* watched the show, but I've watched *only* the show. When my kids were a little younger it would get recorded by the TiVo which faithfully recorded the show and just the show, and that's all I ever saw, maybe 15 episodes max. Other than the bath scene I can't think of a single lesbian possibility. And I've been to the Xena "ride" at Universal - no lesbo stuff there, either.But I think you and Rei and Dan have had all this inuendo thrown at you from the other non-show stuff you've been either watching or reading. I haven't seen any of that. As I think Dan and I have concluded, the show began with no hint of lesbianism, but then the producers began responding to that aspect of the fan reaction. And perhaps I saw too many Joxster episodes - weren't those earlier ones?--Percy

Please, more photos of Zena and the Nude Snail Darter Archers of Lesbonon.

Look, I'm not going to hold your hand and show you the similarities between all those fantasy series. If you don't know how to recognize the basic themes and tropes, are you really qualified to talk about the fantasy genre? It's not historical armor. It's of a distict style that is entirely fictional. Therefore the historical context is irrelevant, because that's not a historical figure.Oh, I see. You think all armor is the same. Well, I guess that makes your points make sense - too bad you're totally wrong. And I think you'll find yourself in a distinct and poorly-thought-of minority who associate weakness with femininity. Actually it may not be a minority - so much the worse. I asked "in your experience, are the majority of female hockey players lesbians?" Of lesbian hockey players, yes. I'm not denying that there's lesbian hockey players. My wife has known three of them out of the 60 or so people she's played on teams with. But they don't consititute the majority, which they would have to, to say that "odds are, a woman who plays hockey is a lesbian." I'm ignoring it because it's not relevant. The history of armor use on our world is not relevant because this is not a picture of a woman wearing our world's armor. A generic, basic fantasy world. If you're unable to generalize from all the different, specific fantasy worlds, why is that my problem? What are we talking about? What's the minimum that we can agree on? That there's a woman in armor, shooting a bow.Therefore the most relevant experience is of women in armor who shoot bows. I have considerably more experience with this than you apparently do, as well as with women in armor in general. The GLBT community is irrelevant because there's no reason to believe that this woman is part of that community. (Even if she is gay, and I'm not saying she can't be gay, that doesn't make her part of the "mainstream" GLBT community.) Of course she's not. Christ, listen to me for a second. Let me spell it out again: She's not a denizen of our world, because she's not reenacting and no historical person ever wore such armor. Therefore any real-world context is irrelevant! Google, dude. It makes your ignorance so much less apparent. Go, on, do it. You'll know who I'm talking about. But of course that's the point of the thread. You don't have the experience to judge, because you lack experience with women in armor, apparently. I mean, I assume you don't, as I started this thread so that you could tell us what experience you have with women in armor that makes you so able to judge their sexual preference on sight. Whatever experience you have with lesbians who don't wear armor, and I grant that your experience is more vast than mine, is not relevant. Who fucking cares? It's not a relevant objection. This woman lives in a world where plenty of women are knights. That's obvious to the most causal student of the fantasy genre. Therefore her particular station in life is not indicative about her sexual orientation. Yes, unlike The Great Rei with his/her amazing Gaydar I don't trust stereotypes to tell me meaningful information about specific persons. If I want to know if somebody is gay, I ask them. It's a shocking concept to you, I'm sure.

quote:

---

Look, I'm not going to hold your hand and show you the similarities between all those fantasy series. If you don't know how to recognize the basic themes and tropes, are you really qualified to talk about the fantasy genre?

---

And I'm not going to hold your hand and point out the intense degree of cultural differences between them.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Excuse me, but what is unapplicable about her armor?

---

​

It's not historical armor. It's of a distict style that is entirely fictional. Therefore the historical context is irrelevant, because that's not a historical figure.

---

*sigh*, how many times are you going to make me have to repeat questions to get a straight answer? What is unapplicable about her armor?

quote:

---

quote:

---

I think you'll find that the vast majority of the world disagrees with you on whether aggressiveness is a masculine or feminine trait.

