[LMB] Women and the Warrior's Path

Tony Zbaraschuk tonyz at eskimo.com
Thu Jan 29 18:58:01 GMT 2009


On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 11:51:51AM -0700, Howard Brazee wrote:
> Training women wouldn't take much - someone already pointed out to 
> training for defense of castles.   One can add assassination skills as 
> well, as the population of trained assassins is small, and we don't have 
> a large amount of examples to nay say them.   If the castle was lost and 
> they were refuges, they probably won't have men to protect them.

Yes, you _can_ train women.  But given the time loss caused by
pregnancies and child-care, and the problems with upper body strength, 
it's usually more effective to train men for the job.  If a full-
trained man beats a half-trained woman, then all the effort you
put into training her is lost.

As far as assassination goes, poison probably works better than
knives anyway -- and the already-agreed-upon small number of needed
assassins indicates that this is not going to largely affect social
attitudes.  

> Jim Butcher's Alera series has women warriors in harms way, but for the 
> most part they are there because their control of Furies is 
> significantly stronger than men in comparable positions.  And the 
> powerful marry those with strong furies control to make their children 
> powerful as well.   Still, most fighting is done by men.

When you make up the world rules, you are free to have them however you
like, but this is not evidence for how our world works.  (One might
even say that, by providing women an advantage in this sort of thing
that men _don't_ have shows that Butcher is aware that combat is
rather highly dependent upon advantages...)


Tony Z

-- 
Whatever purpose a piece of information may have been created and
shared for, it will eventually be used for something else.
--Steve Rambam



More information about the Lois-Bujold mailing list