You can see it in real history too. As I posted before, look at Jean de Clisson or any of the similar links people posted in this thread.
I saw that. Good point!
You can see it in real history too. As I posted before, look at Jean de Clisson or any of the similar links people posted in this thread.
... it seems weird not to acknowledge that the history of books which leave women out has done some harm, especially insomuch as those are the books which are setting the tropes used by modern writers.
If you like, but you're doing some serious backpedaling from your previous over-arching generalizations.
Steerpike; said:Only true if strength is a significant factor to begin with, which is an assumption you make that is not necessarily true. GIven the size ans strength differential, you just just as "realistically" posit that wit and speed are the significant factors and the 15% strength difference is negligible.
I think I get what you mean by women can fight the dragon differently, you need to explain things better. It's the same thing with rock climbing women don't have the upper body streangth to power through a route, they don't try. They use their legs and reach the top while the guy is stuck half way exhausted.
I think the reason why women are often being left out is because many of the stories are about war. And men are predisposed to make wars that's why they are always in the middle of the action. My point is not to exclude females but to give them different roles. IMO, female warriors 'men with breasts' type is as stereotypical as housewife type.
OK, as you wish. My dragon is not that big. A knight can fight him. And strength matters because he needs to cut through the scales that protect vital organs. There are no weak spots. 15% in this case make huge difference. Does it make sense?
Strength is useful for brute force action against stationary objects
Somehow you are inferring that strong people lack speed.
I would suggest doing a little more research into actual fighting before attempting the "strength is superior to all" argument.
I would suggest doing a little more research into actual fighting before attempting the "strength is superior to all" argument.
I'll take experience over skill anytime. I grouped them for convenience.I suppose if I split skill into training and actual fighting experience, that might be your top 4 list. (?)
Concerning female v male characters: just write the damn character, already. Forget boobs or plumbing and just write the bleeping character.
Ah, I see now. I was lumping toughness and strength together, though I can see why you wouldn't.1- Mean streak
2- Toughness
3- Skill/Experience
4- Strength
I'll take experience over skill anytime. I grouped them for convenience.
Not sure what your point is. Every writer has their own method, but when I create a character I start with personality and go from there. My MC is an exceptionally gifted warrior, but has no desire to conquer or dominate or harm anyone. The character's main ambition is to simply be left alone but is forcibly dragged into the world and forced to deal with it. I'm interested in telling this person's story with a focus on how these personality traits interact with each other, how the character deals with them and with the challenges encountered in the story. For what I want to focus on in this story and how I want to tell it, the character's genitals are completely irrelevant.Not to sound like a broken record: but please don't just "forget plumbing". Consider whether you're defaulting to one type of plumbing without thinking, and whether things might be more interesting with a little more diversity represented in aforementioned bleeping character. And if you then decide that yes, the characters all need to have that particular kind of plumbing and/or relationship between their sense of themselves and that plumbing, then fine. Just think about it, is all.
Not sure what your point is. Every writer has their own method, but when I create a character I start with personality and go from there. My MC is an exceptionally gifted warrior, but has no desire to conquer or dominate or harm anyone. The character's main ambition is to simply be left alone but is forcibly dragged into the world and forced to deal with it. I'm interested in telling this person's story with a focus on how these personality traits interact with each other, how the character deals with them and with the challenges encountered in the story. For what I want to focus on in this story and how I want to tell it, the character's genitals are completely irrelevant.
Not sure what your point is. Every writer has their own method, but when I create a character I start with personality and go from there. My MC is an exceptionally gifted warrior, but has no desire to conquer or dominate or harm anyone. The character's main ambition is to simply be left alone but is forcibly dragged into the world and forced to deal with it. I'm interested in telling this person's story with a focus on how these personality traits interact with each other, how the character deals with them and with the challenges encountered in the story. For what I want to focus on in this story and how I want to tell it, the character's genitals are completely irrelevant.
No, I'm not. You've made that up entirely, presumably to bolster your faltering arguments. Speed isn't only about strength, however. Watch an NFL game and see some very strong, large lineman try to catch a lithe, mobile quarterback.