---

​

And I think you'll find yourself in a distinct and poorly-thought-of minority who associate weakness with femininity. Actually it may not be a minority - so much the worse.

---

Crash, we're not talking about physical weakness. We're talking about social stereotypes of aggressiveness. Most places in the world, aggressiveness is a stereotypically male trait. Whether there is truth to this is irrelevant - perhaps it's just a byproduct of the majority of societies in the world being patriarchal. But nonetheless, physical aggressiveness *is* seen as a masculine trait.

quote:

---

quote:

---

And how did you word this, exactly?

---

​

I asked "in your experience, are the majority of female hockey players lesbians?"

---

So, in short, you answered me incorrectly. I asked you whether you asked the players themselves - not just (your wife?) - about their sexuality. Because you seem not to be very good at discerning it on your own (like most people who have no reason to be tuned into such things).

quote:

---

My wife has known three of them out of the 60 or so people she's played on teams with.

---

Once again: How many did she ask (versus overhear, have it come up in conversation, etc)?

quote:

---

quote:

---

You're ignoring the history of armor use in our reality, which has been almost exclusively through men.

---

​

I'm ignoring it because it's not relevant. The history of armor use on our world is not relevant because this is not a picture of a woman wearing our world's armor.

---

Ok, then, let me again pose a question that I've been trying to get you to answer: In our reality, in a *serious* context (i.e., not a costume context - the woman in the picture is quite clearly serious), have the overwhelmingly vast majority of people who have used armor been men?

quote:

---

quote:

---

And you don't have experience with the GLBT community. Which is more applicable?

---

​

What are we talking about? What's the minimum that we can agree on? That there's a woman in armor, shooting a bow. Therefore the most relevant experience is of women in armor who shoot bows. I have considerably more experience with this than you apparently do, as well as with women in armor in general.

---

Yes. The issues of contention are what we disagree on.1) That she is serious - this appears to be her lifestyle, not some sort of "act" or "costume".
2) That her armor is not what stereotypically goes for "feminine" armor vs. "masculine" armor in fantasy series' - she's armored up to the eyebrows.You (assumedly) do not have experience with women who are wearing armor not as a costume - thus, you do not have experience in this context.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Have you *ever* read a *single* book about the middle ages? Answer the question: What percent of knights - give me an even remotely rough estimate - were female. You've skipped this entire issue several times.

---

​

Who fucking cares? It's not a relevant objection. This woman lives in a world where plenty of women are knights. That's obvious to the most causal student of the fantasy genre. Therefore her particular station in life is not indicative about her sexual orientation.

---

Crash, so you acknowledge that in the real world, if it were a non-costume context (Direct Question: Are we in agreement that it is not a costume-context?), then she would be wearing something that has (again, same context) been the historic domain of men, by a heavy margin? If so, then your only argument lies in that it is somehow different because it is a fantasy genre - which you lump all together into the same bucket, and then accuse *me* of being ignorant of fantasy genres.Do you realize how silly this looks?

quote:

---

quote:

---

You wouldn't recognize a gay person in San Francisco at the pride parade.

---

​

Yes, unlike The Great Rei with his/her amazing Gaydar I don't trust stereotypes to tell me meaningful information about specific persons. If I want to know if somebody is gay, I ask them. It's a shocking concept to you, I'm sure.

---

Once again: if you were gay, you'd never find a partner. No relationships start by going up to someone and asking, "are you gay/lesbian/bi/etc?"; you can just tell. There are the initial visual clues (which are all we have to go on here), then there's the physical action clues, and then there's the social clues. Of course there's a margin of error; but it's not nearly as big as you'd think.P.S. - Yet another (inadvertently?) dodged question (you're normally not so bad at dodging direct questions, Crashfrog) that I need to restate directly: What convinces you that women have the same social role throughout fantasy series/games/movies/books/etc? Try to claim that women have the social same roles in the Wheel of Time series that they have in Lord of the Rings. Or between Dungeons and Dragons, and Escaflowne. How can you possibly defend such a claim?------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."[This message has been edited by Rei, 12-03-2003]

Percipient responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

Um, you really need to watch the show.

