Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

All dwarves have beards

133 (41.7%)

Males bearded; females beardless (default setting)

163 (51.1%)

Females bearded; males beardless

14 (4.4%)

All dwarves beardless (horrors!)

9 (2.8%)

Total Members Voted: 319

[USEC_OFFICER]

fictional creature.

They're real to me.

[Stove]

Umm... what were YOU reading?  It certainly wasn't what I was writing...

Your posts. They're filled with strawmen. I pointed one of them out earlier, and you responded with a strawman. Smooth move.

Actually, I haven't ignored it, I have said what Tolkien did with his dwarves is entirely irrelevant to what DF should be several times, and in fact, mocked the whole notion with the reference to Tolkienian elves.

(and it's very thin reasoning to even say Tolkien did it, at that).

Actually, that's the entirity of YOUR argument. 

I'm quite certain I'm not arguing that female dwarves should be beardless.

I think this says it pretty well, in the comparison to Wagner: http://plover.net/~bonds/tolkien1.html

What? This page is terrible, and doesn't even support your argument in any way.

Oh, wow, classic TVTropes arguments 101... Hey, look: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TropesAreTools  The phrases "Tropes Are Not Good" and "Tropes Are Not Bad" both link to the same page!  How interesting! I wonder why that is?

I would have linked you that very page. Thanks for saving me the trouble?

Umm... no.  While I haven't read everything Tolkien-related, I'm pretty sure there is never any part in that about how Elves were percieved as a bunch of murderous cannibals, much less as refusing to touch anything leather, or going into genocidal rage over chopping down trees.

It isn't a perfect interpretation, but there is certainly a rivalry between elves and dwarves in Middle Earth. I believe Tolkien was the one who began this cliche.

[Stove]

You, however, chose to mischaracterize my argument as "it's a trope, and therefore it was bad simply because it was a trope".  This was very obviously not what I had said (as I had said, it is not the fact that it is a trope that makes something bad, I was just pointing out that what people rejected about Tolkienian elves was so commonplace that the rejection itself is, in fact its own trope), and is only one of several attempts you've made to dismiss real challenges to your assertions by simply completely making up an entirely different issue.

Then I guess I just misinterpreted your reason for citing the trope. I was referring specifically to your citing of the planet of hats trope, which came across as "this is a trope so it is bad". If you did not intend it this way, very well then.

[NW_Kohaku]

Then I guess I just misinterpreted your reason for citing the trope. I was referring specifically to your citing of the planet of hats trope, which came across as "this is a trope so it is bad". If you did not intend it this way, very well then.

Allright, I assumed you were talking about the several elves tropes I posted, but apparently you were talking about the Planet Of Hats trope.  Assumptions make yadda yadda yadda...

Thing is, though, that what I had said about this being an oversimplification of my argument still holds true.

Then I'll go back and explain why I referenced Planet of Hats by quoting from My Species Doth Protest Too Much, which is the rebellion against Planet of Hats:

When you're on the Planet Of Hats for too long, someone's hat is going to fall off. The probability of this happening seems to be directly proportional to the flamboyance of the hat. That is, if Bob's planet is filled to the brim with Blood Knights, who proclaim "The greatest glory is to die in battle!" and "Only the strong survive!" over dinner, expect Bob to be a Pacifist.

... <Going over reasons> ...

The biggest reason, however, is that real people don't come from the Planet Of Hats, and when you've got an entire species who has only one character trait among them, there are only so many interesting stories you can tell before you've got to make the characters more complex.

Now then, I referenced this because there was the claim out there that "beards are the defining aspect of a dwarf"... I then went into many other things that are particular to dwarves that would not limit someone's idea of what a dwarf is to simply being a mobile beard rack.

Quite simply, the idea of a dwarf is bigger than just "beards".  It couldn't just be beards.  There simply aren't enough beard jokes you can make to create a compelling game entirely out of beards.

Your posts. They're filled with strawmen. I pointed one of them out earlier, and you responded with a strawman. Smooth move.

*sigh*  OK, please, point it out, and show exactly how it is a strawman.

