Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 157

Thread: Female Generals

  1. #61

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    I love the way your making this all about strength when the real reason lies far more in the social norms of the time. In most cultures women we're not not encouraged/allowed to fight due to the patriarchal societies in which they lived. This does not mean that women couldn't fight, yes they may not have been as physically strong as men, but anyone that knows anything about ancient history knows that tactics, strategy and discipline we're far more instrumental in warfare than sheer strength.

  2. #62
    Matmannen's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Norrköping, Sweden
    Posts
    738

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    As much as I don't want to I must say that Lollaaja is partially correct. There is the force of evoluton which people tend to forget. Because male has been the expendable gender a hard evolutionary pressure was put on males specifically. Basically natural selection has meant that only the most hardened males make it back from wars, only the hardest males survive during hunts. We are talking about the life threatining situations males were put into through out history. Only the males with adaquate strength and durability could survive the challanges they were put through for the sake of society, and only those males could spread their genes on to the next generation. Evolution has run it's course and their is today a natural sexual dimorfism, basically males have an easier time to develop musclemass and males grow larger and taller then women. This is not the whole story though, ofcourse, there is still a social pressure for men to get strong (this is also a remnant of males needing to be strong since it's their job to sacrifice themselves for the sake of society), we need to understand that biological and social factors account for males generally have more muscle mass then females.

    Now as an addige I want to write that even though we are diffrent doesn't mean that we can't take a challange and excell in whatever field we choose. Women might not have had the same evolutionary history as men, but that doesn't mean that if a female tries hard enaugh, and is devoted enough can get better then a male.

    I give you Asskicking with a capital A:

  3. #63

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by lollaaja View Post
    Nobody in MMA does Kung Fu because it's a spectator performance, not a useful hand to hand combat skill. I question if you've been in an actual fight outside of a dojo in your life.
    No use trying to explain, these posters no nothing about hand to hand combat. They have been watching movies and expect fights to be choreographed.
    Shogun 2, no thanks I will stick with Kingdoms SS.

  4. #64

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by krunsh View Post
    Also, did you seriously just compare Kung Fu and MMA, and say that it is kung fu that is a spectator sport? Do you even understand what you just said? (MMA is a very effective fighting style, but it is surrounded by lots of rules and would be close to useless on a battlefield.). Just to be clear, I do not practice Kung Fu.
    MMA is not a fighting style. Kung Fu is a fighting style with a number of sub-styles that fall underneath it's umbrella. At this point I doubt you've put up your fists once in your life.

  5. #65

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Time to close this thread mods.

  6. #66

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by lollaaja View Post
    At this point I doubt you've put up your fists once in your life.
    Tough guy alert

  7. #67

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kye View Post
    Time to close this thread mods.
    Seconded.

  8. #68

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ano2 View Post
    Tough guy alert
    It's just an observation based on the extremely ignorant statement he made. I'm not threatening anyone.

  9. #69

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    99% of women throughout history have been genetically predisposed to conditions that make them not suitable for fighting in melee combat against men. This is an insipid pointless conversation to begin with, but continue on.

    The higher the level black belt someone insists they are -in common society-, is usually a barometer for quickly they get put in a choke hold and are rendered useless.
    Last edited by stevehoos; August 14, 2014 at 03:20 PM.
    Shogun 2, no thanks I will stick with Kingdoms SS.

  10. #70
    Matmannen's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Norrköping, Sweden
    Posts
    738

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    As much as this discussion is interesting I think it's time to revert back to this threads original purpose...

  11. #71

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ano2 View Post
    I love the way your making this all about strength when the real reason lies far more in the social norms of the time. In most cultures women we're not not encouraged/allowed to fight due to the patriarchal societies in which they lived. This does not mean that women couldn't fight, yes they may not have been as physically strong as men, but anyone that knows anything about ancient history knows that tactics, strategy and discipline we're far more instrumental in warfare than sheer strength.
    This is pretty much accurate. However I will say that men tend to be capable of attaining a higher level of endurance than women which was and indeed is vital for soldiers. Let's not forget soldiering isn't purely about fighting, its also about having to march around all the time with equipment as well as constructing things like forts and roads.

    In any event, the reasons why men (in virtually every culture I can think of) have been favoured as soldiers over women are fairly complex. On a simplistic level it is because they have a higher physical potential than women (for the most part) but it is also due to the fact that men are biologically more disposable than women (a society of a single man and many women is much more reproductivley efficient than a society with many men and a single woman). This aside, masculine fighting culture is also partially derived from the male desire to present his physical prowess and thus prove himself to be an alpha male (and therefore a more desirable mate).