​

Specifically, you need to watch the episode where a tabloid/reality show follows there characters around...

---

​

One of the differences between us is that I *have* watched the show, but I've watched *only* the show.

---

Um, if you don't remember the particular episode I mentioned where Xena and Gabrielle are directly asked if they are lovers, then you either haven't watched the series or you weren't paying close enough attention.In that episode, it is after the Twilight of the Gods and Aphrodite has lost her godhood. Thus, there is no love in the world. But at the end, when Aphrodite eats the golden apple and gets her godhood back, a special effects shower of hearts floats across the screen and as they pass over people, they become enveloped in the love...Beowulf goes goo-goo over Gabrielle...but Gabrielle goes goo-goo over Xena...and Xena seems to be fixated on Ares.And then there was the interview with Gabrielle in which Nigel is trying to get her to come out and say that she's in love with Xena by employing a Springer-esque technique, showing her clips of Xena with Ares: How about the episodes with Lao Ma from "The Debt, Part 2"? That's the one I was thinking of with the breath passing. Xena is on the run from Ming Tzu and is saved by Lao Ma. But, since she's still a fugitive, she needs to hide from Ming Tzu when he visits. Xena is put in the bath while Lao Ma and Ming Tzu talk. She's holding her breath, but she cannot hold it forever and just when it finally looks like Ming Tzu is going to leave, he returns. Lao Ma then plunges her head in the water, ostensibly to wet her hair, and she and Xena share a prolongued kiss in order for Lao Ma to pass air to Xena.The epsiode is filled with homoerotic imagery between Xena and Lao Ma. They literally dance in the air with each other and nearly kiss multiple times.

quote:

---

that's all I ever saw, maybe 15 episodes max.

---

You do realize that there are 134 episodes? You've seen 10% or less and you think you have a good handle on the relationship between Xena and Gabrielle?

quote:

---

But I think you and Rei and Dan have had all this inuendo thrown at you from the other non-show stuff you've been either watching or reading. I haven't seen any of that.

---

Then you are truly blind.When the show, itself, asks Xena and Gabrielle if they are lovers, then the show is conscious that there is a definite homoerotic dimension to the pair.Michael Hurst, who played Iolaus on Hercules, played the reporter, Nigel, in the episode.Here's a transcript of the episode: You Are ThereRead it for yourself.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

It's obviously not historical armor. Therefore she's not a historical person. Therefore the historical context of her actions is irrelevant. How many different ways do I have to say it for you? Indeed. However if it's your opinion that the majority of hockey players are lesbians, then you need to substantiate that with evidence. I contend that the number of lesbians who play hockey is not significantly larger than the number of lesbians in the general population, or at the very least, does not represent the majority of hockey players. Do you have evidence to the contrary? Yes. So? Our context is irrelevant, as I have said time and time again. You think this is something we disagree on? I find her armor feminine, not in the Boris Vallejo-sexual object sense, but in the sense of being ornamented and curved. Masculine armor would have harder edges and no ornamentation. Her armor is elven, if you will. Ah, but neither do you. Irrelevant objection. Yeah, they're all in the same bucket - or rather, the same genre. Hence the phrase "fantasy genre." If you refuse to see the similarities between diverse works of fantasy that allow us to think about a "generic" fantasy world, that's hardly my problem.How do you think it is that you know if a work is in the fantasy genre or not? How is it that you're able to say that Conan the Barbarian and Lord of the Rings are fantasy movies, but Dude, Where's My Car is not? Because the genre has tropes. One of those tropes is that women put on armor and fight without automatically being lesbians.Of course it's somehow different because it's a fantasy. It's a fantasy woman! She doesn't exist! You want to assess her out of her context, and that's useless and stupid. Somehow you're ok with assesing her if she were in a costume context - which is fantasy - but yet you won't assess her in a fantasy fictional context. Do you realize how inconsistent that looks? Wouldn't I? Or maybe I'd do it like I found my hetero partner - hang out with people in a romantic context and then ask them if they wanted to start a relationship with me. It's pretty easy, and doesn't require fooling myself into thinking I have some magic gay-sense that immediately and accurately assesses peoples sexuality. You know that I've never made such a claim. Since you're ususally not so bad about putting words in my mouth I can only assume you're misunderstood something else that I said. You're failing to distinguish the features that represent the basic fantasy genre from the specific fantasy genre works themselves. Through basic genre literary theory. Each genre has a default, tropic gender situation (among other tropes). In the fantasy genre that's a gender situation where women can don armor and fight without being thought of as butch lesbians. Now, you could have a fantasy world where women can't do that, or only lesbians can, but that's going to be a specific thematic choice of a certain work. But in the fantasy genre in general, women can fight without being thought of as lesbians.

