WALL OF TEXT
Sure, let's just ignore the fact that Dwarf Fortress is intended to be a fantasy world simulator - a simulator of a genre largely derived from Tolkien. Hell, if Toady wants to make dwarves into 10-foot fall hairless green martians who fly around in the clouds, that's up to his creative vision. Never mind the fact that it would make for a pretty lame fantasy simulator. Toady is the Pope, and he is infallible! Everyone else's opinions are irrelevent!
Well, that's clearly asinine, and not what anybody's saying. DF is a fantasy world simulator, yes. Derived largely from Tolkien, no. Fact of the matter is, Toady has always said he draws his inspiration from mythology and folklore before any modern fantasy. The same sources Tolkien derived his stories from. So yes, there are superficial similarities between the two works, but the differences far outweigh them, if you'd actually look. Nobody's saying Toady's "infallible", just that he's the author here, not anyone else. But you seem to have largely missed the point of my post:
He made the game moddable to respect the creative vision of the players, so you want bearded dwarf ladies, you got em, just add two brackets to the raws.You focus on this one minor point that isn't even crucial to my position as a whole. Why is that? I mean, I'm just saying "here's this idea Tolkien came up with - he's been a pretty significant influence on Dwarf Fortress, after all."
That's because it's really the only support you've given to your original point. And again, Toady's made an obvious effort to not be just another lazy, plagaristic, Tolkien-rip-off author - he draws his inspiration from the same sources as Tolkien did, is all.
Whether Tolkien came up with this idea or not is not crucial, because it's a standard fantasy element. The idea of bearded women is a standard stereotype of fantasy dwarves, just like their industriousness and love of alcohol. And it's a source of entertainment, just like their industriousness and love of alcohol. To omit it is just unfortunate.
You keep saying that. Thing is, you haven't backed it up. I'm pretty well read. I read a lot of fantasy. With the exception of Pratchett (who did it originally as a joke), I can not think of a single instance of bearded dwarf women. I've seen plenty of the "there are hardly any and they don't travel" and the old "fake beard to fool outsiders", sure, but no explicit genuinely bearded ladies. Nobody else seems to have come up with any either, unless I've missed it in the thread. So, if it's the standard stereotype, give me some examples. Name five settings other than Tolkien and Pratchett's that have explicitly stated, bearded ladies. I bet I can name more that have beardless ones.
And the thing is, your original point was addressed, though you weren't directly quoted, and you just hand-waved away any and all discussion of it. So since you think nobody paid attention, let's go back to the beginning:
I figure that since Dwarven society in DF has almost no gender roles at all (the only difference between males and females is that females give birth and nurse infants), and it's generally agreed that beards are a source of pride for Dwarves, it wouldn't make sense for DF's female dwarves to be beardless.
If female dwarves are beardless, then either beards are /not/ a source of pride and have no cultural significance to dwarves whatsoever (which must be the case in unmodded DF currently), or Dwarven society must be patriarchal, since only males are able to grow beards.
See, your point is faulty logic constructed around a misconception about the setting, and a baseless assumption. Let's take a look:
I figure that since Dwarven society in DF has almost no gender roles at all (the only difference between males and females is that females give birth and nurse infants),
YET. There are no gender roles in almost
any society in DF yet, cultures are placeholders right now. Until .31.xx the code wasn't there to make it possible. But they are coming, to what extent, we do not yet know. But it is going to change, men will stop wearing dresses, certain roles in entities will be caste-specific (an explicitly stated exaple was the antmen. The worker ants will be the only workers, the Soldier ants will be fighters only, etc.) - and the framework to start all this is only now in the game. The first run test was the elves - have you noticed that their war-leaders are (supposed to be) all women, all the time? It's true. That sort of thing will make its way into all the entites eventually.
and it's generally agreed that beards are a source of pride for Dwarves,
Says who? Certainly not the game. That's all fan-fiction and forum memes. And yes, this too will be changing as the game is more developed. After all shaving is suggested in the Crime and Punishment Arc for minor crimes.
it wouldn't make sense for DF's female dwarves to be beardless.
That's some faulty logic right there. The problem is, you're trying to justify it using concepts that are currently in game as place holders (all gender equality, all the time) and things that are not in the game at all (Beard Pride). But it's ok, because you get to that in a minute:
If female dwarves are beardless, then either beards are /not/ a source of pride and have no cultural significance to dwarves whatsoever (which must be the case in unmodded DF currently)
And there you go. That is, in fact, how the game currently views the situiation. Ladies have no beards, and they have no particular cultural significance. What that significance is supposed to be, you never actually said, but whatever. But you don't leave it there:
or Dwarven society must be patriarchal, since only males are able to grow beards.
What? I'm sorry, but that is just even worse logic. Just because women don't grow beards, they have to be second-class citizens just because the men are proud of theirs? That's a pretty narrow minded view of the society, actually. Physiology dictates society, not the other way around. Just because one gender is proud of an anatomical feature, does not mean the other is automatically going to be downtrodden, even if the entire culture celebrates the feature. Why can't Dwarf men be proud of their beards, and Dwarf ladies be proud of their men's beards (they're so much better than those scraggly human beards after all)? It's still a cultural point of pride, but causes no internal bigotry, because it's a "Dwarves vs. The World" pride, and so there can still be a gender equal workplace. This point was even further discussed - you even quoted it.
Either you drop the assumption that beards are something to be proud of, or you insult every single female beardless dwarf that ever fought in the front lines, mined out a fortress where before there was none, or - and heavens, what must that be - gave birth to future dwarves.
I'll drop the assumption that beards are something to be proud of, then, thanks.
Don't be silly. They're dwarves. If we're going to drop that, we might as well make them all teetotallers with a fear of the dark as well.
You just hand-waved it away. In unmodded DF, beards currently have no cultural significance, and nobody's proud of them. You said it yourself. But somebody else says "Yeah, that's how it is" and you're just dismissing it altogether as "silly". You don't even give any actual support to your argument. Then a few pages of theoretical biology to explain that, yes, there are plenty of reasons why there could be gender based dimorphism in dwarves, and you reply with:
You're arbitrarily assuming that dwarves have a similar degree of sexual dimorphism to humans. They're a fantasy race. Why would you do this? It's silly. And besides, there have been women who have grown relatively dwarven beards: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Jones_(bearded_woman)
More hand-waving. Again with the "silly". Seems anyone who disagrees with you is "silly". Sure there are plenty of logical reasons for sexual dimorphism, for example the peacock-tail analogy, but let's throw that out. And, not to beat a dead horse or anything, DF already defaults to Dwarf ladies having no beards. So the dimorphism is already there.
This can be fun, but ultimately, relying on scientific rigour to determine something that is purely fantasy is folly. I would prefer to take a more philological and philosophical route.
Yes, let's abandon
actual logic. Not to mention the fact that in DF Toady has gone to great lengths to make things as scientificly accurate as possible, so let's throw "scientific rigour" out the window too in favor of
philosophy, that makes perfect sense.
So, throwing out all reasonable discussion, you give the only actual support to your bearded lady stance at this point.
The classic image of a dwarf is that of a short old man with a long beard. This association is so strong that when one considers the existence of female dwarves, the problem arises: You can't have half the Dwarven population walking around beardless. That would be like having a race of satyrs, where all the females have human legs and no horns. They can't really be called satyrs, can they?
I'm going to stop you right there - Your assertation that "The classic Dwarf image" immediately creates a problem with beardless females. Says who? The vast bulk of fiction I've read has no problem rationalizing beardless lady Dwarves, as I have already stated. You're talking about a stereotype here. And if you just bow to stereotypes, then frankly you are a lazy writer. Also, regarding Satyrs:
That's exactly how they work. In Greek myth they are in fact all male, and they reproduce by mating with the Nymphs. The concept of female satyr is a modern invention. Sorry.
So at this point you bring Tolkien into it:
Tolkien was the first (as far as I know) to attempt to solve this. His solution was to give female dwarves beards. As the father of modern fantasy, I'd say this is pretty important.
And there it is. Your only real support for the idea of bearded Dwarf ladies. "Tolkien said so, and his work is important." That's fine. Though many have pointed out that he actually never said it in the works he published in his lifetime, and the only real references are found in unfinished works (so who knows what he truly intended) and early drafts of published works (where it is redacted. Honestly, if he took it out of a rough draft of Appendix A before publication, then he decided against the idea. Deal with it.) - and it's really Christopher Tolkien who put the idea out there for everyone to see. (If J. R. R. Tolkien is the Father of Modern Fantasy, does that make Christopher Tolkien The Brother of Modern Fantasy?) If Middle Earth has bearded lady dwarves - great! As its creator, it's absolutely Tolkien's perogative to make it so - a luxury you seem to be less and less willing to afford any other author as your posts continue.
So then, disregarding logic, and the discussions on biology and society as "silly", you put forth this:
So, why are people resistent to this idea? It's pretty easy to analyze:
1. The idea of a female having a beard gives some people cognitive dissonance. They're squeamish about the idea because it's contrary to what they're used to, and by human heterosexual standards, it's hard to imagine a male finding it attractive.
2. In the case of many RPGs, it's for the sake of marketing. Both for appeasing the squeamish folks and for the potential of making female Dwarves "sexy" along with other races. (And, well, the people who want this are just kind of sad. And probably adolescent.)
3. The idea of female dwarves having beards seems goofy and humourous. I see nothing wrong with this, and if anything, consider it a point in favour of them having beards.
So, here your first two points boil down to: "People don't find bearded women attractive"- while it's a fair enough point, it is not the reason most people have a hard time with the idea, but you threw biology out of the discussion, so it's what we're left with - and the third is "Bearded ladies are humourous". Which you have no problem with. You actually
agree that the idea of bearded Dwarf women is goofy, a leading reason people say it should not be so.
All in all, I'd say beardless female dwarves are a total cop-out, and the 'side-burn' compromise is even more of a cop-out (seriously, guys? laaaame)
Cop-out? How about not being a lazy, plagaristic Tolkien-clone?
I propose that, to Dwarves, the term "beardless" shall have a negative connotation, meaning foolish, effete, cowardly, or confused, depending on the context.
And then you throw this in at the end, essentially unsupported, painting all Dwarves in all fiction to be bigoted against the beardless, regardless of the setting.
Really?And here's the best part of your argument:
Nobody's saying it should be based entirely on Tolkien. Just that Tolkien's canon is important to consider. Tolkien also said that only a third of the Dwarven population is female, and that the females rarely travelled. [edit - and as stated earlier, I appreciate DF's lack of dwarven gender roles, so obviously I don't favour this just because Tolkien said it.]
Sooo.... Everybody should listen to Tolkien about the beards, but the low female to male ratio in his canon can just be thrown out,
because you don't like it? Why, exactly, can one piece of Tolkien's canon be more important than the other? If you have the luxury to pick and choose, why are you telling people their ideas about beardless ladies are "silly"? Why doesn't everybody get to pick what they want to use from it for their own personal idea of dwarves? Oh, wait,
they do. I applaud your bold hypocrisy.
You make an aside about Toady's plans for genetics at this point, but I'm pretty sure what you're referring to was actually the statement that we'll be able to switch beards on in the raws, which came up at some point in the discussion of what will be possible with genetics. I'm too lazy to hunt for the quote, but since you didn't either, I think we're cool there.
And then, even though you continue to say that Tolkien is not the basis of your argument, nearly every post from there on is built around defending the Tolkien canon of what dwarves are.
So far, your arguments against bearded dwarf-women have consisted almost entirely of weak strawman fallacies and pseudo-freudian ad hominems against everyone in favour of bearded dwarf-women. You've even completely ignored the fact that I proved beyond any reasonable doubt that Tolkien's female dwarves were in fact bearded.
Your only argument in favour of beardless dwarf-women seems to be that...you want dwarf women to be beardless.
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.
Aaaaaand... there is no rivalry between Elves and Dwarves in DF,
unless you make it happen through your own actions. Here again you subtly imply that DF is based on Middle Earth.
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.
Breaking in here to say: Well, you pretty much said it, yourself:
I'll drop the assumption that beards are something to be proud of, then, thanks.
Don't be silly. They're dwarves. If we're going to drop that, we might as well make them all teetotallers with a fear of the dark as well.
The classic image of a dwarf is that of a short old man with a long beard.
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 you deny your earlier bold hypocrisy!
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.
Again, you've got it backwards. DF is based on fairy tales, myth an folklore, and makes specific effort to stay away from Tolkienesque stereotyping. But I already went over this at the top. And yes, it's a throw a way idea from the father of modern fantasy. That doesn't make it any less of a throw away idea.
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?)
That last bit, I really think you misunderstood Shrugging Khan's post. I, personally took it to mean "If you play unmodded, you must drop the assumption beards are a pride factor, or it's insulting to the female dwarves." Which, as I pointed out in the beginning,
you said "If female dwarves are beardless, then either beards are /not/ a source of pride and have no cultural significance to dwarves whatsoever (which must be the case in unmodded DF currently)" - since, currently, there are no social gender roles. And NW_Kohaku agreed that they are not, in fact a point of pride currently, thank-you-very-much, essentially agreeing with your own original statement's conclusion
(must be the case in unmodded DF currently). So you then argue about it? I can only assume miscommunication, otherwise, you're just trolling.
And that brings us back to the quote at the top.
Well, if you read what you actually
wrote, yes, your entire support for your original argument was "your ideas are silly" and "Tolkien said so, so it's how modern fantasy is" followed by "Tolkien is not the only support for my argument". The only posts I didn't quote were a post about tropes, and you pointing out a quote someone made didn't belong to you.
So, yes, you have beaten the Tolkien horse to death. No, you really didn't put forth that much other support for your statements that didn't somehow lead back to Tolkien, or "it's my choice".
And in the end "it's my choice" is your only valid argument. Stop with the "you must respect the father of modern fantasy" - it's been shot down, it is irrelevant.
The only relevant thing here is what you choose to do in your own, personal, raw file. "It's my choice".
tl;dr - Stove, seems like you just like fighting. No matter what anyone says, you just disregard it and get more irrational. I honestly just assume you are a troll at this point.
Edit: you posted while I typed, so, I have to say:
No. Beardless wodwarfs are the common. See WoW. That is the most influential fantasy game to date. There is no stereotype for Dwarfs. That is what is so great about them. They're a clean slate.
There is also apparently a game that depicts female dwarves as looking like little girls. And also a game that depicts dwarves as looking like Persians, of human height, and being technologically advanced to the point of building robots. So what? Doesn't change the fact that female dwarves are commonly considered to be bearded.
You keep saying that, and yet, you still don't site a single source other than Tolkien. Weak argument.
Poll
133 (41.7%)
Author
Topic: Do your female dwarves have beards? (Read 43664 times)