    Whatever the case, and from studying medieval history at university I can say with pretty sure accuracy that the authority granted by blood and wealth outranks the authority granted by gender. For this reason I would very much like to see the odd female general (obviously Boudica comes to mind) though I also wouldn't be adverse to seeing female warriors where they are known to have existed IRL. I have seen lots of people saying the Steppe tribes used women in battle, and it pretty much goes without saying that women would fight to defend their homes if they had to.



  12. #72
    Matmannen's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Norrköping, Sweden
    Posts
    738

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leving View Post
    This is pretty much accurate. However I will say that men tend to be capable of attaining a higher level of endurance than women which was and indeed is vital for soldiers. Let's not forget soldiering isn't purely about fighting, its also about having to march around all the time with equipment as well as constructing things like forts and roads.

    In any event, the reasons why men (in virtually every culture I can think of) have been favoured as soldiers over women are fairly complex. On a simplistic level it is because they have a higher physical potential than women (for the most part) but it is also due to the fact that men are biologically more disposable than women (a society of a single man and many women is much more reproductivley efficient than a society with many men and a single woman). This aside, masculine fighting culture is also partially derived from the male desire to present his physical prowess and thus prove himself to be an alpha male (and therefore a more desirable mate).

    Whatever the case, and from studying medieval history at university I can say with pretty sure accuracy that the authority granted by blood and wealth outranks the authority granted by gender. For this reason I would very much like to see the odd female general (obviously Boudica comes to mind) though I also wouldn't be adverse to seeing female warriors where they are known to have existed IRL. I have seen lots of people saying the Steppe tribes used women in battle, and it pretty much goes without saying that women would fight to defend their homes if they had to.
    A fellow historian, this is why our arguments are pretty much the same

  13. #73

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Matmannen View Post
    As much as I don't want to I must say that Lollaaja is partially correct. There is the force of evoluton which people tend to forget. Because male has been the expendable gender a hard evolutionary pressure was put on males specifically. Basically natural selection has meant that only the most hardened males make it back from wars, only the hardest males survive during hunts. We are talking about the life threatining situations males were put into through out history. Only the males with adaquate strength and durability could survive the challanges they were put through for the sake of society, and only those males could spread their genes on to the next generation. Evolution has run it's course and their is today a natural sexual dimorfism, basically males have an easier time to develop musclemass and males grow larger and taller then women. This is not the whole story though, ofcourse, there is still a social pressure for men to get strong (this is also a remnant of males needing to be strong since it's their job to sacrifice themselves for the sake of society), we need to understand that biological and social factors account for males generally have more muscle mass then females.

    Now as an addige I want to write that even though we are diffrent doesn't mean that we can't take a challange and excell in whatever field we choose. Women might not have had the same evolutionary history as men, but that doesn't mean that if a female tries hard enaugh, and is devoted enough can get better then a male.
    First of all, thank you for remaining polite. While you are correct in saying that evolution had an effect on this, I would argue that the main reason why women were not involved in wars had very little to do with the actual body, but rather with the patriarchal cultural incentives of that Era (not to repeat what Ano2 said... but.).

    Even WW2 had only very little occurrences of women in fights, and a woman is very much capable of carrying a rifle, running around with heavy bags, and so on (As seen in modern military.). In old times, it made sense for women to stay behind, as the main goal of a tribe was to grow in size (Thus have babies.). This, culturally, lead to a widely male dominated society (still seen today.). If women had not been prevented from participating in wars, trust me they would have (As good as a man or not is really irrelevant here. Smaller, weaker men were sent to wars all the time even though they were "inferior".).

    All this to say that the whole "They are weaker" argument is pretty irrelevant here, in my opinion. Weaker people fight all the time, and thus should be represented on battlefields where historically accurate. And again, whether woman would actually be weaker is highly debatable anyway. but we have a few strong men here disagreeing quite violently so I'll let it go.
    Last edited by krunsh; August 14, 2014 at 03:25 PM.

  14. #74

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by krunsh View Post
    First of all, thank you for remaining polite. While you are correct in saying that evolution had an effect on this, the main reason why women were not involved in wars had very little to do with the actual body, but rather with the patriarchal cultural incentives of that Era.

    Even WW2 had only very little occurrences of women in fights, and a woman is very much capable of carrying a rifle, running around with heavy bags, and so on (As seen in modern military.). In old times, it made sense for women to stay behind, as the main goal of a tribe was to grow in size (Thus have babies.). This, culturally, lead to a widely male dominated society (still seen today.). If women had not been prevented from participating in wars, trust me they would have (As good as a man or not is really irrelevant here. Smaller, weaker men were sent to wars all the time even though they were "inferior".).
    A smaller man is still stronger than the biggest woman you can find. I'm not sure how you got to the state of mind you're in. Have you seen a naked man next to a naked woman in real life?