I'm quite certain I'm not arguing that female dwarves should be beardless.

... And now it's "I know you are, but what am I?" 

You know, even if I am someone who just loves to argue, there is a limit to what sort of arguments I'll put up with. 

What? This page is terrible, and doesn't even support your argument in any way.

Please at least try to read it and make some sort of useful reference or means of backing up your claims.

It isn't a perfect interpretation, but there is certainly a rivalry between elves and dwarves in Middle Earth. I believe Tolkien was the one who began this cliche.

Unfortunately, that is only the most shallow of comparisons, the contrasts that I listed are extremely striking, and frankly, far more salient.

[breadbocks]

Umm... what were YOU reading?  It certainly wasn't what I was writing...

Your posts. They're filled with strawmen. I pointed one of them out earlier, and you responded with a strawman. Smooth move.

Actually, that's the entirity of YOUR argument. 

I'm quite certain I'm not arguing that female dwarves should be beardless.

STRAWMAN ALERT STRAWMAN ALERT
Seriously.

You totally avoided the point there. The point he made was

You read Diskworld, so you were biased at the start. You have yet to provide any real evidence that female Dwarfs should have beards. The only thing you have done is say "I want them to have beards".

[Stove]

Now then, I referenced this because there was the claim out there that "beards are the defining aspect of a dwarf"... I then went into many other things that are particular to dwarves that would not limit someone's idea of what a dwarf is to simply being a mobile beard rack.

Quite simply, the idea of a dwarf is bigger than just "beards".  It couldn't just be beards.  There simply aren't enough beard jokes you can make to create a compelling game entirely out of beards.

I don't know who claimed that beards are /the/ defining aspect of a dwarf. It's certainly /a/ defining aspect of dwarves, though.

Your posts. They're filled with strawmen. I pointed one of them out earlier, and you responded with a strawman. Smooth move.

*sigh*  OK, please, point it out, and show exactly how it is a strawman.

I was proposing that the ideas of Tolkien (being the father of modern fantasy) regarding female dwarves are important to take into consideration (in other words, that they shouldn't arbitrarily be dismissed as irrelevent), and you chose to "rephrase" this into something different:

In other words,we should listen to Tolkien on the parts you want us to listen to, but we shouldn't listen to Tolkien on the parts you don't want us to listen to...

... And now it's "I know you are, but what am I?" 

You know, even if I am someone who just loves to argue, there is a limit to what sort of arguments I'll put up with. 

If the "I know you are, but what am I" style of retort is beyond that limit, then that's quite the treasure you have there in that Horadric double-standard! What you just quoted was a response to you doing just that.

See, look:

Actually, that's the entirity of YOUR argument.

Just what are you trying to pull, here?

Please at least try to read it and make some sort of useful reference or means of backing up your claims.

The burden's on you to show how it's relevant.

Unfortunately, that is only the most shallow of comparisons, the contrasts that I listed are extremely striking, and frankly, far more salient.

It's a rough, shallow comparison, then. So what? I didn't intend it as some kind of complexly symbolic parallel. Nitpick it all you want, if that floats your boat.

[Stove]

You totally avoided the point there. The point he made was

You read Diskworld, so you were biased at the start. You have yet to provide any real evidence that female Dwarfs should have beards. The only thing you have done is say "I want them to have beards".

What? Who are you quoting? I don't think I've even made any discworld references. Are you just goofing around?

[breadbocks]

Please at least try to read it and make some sort of useful reference or means of backing up your claims.

The burden's on you to show how it's relevant.

Uh. That's wrong. The creator, game, and therefore these forums are based in America. America runs on the system that says the burden of proof is on the accuser. You are in the position of accuser as you are saying something different than the status quo. Therefore, you need to find proof that dwarfs have beards. So. Get to it.