Those are nothing - What about the Great Dyke, in Africa (Zimbabwae (sp?) I believe)?Moose

I second the motion...with a thread title like this, it is almost a crime that there are so few visuals
Though Mr. Hambre's contribution makes me question his dating prefences...is it a crime to be attracted to masonry?[This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 12-04-2003]

You sure know your dykes. Do you watch Xena, Dutch Hydroelectrician too? I think it airs on the Pumping Station but my folks have the V-chip.------------------
The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

I used to date a girl that was a dyke. She wasn't a lesbian, though: she just retained a lot of water.
And I don't know if it's a crime to have sexual attractions to masonry, but I've seen piles of gravel beside the highway that had a warning sign: "State Property Do Not Molest"[This message has been edited by Coragyps, 12-04-2003]

The expression "get your rocks off" just became much clearer to me.

quote:

---

quote:

---

*sigh*, how many times are you going to make me have to repeat questions to get a straight answer? What is unapplicable about her armor?

---

​

It's obviously not historical armor. Therefore she's not a historical person. Therefore the historical context of her actions is irrelevant. How many different ways do I have to say it for you?

---

Once again, I'll ask it, you're still not answering: What is unapplicable about her armor? Flatly stating that it somehow isn't representative of historic styles, and also flatly assering that that's somehow relevant, doesn't cut it. I'm asking you for specifics. What.

quote:

---

Indeed. However if it's your opinion that the majority of hockey players are lesbians, then you need to substantiate that with evidence.

---

Wrong. My assertion is that there are a higher proportion of lesbians who play hockey than their distribution in the general population. Now, if you asked about pro-basketball, you might actually get a majority of total players

quote:

---

I contend that the number of lesbians who play hockey is not significantly larger than the number of lesbians in the general population, or at the very least, does not represent the majority of hockey players.

---

So are you now admitting that your earlier statement - that you've asked the members of the team that they were lesbians - is factually incorrect? If that is the case, than *you* are making a judgement based on appearences and assumptions, something that you are faulting me for doing. [quote]

quote:

---

In our reality, in a *serious* context (i.e., not a costume context - the woman in the picture is quite clearly serious), have the overwhelmingly vast majority of people who have used armor been men?

​

Yes. So? Our context is irrelevant, as I have said time and time again.

---

Good. I'm glad that we're in agreement on this "our context" issue, which I have many times stated that I have been using to judge because we don't know her particular fantasy context.

quote:

---

quote:

---

That she is serious - this appears to be her lifestyle, not some sort of "act" or "costume".

---

​

You think this is something we disagree on?

---

Good. Then leave costumes out of it - something that you have repetitively brought up in an attempt to defend your position.

quote:

---

I find her armor feminine, not in the Boris Vallejo-sexual object sense, but in the sense of being ornamented and curved. Masculine armor would have harder edges and no ornamentation. Her armor is elven, if you will.

---

We're back to the issue of "Those Flaming Romans", now aren't we?

quote:

---

quote:

---

You (assumedly) do not have experience with women who are wearing armor not as a costume - thus, you do not have experience in this context.

---

​

Ah, but neither do you. Irrelevant objection.