  15. #75
    BalrogOfMorgoth's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Around Etampes, France
    Posts
    526

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Thanks for ruining my thread, evrybody. I just wanted to say it could be a good idea to have some women generals and all you do is to fight on useless and off-topic things. Mods, please delet all thoses messages or close the thread. Thanks.

  16. #76

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by lollaaja View Post
    A smaller man is still stronger than the biggest woman you can find.
    Well that's just an insane statement.

  17. #77

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritter-Floh View Post
    About the romans, we need Don_diego to clarify the usage of gladiators. I know, the social status of gladiators was below that of a slave, they were scum - no free man would stand side by side with gladiators. And no gladiator would ever get a weapon outside the arena - since Spartacus
    No a common misconception! The gladiators were also some of the most important celebrities of the day! (Just like today's footballers, scum but some became rich and famous also! )

    In fact they could have a much better life and status than ordinary slaves, and even some freemen volunteered to become gladiators. Of course many slaves were also sent in as "cannon fodder or animal food too", particularly prisoners of war would have low status. But properly trained gladiators were expensive property and often they did not actually fight to the death. Here is some info:

    "Most gladiators were slaves. They were subjected to a rigorous training, fed on a high-energy diet, and given expert medical attention. Hence they were an expensive investment, not to be despatched lightly.

    For a gladiator who died in combat the trainer (lanista) might charge the sponsor of the fatal spectacle up to a hundred times the cost of a gladiator who survived. Hence it was very much more costly for sponsors to supply the bloodshed that audiences often demanded, although if they did allow a gladiator to be slain it was seen as an indication of their generosity."

    As for gladiators fighting in battle, the only record i can find is in Sparticus' revolt. Also gladiator armour was not in any way suitable for real war-fare, and did not really give proper protection (skin left bare so blood can be seen by spectators!). These rebels would probably scavenge equipment off from dead legionaries.

    So no, gladiator units are not realistic unless there is a specific slave revolt at 73bc in DEI. As for female units, I think some occasional female generals or mixed gender mob units are ok. With maybe a couple of rare units like mixed gender scythian riders. But I do not think there should be many female soldiers in proper units. BTW is it even possible to have mixed gender units? From what I've heard they have to be female or male only units and this is really silly. If it is not possible, then I think we should avoid these units IMO.

  18. #78
    Matmannen's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Norrköping, Sweden
    Posts
    738

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by krunsh View Post
    First of all, thank you for remaining polite. While you are correct in saying that evolution had an effect on this, the main reason why women were not involved in wars had very little to do with the actual body, but rather with the patriarchal cultural incentives of that Era.

    Even WW2 had only very little occurrences of women in fights, and a woman is very much capable of carrying a rifle. In old times, it made sense for women to stay behind, as the main goal of a tribe was to grow in size (Thus have babies.). This, culturally, lead to a widely male dominated society (still seen today.). If women had not been prevented from participating in wars, trust me they would have (As good as a man or not is really irrelevant here. Smaller, weaker men were sent to wars all the time even though they were "inferior".).
    I am seeing that you are making two seperate arguments which partially contridict each other:
    Firstly you say Men perticipated in wars becasue of Patriarchy.
    Secondly you say that men perticipated in wars becasue they are expendable.

    I must say that history has shown that men fought in wars because they were expendable. This view and practice was very necessary at that time (just like the contol of female sexuality was also necessary (became necessary after the agrarian revolution of the neolithic era)), but today it isn't needed, but it is still there. Only males being subject to the draft in the US, only males having cumpulsory military application in sweden, these are sexist relics from a time when they were needed for the continued progression of society, they have nothing to do with Patriarchy...

    Quote Originally Posted by Don_Diego View Post
    No a common misconception! The gladiators were also some of the most important celebrities of the day! (Just like today's footballers, scum but some became rich and famous also! )
    Pretty much^^. The best way to have the most sex possible as a man was to become a gladiator, they were sex symbols of their time. I remember reading a story during my teenage years of a roman noblewoman running away with a gladiator to egypt, even though his face had been deformed by and axe...
    Last edited by Matmannen; August 14, 2014 at 03:31 PM.

  19. #79
    totalingend's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Great Britain
    Posts
    100

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Monglor View Post
    As to female units in the game, it's tricky. I mean I can see it as part of a garrison definitely. Especially for Goddess religion temple guards (not necessarily as elite units, but I can imagine an angry mob of Isis or Athena priestesses or something being a threat worthy of putting into the game as a garrison unit). Other than that a more accurate portrayal would be to have a few women in irregular units, and since that's not really possible, I'd probably err on the side of using them very sparingly or not at all.
    I think there's more scope for female warriors in the mod than you'd think...