[NW_Kohaku]

I was proposing that the ideas of Tolkien (being the father of modern fantasy) regarding female dwarves are important to take into consideration (in other words, that they shouldn't arbitrarily be dismissed as irrelevent),

Except they ARE irrelevant.  That's what I've been saying in as many ways as I know how.  I'll just quote this again, because it's far more direct than I was trying to be:

This argument is pointless.
By default, dwarf ladies have no beards. This is how Toady envisions them. DF is his creation, so his is the only opinion that really counts. This is what the "DF cannon" is.
But, he also made it moddable so folks who want bearded ladies can have them, because he wants the game to be customizable.

What someone else wrote about dwarves in a completely different setting is irrelevant to Dwarf Fortress. For every instance of bearded dwarf ladies in other fiction, an instance of non-bearded dwarf ladies can equally be pointed out. There is no "right" here. There is only what each individual author decided about his or her own personal version of a fictional creature.

Some people just like arguing.

This is not a Tolkien simulator.  Period.  That's all there is to it.  There is no need to follow any particular aspect of Tolkien in making any fantasy setting.

and you chose to "rephrase" this into something different:

In other words,we should listen to Tolkien on the parts you want us to listen to, but we shouldn't listen to Tolkien on the parts you don't want us to listen to...

OK, now in context, what I was saying was: We do not need to follow Tolkien's example in Dwarves because we do not follow Tolkien's example in other creatures like elves... To say that we must follow Tolkien's example for Dwarves when we rewrite other creatues, like Elves (to specifically mock the elves of Tolkien, no less), freely shows total inconsistancy.  If you want to keep Tolkienian dwarves because you like Tolkienian Dwarves, but not Tolkienian elves because you don't like Tolkienian elves, then you are undermining your own argument with your inconsistancy, and revealing that the only reasoning in your argument is "I want this because I like it".

This is NOT a strawman - a strawman is engineering a fictitious position just to knock it down.  (I get the impression the word "strawman" is thrown around so often that the word is losing its meaning...) I am talking about the positions that you, yourself, have stated.

... And now it's "I know you are, but what am I?" 

You know, even if I am someone who just loves to argue, there is a limit to what sort of arguments I'll put up with. 

If the "I know you are, but what am I" style of retort is beyond that limit, then that's quite the treasure you have there in that Horadric double-standard! What you just quoted was a response to you doing just that.

See, look:

Actually, that's the entirity of YOUR argument.

Just what are you trying to pull, here?

This is, again, the exact same argument I've been making in many different ways, hoping that you will eventually see the point I'm trying to make:  You have never gone beyond "I like it because that's what Tolkien did, and I liked Tolkien", which is apparent when you read the conversation, instead of trying to strip something out of context, and reducing what others say into the shallowest of concepts, without reading the meaning of their actions.

It's a rough, shallow comparison, then. So what? I didn't intend it as some kind of complexly symbolic parallel. Nitpick it all you want, if that floats your boat.

Actually, this is a matter of critical thinking skills, the ability to discern differences between two unlike things, and judge the similarities...  The ability to make connections between statements of facts, and their implications.  Or, more directly, the ability to grasp the relevance of a metaphor when you see one.

Tolkienian elves and DF elves are almost nothing alike: DF elves are, in fact, a cruel mockery of Tolkienian elves.  Tolkienian elves are an ideal - an expression of one author's idea of a perfect society, free from the evils of industry or progress or social mobility.  DF elves are "filthy hippies", a collection of every negative trait that can be levelled against those who oppose industrial progress.

Even if you cannot grasp this concept in its entirity, you, yourself, used the tennants of this concept when you were mocking beardless women as "elf-like creatures" in an explicitly negative way.  See:

Hey, you're the one trying to deprecate female Dwarves into beardless elf-like creatures!

[NW_Kohaku]

Please at least try to read it and make some sort of useful reference or means of backing up your claims.

The burden's on you to show how it's relevant.

Uh. That's wrong. The creator, game, and therefore these forums are based in America. America runs on the system that says the burden of proof is on the accuser. You are in the position of accuser as you are saying something different than the status quo. Therefore, you need to find proof that dwarfs have beards. So. Get to it.

I think that multiple layers of quoting has made you a little confused, that's not what this line was referencing...

[Thundrim]

Whoa. That's quite a labyrinth you have created here. The real trick is to get out of it. Looking at it from a new perspective might reveal the exit, if the thread is lost that is. 
...

[breadbocks]

You totally avoided the point there. The point he made was

You read Diskworld, so you were biased at the start. You have yet to provide any real evidence that female Dwarfs should have beards. The only thing you have done is say "I want them to have beards".

What? Who are you quoting? I don't think I've even made any discworld references. Are you just goofing around?

OK. The names got confused. Either way, especially with Tolkien,  the fact is you are reading into some very ambiguous writing, and saying females have beards. For Tolkien, did you ever wonder WHY the piece of writing you quoted wasn't in any of J.R.R.'s published writings?

NW, if that wasn't what it meant, it isn't my fault he lost the context. Now he'll probably quote you as a way to discount my arguments. Either way, he still needs to provide proof of bearded female DF dwarfs. He is still causing upheaval in the Status Quo.

[Tokkius]

I prefer my females to be beardless. Consider it dimorphism-bias.

[Cespinarve]

Beardless for everyone. I hate facial hair.

[Stove]

Except they ARE irrelevant.  That's what I've been saying in as many ways as I know how.  I'll just quote this again, because it's far more direct than I was trying to be:

Tolkien has already been a significant source of inspiration for Dwarf Fortress. To deny its relevance is silly. A significant portion of Dwarf Fortress is derivative of Tolkien (and by transitivity, derivative of Germanic mythology, and so forth.)
The point I'm making is that bearded dwarf-women are not just some throw-away idea originating from a random, less-significant source (such as certain editions of D&D, as some have (mistakenly) claimed). It's from the father of modern fantasy.
Also, this is not the foundation of my entire argument, as you seem to think (more on this later)

This is not a Tolkien simulator.  Period.  That's all there is to it.

I didn't say it is. See, this is a fictitious position, which you have engineered, in order to knock it down.

OK, now in context, what I was saying was: We do not need to follow Tolkien's example in Dwarves because we do not follow Tolkien's example in other creatures like elves... To say that we must follow Tolkien's example for Dwarves when we rewrite other creatues, like Elves (to specifically mock the elves of Tolkien, no less), freely shows total inconsistancy.  If you want to keep Tolkienian dwarves because you like Tolkienian Dwarves, but not Tolkienian elves because you don't like Tolkienian elves, then you are undermining your own argument with your inconsistancy, and revealing that the only reasoning in your argument is "I want this because I like it".

Again, this Tolkien thing is not the foundation of my entire argument. It's just a little point.

This is, again, the exact same argument I've been making in many different ways, hoping that you will eventually see the point I'm trying to make:  You have never gone beyond "I like it because that's what Tolkien did, and I liked Tolkien"

Yes I have. I've made a few other arguments not even relating directly to Tolkien. (And I won't even go into how much of a strawman your "paraphrasing" of my argument is. Just read what I wrote above.)

But maybe you just haven't been keeping track of who said what, and don't realise that I was making more than just this point. You did respond to someone else who had essentially agreed with the first point I made (about how sexual dimorphism in dwarves would enforce gender roles, which is inconsistent with DF's lack of gender roles, to put it simply). Your response was that you'd prefer a Dwarven culture in which beards are not a thing of pride. (I could see this spawning a whole other debate about whether dwarves are proud of their beards. Do we really want to do this?)

DF elves are "filthy hippies", a collection of every negative trait that can be levelled against those who oppose industrial progress.

Hence, my speculation that DF Elves are based on how Dwarves perceive Elves.

OK. The names got confused. Either way, especially with Tolkien,  the fact is you are reading into some very ambiguous writing, and saying females have beards. For Tolkien, did you ever wonder WHY the piece of writing you quoted wasn't in any of J.R.R.'s published writings?

Most of what Tolkien wrote was not published in his lifetime. This includes everything in the Silmarillion. It's still considered canon. If you have a problem with the conclusion that his dwarves are all bearded, take it up with the hardcore Tolkien fans.