---

Incorrect. You were boasting of your experience with women wearing armor before, to compensate for your lack of experience with the GLBT community.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If so, then your only argument lies in that it is somehow different because it is a fantasy genre - which you lump all together into the same bucket, and then accuse *me* of being ignorant of fantasy genres.

---

​

Yeah, they're all in the same bucket - or rather, the same genre. Hence the phrase "fantasy genre." If you refuse to see the similarities between diverse works of fantasy that allow us to think about a "generic" fantasy world, that's hardly my problem.

---

I've given examples of fanatasy worlds that have quite different views of women in them. You have yet to counter.

quote:

---

How do you think it is that you know if a work is in the fantasy genre or not? How is it that you're able to say that Conan the Barbarian and Lord of the Rings are fantasy movies, but Dude, Where's My Car is not? Because the genre has tropes. One of those tropes is that women put on armor and fight without automatically being lesbians.

---

Ah. So Escaflowne and a dozen other animes, your own example of Conan the Barbarian (pretty much everyone except Valeria, etc), virtually all "old" fantasy works (your arthurian legends, etc),... hell, even most of Marion Zimmer Bradley's works (and she's anything if not a feminist) leave women out of the fighting.I still can't believe you're trying to put women in all of the utterly-different fantasy universes into the same role.

quote:

---

Of course it's somehow different because it's a fantasy. It's a fantasy woman! She doesn't exist! You want to assess her out of her context, and that's useless and stupid.

---

And you want to pigeonhole her into one particular fantasy role. By the way, I didn't start this particular topic - I was just defending Brian's statement that she looks gay. Applying the *only context that I can*, I wouldn't be surprised if she was.

quote:

---

Somehow you're ok with assesing her if she were in a costume context

---

Apparently you haven't read a single word at all that I have written. I keep trying to *drag you* off of your desire to putting it in a costume context. I've been arguing for a historical context, since that is the only reality context that we have for knights (non-costume purposes).

quote:

---

quote:

---

Once again: if you were gay, you'd never find a partner.

---

​

Wouldn't I? Or maybe I'd do it like I found my hetero partner - hang out with people in a romantic context and then ask them if they wanted to start a relationship with me.

---

You're changing your stance. Before, you were stating that you'd go up to them and ask them if they were gay. That's a ludicrous notion of GLBT social interations, and that's why I had to comment.

quote:

---

It's pretty easy, and doesn't require fooling myself into thinking I have some magic gay-sense that immediately and accurately assesses peoples sexuality.

---

Crash, if I can qualify elements (as I've been doing for this entire thread), it's not a "magic gay-sense". It is identifiable traits, not some sort of extrasensory perception. And they're not "accidental" traits, they're often deliberately done. Not everyone has all traits (for example, I have moderately long hair), nor does the presence of one trait mean that you're a lesbian (my partner's mother, and my aunt, have short hair). But it is the presence of a large number of traits that one uses to determine whether the person likely is gay. The physical appearence traits are judged first (which is all we have to go on here, hence the low degree of confidence); then the behavioral traits; then the social interaction traits. These are not inborn things, but learned behaviors. We've already covered the first one fairly extensively; do you need more specifics on the latter two?

quote:

---

quote:

---

What convinces you that women have the same social role throughout fantasy series/games/movies/books/etc?

---

​

You know that I've never made such a claim.

---

Ok. Then explain please to me how you expect women in fantasy series to all be aggressive knight types, while at same time disagreeing that they all share the same role in different fantasy series/games/movies/books/etc. This appears a contradiction to me; if you could explain, I would be appreciative.

quote:

---

Through basic genre literary theory. Each genre has a default, tropic gender situation (among other tropes). In the fantasy genre that's a gender situation where women can don armor and fight without being thought of as butch lesbians. Now, you could have a fantasy world where women can't do that, or only lesbians can, but that's going to be a specific thematic choice of a certain work. But in the fantasy genre in general, women can fight without being thought of as lesbians.

---

Historically, in the fantasy genre the concept of a woman fighting was an almost unthinkable notion - the "damsel in distress" has been the most common role of women in fantasy up through the 1950s and to a lesser extent later. There was a significant degree of reversal, especially in the 70s and 80s, and now fantasy genres, from my experience, have been starting to take on a wider range, incorporating both weak and strong women.I think your generalized "women in fantasy don armor and fight and it's perfectly normal" is a generalization and stereotyping.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

Historically, in the fantasy genre the concept of a woman fighting was an almost unthinkable notion - the "damsel in distress" has been the most common role of women in fantasy up through the 1950s and to a lesser extent later.

---

Historically? Well I guess it depends on what you mean by "fantasy" and which nationality's writings you are talking about. Have you ever read Norse mythology, Greek Mythology, Roman Mythology, Sumerian Mythology, Chinese Mythology, and to some extent Japanese Mythology? Women not only fight alongside men, some of the most fierce fighters were women. Flight of the Valkyries was not about a bunch of guys.Most modern fantasy springs from those older tales and even in Conan (some of the oldest English fantasy novels) women could fight (though not as well as Conan).

quote:

---

There was a significant degree of reversal, especially in the 70s and 80s, and now fantasy genres, from my experience, have been starting to take on a wider range, incorporating both weak and strong women.

---

Now this is especially interesting. Doesn't it actually defend Crash's whole point?Correct me if I am wrong but we are living in the 2000's and that image was created well past the 80s. Thus Crash can certainly use modern interpretation to say she is not necessarily unfeminine or gay, just because of the way she is dressed (and what she is doing).The question would become why are you hanging on to such antiquated notions of what women are like in fantasy realms?Then again, in defense of your claim that she could be gay, it is just a freakin' picture of a fantasy oriented character. She will be whatever anyone wants to fantasize she is. And as far as I'm concerned I am definitely fantasizing that she is willing to make it with many other elven females (as well as some Boris Vallejo human females).Yes, yes I can see her doing that right now! Case closed.Wait now I see her raping a giant troll. What a wicked little elf she is. Naughty little girl. Holy... who said it was a girl at all? She just took off her armor completely and it turns out she's actually a hermaphrodite! Those naughty, sneaky elves.------------------
holmes

Look, we're getting nowhere with this. What I'm most interested in, and what I'd like to steer the topic back to, is what specific experience of yours leads you to make the statement "If I ran into this woman, I would assume that the odds are, she's gay. My experiences support that assumption."It's that "odds are" that I'm most interested in. To me that sounds like what you're saying is "most women who are like this woman are gay." After all, that's what "odds are" means - I could say "odds are, the coin will come up heads" unless most of the time when I flipped the coin it came up heads, right?Ok, so we're clear on that. What I still don't understand, because you won't tell me, is what specific experiences you have that lead you to believe that woman is gay. You've come close to explaining what women in our world you think that woman is most like.So, then, it appears you're taking one of the following positions:

• Women who wear armor and fight are mostly gay. I don't understand what experience you have with women who wear armor and fight, but the experience I have - with ones who pretend to fight, in games - says that the vast majority are straight.
• Historically in our world, the women who wear armor and fight have been mostly gay. That's just untrue. While female combatants are rare, they're not unheard of - you yourself pointed out that Joa of Arc was not a lesbian - especially in Asian cultures. (Mulan?)
• Historically, in our world, women who act aggressive ar emostly gay. Again, this isn't even close to true - there's way more aggressive women than there are gay ones.
• Historically, in our world, women who do "mannish" things are mostly gay. Again, untrue.
  

Basically what I'm asking you is: you keep saying that in your experience, women like the woman in the picture are mostly gay. WHat I need you to tell me is when you say "women like the woman in the picture", what women are you talking about?One more thing: I don't think you understand what you're asking. It's like I'm telling you "the keys aren't in the kitchen", and you keep saying "I need specific examples of keys that aren't in the kitchen. Flatly stating that the keys aren't in the kitchen won't cut it."If you won't take "of all the amor that has appeared on Earth in our history and was used in combat, her armor is representative of or similar to none of them" as proof that her armor is not historically accurate, I don't know how to convince you. But never mind about that. Answer my question above, please.