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.
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!. ?????
Saturday, August 09 2003, 06:04AM
Who wrote it?
Saturday, August 09 2003, 07:32AM
Err, Maja wrote the original post here. Sowwy.
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
(who managed not to sit on her capslock this time while typing her name)
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.
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.
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
> 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
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
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.
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.