Hydaelyn Role-Players
Gender roles - Printable Version

+- Hydaelyn Role-Players (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18)
+-- Forum: Final Fantasy 14 (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=41)
+--- Forum: FFXIV Discussion (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: Gender roles (/showthread.php?tid=7486)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

RE: Gender roles - Kage - 07-28-2014

The Manderville men are wonderful. One of them is even on the Syndicate!

I do however want and feel like I need a way to explain why a woman and also a Lalafell would be able to be on par or beat what we consider to be physically superior. And I don't like to think that it's just "~skill~" because it's like half/half in the Ul'dah forces (Immortal Flames, Brass Blades, Sultansworn) that there are Lalafell, and Hyur and Roegadyn.

I personally feel it -is- aether.

RE: Gender roles - Aya - 07-28-2014

People will interpret and play the strength of their characters how they desire Smile

(For my own characters) I tend to prefer mine to be realistic.  Aya is athletic, fit, and stronger than people would expect, but nonetheless a weakling (in most ways) compared to any men other than Lalafel and perhaps smaller Miqo'te.  And would be easily overpowered by most all Roegadyn women, and many Highlander women.  Making up for these physical weaknesses (and, indeed,the many other weaknesses she possesses!) are part of what make playing her interesting as a character.

I disregard in-game combat performance because issues of game balance essentially beg the question before RP can be taken into account.  But, should a Lalafel (female Miqo'te, or any other possible example!) wish to use aether to be as strong as the mightiest Sea Wolf, I don't see how you could really object! Though his height and stature would still introduce limitations a little more difficult to overcome.

RE: Gender roles - C'kayah Polaali - 07-28-2014

If you want to look at game mechanics in relation to this question, I think aether is a good answer to this.

If you look at the starter stats, they're minuscule compared to the stats of an endgame character. Where do all the extra stats come from? Is someone *really* that much stronger at level 50, in terms of muscle, than they are at level 1? Probably not. Instead, they're better able to tap into the aether that flows all around our characters (with crystals and peace and love and the will of Landru and all that).

For differences between the sexes, there's clearly no in-game stat difference because because it's what we as players expect.

For the races, there are differences in stats, but they're relatively small.

That said, it's probably a bad idea to start looking at things like physical size as an indicator of strength. Take a look at Chimpanzees in the real world, for instance. Pound for pound, they're about four times as strong as a person. A 50 pound Chimp can easily take a fully grown man in a fight, and a large Chimp (males of some types can grow to about the size of a male Miqo'te) maintains that huge margin of strength.

Makes you look at Lalafells just a little bit differently...

RE: Gender roles - Zyrusticae - 07-28-2014

(07-28-2014, 07:26 PM)Ckayah Tia Wrote: That said, it's probably a bad idea to start looking at things like physical size as an indicator of strength. Take a look at Chimpanzees in the real world, for instance. Pound for pound, they're about four times as strong as a person. A 50 pound Chimp can easily take a fully grown man in a fight, and a large Chimp (males of some types can grow to about the size of a male Miqo'te) maintains that huge margin of strength.

Makes you look at Lalafells just a little bit differently...
The thing about this is that they're actually trading brain power for more brawn; to put it another way, only so much of our brains are devoted to physical activity and exertion. Part of the reason we're weaker is because our brains are actually holding us back in order to prevent us from damaging ourselves in the process of exertion. Naturally, since Chimpanzees are much less intellectually inclined (but they're still smart, mind you), they have more resources to devote to raw physical strength. A similar and related theory says that their lack of fine motor control (i.e. less precision) means that they devote more resources to the major muscles. And while we're at it, the actual amount is closer to twice that of human strength per pound - any claims of 4x or higher are completely unfounded.

All this is just a long way of saying that, no, Lalafell are really, really unlikely to have chimpanzee-style strength. If they did, they would be lacking considerably in other areas, and wouldn't even be capable of performing certain jobs, much less do something like fine stitching. I will continue to posit that aether is the answer, always. Smile

RE: Gender roles - LiadansWhisper - 07-28-2014

(07-28-2014, 07:46 PM)Zyrusticae Wrote: Part of the reason we're weaker is because our brains are actually holding us back in order to prevent us from damaging ourselves in the process of exertion. 

I would really l like a citation on this, because I have literally never heard this before.

RE: Gender roles - McBeefâ„¢ - 07-29-2014

The real reason the chimp/lala analogy fails is because Chimpanzees have giant arms with lots of leverage for muscles to work on. Lalafells have little tiny T-rex arms. Even if their muscles were 10x stronger they're at such a mechanical disadvantage they'd still have problems keeping up with a Highlander.

RE: Gender roles - Yssen - 07-29-2014

(07-29-2014, 03:18 AM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: The real reason the chimp/lala analogy fails is because Chimpanzees have giant arms with lots of leverage for muscles to work on. Lalafells have little tiny T-rex arms. Even if their muscles were 10x stronger they're at such a mechanical disadvantage they'd still have problems keeping up with a Highlander.

They have giant heads, and tiny arms, and they are not sure this plan was thought through. 

^ ^

RE: Gender roles - LiadansWhisper - 07-29-2014

(07-29-2014, 05:10 AM)Yssen Wrote:
(07-29-2014, 03:18 AM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: The real reason the chimp/lala analogy fails is because Chimpanzees have giant arms with lots of leverage for muscles to work on. Lalafells have little tiny T-rex arms. Even if their muscles were 10x stronger they're at such a mechanical disadvantage they'd still have problems keeping up with a Highlander.

They have giant heads, and tiny arms, and they are not sure this plan was thought through. 

^ ^

>.>

[youtube]3LVXjB_VUfk[/youtube]

RE: Gender roles - C'kayah Polaali - 07-29-2014

(07-28-2014, 11:03 PM)LiadansWhisper Wrote:
(07-28-2014, 07:46 PM)Zyrusticae Wrote: Part of the reason we're weaker is because our brains are actually holding us back in order to prevent us from damaging ourselves in the process of exertion. 

I would really l like a citation on this, because I have literally never heard this before.
I've seen this theory before, but it's never made a lot of sense to me.

There are theories that chalk up the difference to differences in fine motor control, or to evolutionary differences designed to allow more metabolic activity for our brains without increasing the amount of food we have to eat, but there are other theories pointing to differences in the length of muscle fibers, muscle proteins, or leverage.

There's an interesting study on bonobos, though, that looks at their jumping performance and determines that bonobos generate about as much force while jumping as an adult human, despite their smaller size. This is interesting because, while (as Nat says) chimps and bonobos do have these big ol' arms, bonobos have pretty stubby legs compared to humans.

RE: Gender roles - Naunet - 07-29-2014

(07-28-2014, 11:03 PM)LiadansWhisper Wrote:
(07-28-2014, 07:46 PM)Zyrusticae Wrote: Part of the reason we're weaker is because our brains are actually holding us back in order to prevent us from damaging ourselves in the process of exertion. 

I would really l like a citation on this, because I have literally never heard this before.

Here is the article Zyrusticae is likely referring to. While it's a suggestive study, it doesn't really examine causality, and I would hesitate to claim its hypothesis as fact. I would want to see similar studies across a greater range of species (and not just primates - dolphins are arguably more intelligent than humans, but they have not sacrificed much in the way of physical strength, though they do have the benefit of being aquatic) before considering a causal link.

RE: Gender roles - Zhavi - 07-29-2014

(07-29-2014, 03:18 AM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: The real reason the chimp/lala analogy fails is because Chimpanzees have giant arms with lots of leverage for muscles to work on. Lalafells have little tiny T-rex arms. Even if their muscles were 10x stronger they're at such a mechanical disadvantage they'd still have problems keeping up with a Highlander.

[Image: 1320203289_TRex_hates_pushups_gag.jpg]

(I had to, sorry)

(carry on!)

RE: Gender roles - C'kayah Polaali - 07-29-2014

(07-29-2014, 12:05 PM)Naunet Wrote:
(07-28-2014, 11:03 PM)LiadansWhisper Wrote:
(07-28-2014, 07:46 PM)Zyrusticae Wrote: Part of the reason we're weaker is because our brains are actually holding us back in order to prevent us from damaging ourselves in the process of exertion. 

I would really l like a citation on this, because I have literally never heard this before.

Here is the article Zyrusticae is likely referring to. While it's a suggestive study, it doesn't really examine causality, and I would hesitate to claim its hypothesis as fact. I would want to see similar studies across a greater range of species (and not just primates - dolphins are arguably more intelligent than humans, but they have not sacrificed much in the way of physical strength, though they do have the benefit of being aquatic) before considering a causal link.
And the only thing I was really trying to do with the point, anyways, is just suggest that Lalafell aren't necessarily weak as toddlers just because they're toddler sized.

[Image: ffxivgame2011-08-1319-bk0s.jpg]
Fear them.

RE: Gender roles - Zyrusticae - 07-29-2014

Well, yeah, of course they're not as weak (misleading word - toddlers are, pound for pound, not actually that weak, just uncoordinated), because Lalafells are actually adults who just happen to be tiny and consequently have fully-developed brains and the neurological and motor systems to accompany that. Tongue

But come on, you know that they'd be screwed without aether to back them up. Those tiny little arms and legs, even if they packed much more power than an equivalent human's, are still too much of a disadvantage to just ignore without something to compensate for it.

RE: Gender roles - C'kayah Polaali - 07-30-2014

(07-29-2014, 06:49 PM)Zyrusticae Wrote: Well, yeah, of course they're not as weak (misleading word - toddlers are, pound for pound, not actually that weak, just uncoordinated), because Lalafells are actually adults who just happen to be tiny and consequently have fully-developed brains and the neurological and motor systems to accompany that. Tongue

But come on, you know that they'd be screwed without aether to back them up. Those tiny little arms and legs, even if they packed much more power than an equivalent human's, are still too much of a disadvantage to just ignore without something to compensate for it.
I'm over 6 feet tall, with big gorilla arms. I used to do classical fencing, and one of my favorite opponents was a young woman who was well under five feet tall. My foil easily had a good foot on the length of hers. By all "size matters" criteria, I should be able to easily spank her without fear of reprisal.

However, real life doesn't necessarily respect those criteria. While my reach with the foil was greater than hers (and the length of my lunge, length of my step, etc), my "minimum distance" was also greater. If I could keep her at foil length, I was okay. But if she could close on me when I lunged, I wouldn't be able to retreat fast enough. We ended up pretty evenly matched, and had a blast.

I think you're looking at the same thing with the Lalafell. Especially if they're armed. If they can close on a bigger opponent, then they're at an advantage.

We might want to split this off into a different thread about racial differences in combat. This is veering pretty far off from gender roles.

RE: Gender roles - allgivenover - 07-30-2014

Show Content