    Although women partaking in warfare may have been an 'unusual freedom' for the time, there are notable examples - largely depending on the culture they come from:

    The Samaritans/Scythians: ''Their women, so long as they are virgins, ride, shoot, throw the javelin while mounted, and fight with their enemies. They do not lay aside their virginity until they have killed three of their enemies, and they do not marry before they have performed the traditional sacred rites'' (wikipedia!)

    Olympius (the mother of Alexander the Great) and Adea (Alexander's half brother's wife) - these two women led opposing armies against one another in the immediate aftermath of Alexander's death, fighting for control of his Empire

    Tomyris - Warrior Queen of the Massagetae
    (there are numerous other warrior Queens - Boudica and Zenobia for example who could serve as generals)

    Certainly women fighting in city garrisons is plausible as has previously been mentioned and is nicely exemplified by the account of Telesilla of Argos rallying the women of the city to (wo)man the city walls against an invading Spartan army (historians have concluded that the account of Telesilla leading the woman of the city into battle is based on an historical event, as improbable as it seems!)

    This is a little excerpt from - http://www.geni.com/projects/Powerfu...-1500-CE/12514
    (a really good article for this, includes sources..)


    • 138 BCE - The Roman, Sextus Junius Brutus found that in Lusitania the women were "fighting and perishing in company with the men with such bravery that they uttered no cry even in the midst of slaughter". He also noted that the Bracari women were "bearing arms with the men, who fought never turning, never showing their backs, or uttering a cry."
    • 102 BCE - A battle between Romans and the Teutonic Ambrones at Aquae Sextiae took place during this time. Plutarch described that "the fight had been no less fierce with the women than with the men themselves... the women charged with swords and axes and fell upon their opponents uttering a hideous outcry."
    • 101 BCE - General Marius of the Romans fought the Teutonic Cimbrians. Cimbrian women followed the men in battle, shooting arrows from mobile "wagon castles", and occasionally left the wagon castles to fight with swords. Marius reported that when the battle went poorly for the men, the women emerged from their wagon castles with swords and threatened their own men to ensure that they would continue to fight.

    But yeah, there just seems to be great scope to include female warriors in the mod, theres plenty of historical evidence to back up

  20. #80
    Matmannen's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Norrköping, Sweden
    Posts
    738

    Default Re: Femal generals for barbarians faction ?

    Quote Originally Posted by totalingend View Post
    I think there's more scope for female warriors in the mod than you'd think...

    Although women partaking in warfare may have been an 'unusual freedom' for the time, there are notable examples - largely depending on the culture they come from:

    The Samaritans/Scythians: ''Their women, so long as they are virgins, ride, shoot, throw the javelin while mounted, and fight with their enemies. They do not lay aside their virginity until they have killed three of their enemies, and they do not marry before they have performed the traditional sacred rites'' (wikipedia!)

    Olympius (the mother of Alexander the Great) and Adea (Alexander's half brother's wife) - these two women led opposing armies against one another in the immediate aftermath of Alexander's death, fighting for control of his Empire

    Tomyris - Warrior Queen of the Massagetae
    (there are numerous other warrior Queens - Boudica and Zenobia for example who could serve as generals)

    Certainly women fighting in city garrisons is plausible as has previously been mentioned and is nicely exemplified by the account of Telesilla of Argos rallying the women of the city to (wo)man the city walls against an invading Spartan army (historians have concluded that the account of Telesilla leading the woman of the city into battle is based on an historical event, as improbable as it seems!)

    This is a little excerpt from - http://www.geni.com/projects/Powerfu...-1500-CE/12514
    (a really good article for this, includes sources..)


    • 138 BCE - The Roman, Sextus Junius Brutus found that in Lusitania the women were "fighting and perishing in company with the men with such bravery that they uttered no cry even in the midst of slaughter". He also noted that the Bracari women were "bearing arms with the men, who fought never turning, never showing their backs, or uttering a cry."
    • 102 BCE - A battle between Romans and the Teutonic Ambrones at Aquae Sextiae took place during this time. Plutarch described that "the fight had been no less fierce with the women than with the men themselves... the women charged with swords and axes and fell upon their opponents uttering a hideous outcry."
    • 101 BCE - General Marius of the Romans fought the Teutonic Cimbrians. Cimbrian women followed the men in battle, shooting arrows from mobile "wagon castles", and occasionally left the wagon castles to fight with swords. Marius reported that when the battle went poorly for the men, the women emerged from their wagon castles with swords and threatened their own men to ensure that they would continue to fight.

    But yeah, there just seems to be great scope to include female warriors in the mod, theres plenty of historical evidence to back up
    Don't forget Queen Teuta of the Ardiaei, she's even in the game art...

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •