I want to go full 90's in this game.

[Deer87]

It is topics like this that gives fuel to the more aggressive feminist movements, which, while a pain in the butt, have valid points when people return to old gender stereotypes like male engineers vs female nurses.

Im a man, im married to a female engieneer, and among her and her friends from university i have no indication that the gals are more poorly suited for the job than their male counterparts.
Old "wisdom" would also say that men are better doctors and women are better nurses, yet in the later years there have been a surplus of women studying medicin, so in the next decades this "wisdom" will become history. At least in Denmark.
What we are looking at is gender roles in the society, and they can, luckily, shift.
Just look at different countries to see differences, so to claim something would be more "fitting" or "realistic" is just demanding that your (outdated) view of gender roles should be dominant.

Considering this is a sci-fy game should leave the gender role argument totally redundant. If you want the 90's, don't play this game. It has interstellar space travel in it.

The same with the gay part, if you really have a problem with it, do as ISIS and execute them. You can do that within the game limits, but it will be a consequence of your less than tolerant world views rather than game limitations.

Regarding the physical strengh part, why should it affect the use of a close combat weapon where technique is expected to play a bigger part than raw strength.

[Razzoriel]

It is topics like this that gives fuel to the more aggressive feminist movements, which, while a pain in the butt, have valid points when people return to old gender stereotypes like male engineers vs female nurses.

Well, topics like this fuel agressive feminist movements which tend to not look into the rational parts of science and sex differences. No one in their right mind should take ideologues' positions seriously; they want to push ideologies which don't follow the scientific method of appraising reality.

Stereotypes are not 100% the reality, but simply the portrayal of something that tends to happen often. But it is a reality that women tend not to choose STEM fields over men, and that is the main reason feminists cry wolf about "gender pay gaps". If more women chose to work in such fields, which are regarded in the market as more profitable because they're more complex than human fields (law and psychology, for instance). And also because of that, the amount of people with such degrees are much more prevalent then STEM, which plays the offer x demand effect in the workforce.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_STEM_fields

Im a man, im married to a female engieneer, and among her and her friends from university i have no indication that the gals are more poorly suited for the job than their male counterparts.

Yet this is a fallacy most commonly faced when this reality is portrayed. No one ever claimed that women are not as competent as men in these areas. But it's a reality that, on average, they tend to choose other specialities in other areas. But this is engineering; I haven't even mentioned that part, and made myself clear that for example, Construction requiring engineering is a part of the skill, but also would require physical strength to haul things. But I digress; this is not the point.

Old "wisdom" would also say that men are better doctors and women are better nurses, yet in the later years there have been a surplus of women studying medicin, so in the next decades this "wisdom" will become history. At least in Denmark.

You just answered yourself; Denmark is not the hallmark of human society at large. It may happen in your backyard, but it would play differently in other places.

What we are looking at is gender roles in the society, and they can, luckily, shift.
Just look at different countries to see differences, so to claim something would be more "fitting" or "realistic" is just demanding that your (outdated) view of gender roles should be dominant.

My view is my own. It doesn't fit yours because you want to use your lens of the world through your own ivory tower. Sex roles in society change, I completely agree with you. I'll leave to each person to decide whether this is good or bad.

And just for the record; outdated does not necessarly mean out-of-place.

Considering this is a sci-fy game should leave the gender role argument totally redundant. If you want the 90's, don't play this game. It has interstellar space travel in it.

Completely agree; I mentioned that too. There's a large part of theory and fiction in Rimworld. Should we apply fiction to this part of the game, too? If so, why? Is it too much to simply have a conversation on the subject, or you'll insist in your "higher than thou" mentality which simply denies to discuss scientific findings which enter in direct conflict to what the game is portraying? Because it tends to slightly bug me when a game wants to be so realistic to track wounds in thumbs and social interactions tracking up to who was slighted by whom and the impact on their future contacts, but refuses to accept women are on average physically weaker than men but have the same combat capabilities.

The same with the gay part, if you really have a problem with it, do as ISIS and execute them. You can do that within the game limits, but it will be a consequence of your less than tolerant world views rather than game limitations.

See, infidel, according to your own views, you're being very islamophobic to portray me as a gay-killer. That also tends to fit your own stereotypical view of islamic people being murderers of gays, and if i'm not correct, it is hate speech which is punishable by law in the ever-so-tolerable land of Denmark. I'm going to let that slide and not report you here as such. Allah have mercy on your soul.

/s

Regarding the physical strengh part, why should it affect the use of a close combat weapon where technique is expected to play a bigger part than raw strength.

So you're saying that women are more technical than man? According to what scientific source? I gave every idea so far a scientific source. Yet you did not provide anything to back up that statement.

But I'll be very kind to you, and assume you're right, even if you have nothing to back that statement up.

I'm sure you know Ronda Rousey, former MMA champion, considered one of the most technical wrestlers in the world. Google "Ronda Gegard Mousasi wrestling". This is the top wrestler in the world sparring with an MMA fighter which is not considered to be a good wrestler.

Not convinced yet? Google "Karsten Braasch v the Williams Sisters". This is the top two women's tennis players trying to prove they can best the top men in tennis. This guy showed up and beat them with no effort at all. It didn't help he was not even in the top 30.

In both scenarios, the man could be seen as less technical, but eventually bested their female opponents by simply being physically stronger. The Williams sisters, in special, are very physically fit for women standards, and even still were bested by a man who was drinking and smoking WHILE PLAYING.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis)

[Deer87]

I'm gonna keep it relatively short.

Technique is referred to the use of weapons, you talk about mma, which is unarmed, and tennis, where strength correctly play a role. We could call that cherry picking.

Rimworld is neither Saudi Arabia or Denmark, my argument is that existing gender roles are not ultimate truths and in a sci-fi setting irrelevant as the development could have gone in any direction.

Isis is known for execution of homosexuels. I'm not talking against Muslims, I'm talking against violent intolerance.
Let.me turn it around, why do you want the gays out of the game?

If you want aspects like the female period to be a debuff in game mechanics, why not young men being impulsive and not think about consequences (look at statistics for fatal traffic accidents), by giving them a debuff to intellectual work.

With the whole Norm aspect, you might as well claim that pawns with darker skin should be less inclined to have high education background...

[mumblemumble]

It is topics like this that gives fuel to the more aggressive feminist movements, which, while a pain in the butt, have valid points when people return to old gender stereotypes like male engineers vs female nurses.

Whats wrong with these stereotypes? They are typically true, so whats the deal? women are more empathetic, men more practical and calculated. Stereotypes never exist unless theres some truth behind it.

Im a man, im married to a female engieneer, and among her and her friends from university i have no indication that the gals are more poorly suited for the job than their male counterparts.

I know a guy who survived a shotgun blast to the head. Shotguns are thus safe to shoot at peoples face.. ...yeah, see? Thats fallacious buddy.

Old "wisdom" would also say that men are better doctors and women are better nurses, yet in the later years there have been a surplus of women studying medicine, so in the next decades this "wisdom" will become history. At least in Denmark

Medicine has also changed DRASTICALLY in the past few years, far fewer doctors "do" things and they are all compartmentalized. Old doctors did anything from surgery, diet recommendations, amputations, patching wounds, removal of kidney stones, ect. So a title of "doctor" might as well mean "laborer in the medicine field". The better thing to ask is what do they DO. Show me a woman who sutures wounds, places bones, and works in the ER doing something more than intake / information gathering, and she will have my full respect...but a person whom JUST does intake, or takes stats, but never does the physical actions isn't as important IMO. they are essentially big fancy receptionists if all they do is paper work and questions. Also, theres a huge difference between a NURSE and DOCTOR. A nurse is there to do care for someone, to keep them happy, healthy, and well during their stay...a doctor is supposed to actually do operations, like bone setting, surgery, removal of foreign objects ect. So I don't care about anyones title, I care what they DO. Furthermore, I wish medicine was a far more simple, they refused to set my bone in my broken hand before, and even after an xray, they just gave a cast, which I promtly ripped off the next day and set it myself. Its fine now....though that last complaint is more modern medicine than women.

What we are looking at is gender roles in the society, and they can, luckily, shift.
Just look at different countries to see differences, so to claim something would be more "fitting" or "realistic" is just demanding that your (outdated) view of gender roles should be dominant.

Its not so much outdated, so much as what does xyz job require compared to what are the range of strengths / weaknesses of both sexes.

Imagine it like rimworld, with skills. Would you make your assassin cook, while your cook fights? Or would you make the assassin fight while the cook makes a meal for the assassin to come home to? yes, some assassins with RNG are amazing cooks, and some cooks are amazing fighters, but MOST cooks are better cooks than fighters, and assassins better fighters than cooks. more importantly, if you get a radio call for a cook asking for help from a raider, you ask yourself if you need another COOK, not fighter explicitly, as you GENERALIZE that the cook is better at cooking than fighting.

Considering this is a sci-fy game should leave the gender role argument totally redundant. If you want the 90's, don't play this game. It has interstellar space travel in it.

Why should sci fy NOT have gender roles again, considering they are realistically modeled??? Why do you presume sci fi means gender roles somehow vanish? Black holes cannot suck away gender roles without killing the people too, fyi.

The same with the gay part, if you really have a problem with it, do as ISIS and execute them. You can do that within the game limits, but it will be a consequence of your less than tolerant world views rather than game limitations.

I personally have no issues with gayness existing in game...short of a small desire for it to be curable / attainable via trauma. Also, I do not kill gays (I'm sympathetic), but I DID kill a trans character who was married to one of my colonists. That was a bit different though, as they MARRIED the starter colonist of my family based colony, and appeared out of nowhere, causing quite the rift.... That was absolutely unacceptable. Had they not done that, I would of let them stick around and make me nice art. disagreeing with me is one thing, bringing family into it is another... I treat gays the same manner. Fine with you generally (if not particularly fond) but if you risk the family, or safety, you may be in jeopardy

Regarding the physical strengh part, why should it affect the use of a close combat weapon where technique is expected to play a bigger part than raw strength.

Fun fact : I worked demolition for a few years (melee skill) and frankly no amount of technique would make up for not being able to swing the hammer hard enough to break the target.

Really, with melee, or frankly ANYTHING mechanical, technique is amazing, but is still MULTIPLIED by strength. You may have sledge hammer swinging down to a SCIENCE, but if you cannot physically swing it....yeeeaaah....no. You are USELESS if you don't have the muscle.

I also never ONCE saw a woman working that job. Saw them on CONSTRUCTION sites (measuring, cutting wood, putting in plumbing) but never demo.

I would say if an equation was put to it, it would be (S*3)T=E. Strength, technique, Efficiency. More detailed, every JOB would have a strength quota, for minimum required, recommended, and ideal. Minimum would be "can you EVEN lift this?", a sort of measure of "can you do this to save your mother?". recommended would be enough to do it without wasting a boatload of time DOING it. Capable, but not the best. Ideal is enough where, strength wise, you have more than enough. It hardly takes effort.

Now, of course, strength wont matter in low strength situations, but its vastly more important in high strength situations.

For instance, lets compare 2 men. Man A is very good with technique, but weak. Man B is very strong, but has awful technique (lets just assume technique is for ALL things)

First task is unscrewing tiny bolts. This is VERY low strength, high tech. This means man B is awful at this job, but man A is very good, as no strength almost is required.  Thus man A is a better fit.

Now 2nd task is lifting and stacking heavy boxes. GRANTED, man A could probably know a better method to LIFT them, but if he doesn't have the muscle to actually lift it at all, man B is the only option. Even if technique is working less than great, getting it DONE is much more important. One could even recommend man A teach man B, but man A simply will not be able to do the task if he does not meet the strength quota.

In the specific context of MELEE, whens the last time you fled in horror over a toddler trying to strangle you? I never have, I laugh and have a damn good time...If a grown MAN tried this, I go into fight mode.

Another experiment...go around and arm wrestle every girl you meet at the store..the  arm wrestle every guy..i promise the win ratio of women will be lower than men.  Apply this change in strength to combat (strength can mean the difference between a punch just dazing, and knocking out cold) and you can see my point.

If you want aspects like the female period to be a debuff in game mechanics, why not young men being impulsive and not think about consequences (look at statistics for fatal traffic accidents), by giving them a debuff to intellectual work.

I think this is a bit inaccurate, make YOUNG men a bit impulsive, more flirty, and needing exertion of energy. Though even then, I would say this is not helped by American / western culture. As for a debuff to intellectual work... ...uhm...what? IIRC more scientists are men, and they are not miserable. Infact, most intellectual minds I think of are men... ...and...I cannot think of a woman, to be quite honest.

But I will say, making young men a bit more rambunctious would be awesome, with wresting, play fighting, playing catch...

and dont men drive more? doesn't this skew statistics?

With the whole Norm aspect, you might as well claim that pawns with darker skin should be less inclined to have high education background...

Actually I disagree with MOST of the bell-curve book. I think a damn big portion of this is toxic culture (especially in America). This is even more evident as damn near every true blooded off the boat African I've met up ends up HATING African Americans "as a whole" because of the awful culture of MOST of the group, the only exceptions being very diehard Christians. I kinda feel nobody would get into space if behaving like a thug however, so I think THAT group would be weeded out a bit more. Thus, no, I don't think that. Also, nice try race baiting.

Rimworld is neither Saudi Arabia or Denmark, my argument is that existing gender roles are not ultimate truths and in a sci-fi setting irrelevant as the development could have gone in any direction.

But what makes you think it would suddenly go the direction of feminism? and biology tends to go a certain way. I fail to see how suddenly women would be the same as men.

Technique is referred to the use of weapons, you talk about mma, which is unarmed, and tennis, where strength correctly play a role. We could call that cherry picking.

wut?

I mentioned this before but a hammer is much more effective with more muscle, no amount of technique will EVER substitute for a strong arm. Even with a spear, no amount of technique can make the blade magically be pushed HARDER through cloth and armor.

Infact, bullets are a good comparison. Want to know why 38 specials hit lighter than 357s? Less powder...less "muscle" so to speak. Exact same BULLET pretty much,  but one with more power. Yes, a shooter with good aim might be able to beat a 357 wielder, using a 38, but a 357 will ALWAYS hit HARDER than a 38. Even if the bullet is exactly the same, the extra powder simply gets better results.

Another good analogy is engines and efficiency. Muscle is say, gasoline / electrical input, and technique is all the stuff which is used to make it work good....tight engine for a combustion engine, lubed up parts, optimizations, ect... This said, a little gokart engine will NEVER be more effective at output effectiveness than an engine of a truck. No amount of modifications and details will make it comparable, without FIRST having more muscle.

[daduhweewah]

I'm gonna keep it relatively short.

Technique is referred to the use of weapons, you talk about mma, which is unarmed, and tennis, where strength correctly play a role. We could call that cherry picking.

Rimworld is neither Saudi Arabia or Denmark, my argument is that existing gender roles are not ultimate truths and in a sci-fi setting irrelevant as the development could have gone in any direction.

Isis is known for execution of homosexuels. I'm not talking against Muslims, I'm talking against violent intolerance.
Let.me turn it around, why do you want the gays out of the game?

If you want aspects like the female period to be a debuff in game mechanics, why not young men being impulsive and not think about consequences (look at statistics for fatal traffic accidents), by giving them a debuff to intellectual work.

With the whole Norm aspect, you might as well claim that pawns with darker skin should be less inclined to have high education background...

Umm what? Wouldn't strength be far more important in combat than tennis?

This thread is awesome... Read my first response, since some of the feminist rights activists don't think it should be standard that women get nerfed in combat and other things and buffed in other things and same with men.

This WOULD OPEN more personality traits if done, where you could have masculine women and feminine men, which when considering that would be great and be true.

I don't know why it is so hard for progressives to just say "ok you win, that is correct" conservative minded people always want to use facts and data and liberal minded people always want to use "you should think" or "the correct way to feel about this is"

Personal opinion, and a long history of facts. That is what this is debating, and this thread in no way slanders women, if a woman was to read this and get offended then it is a woman I would never ever want to be around, as everything stated by OP has been true, and there have been several things that women have the perk over men in, buttttt because it is a stereotype that feminists and progressives don't like (when stereotypes are stereotypes BECAUSE THEY ARE REALITY) it is just not politically correct and you gotta CHECK OUR PRIVELEGE!

Also, as for the women endure pain better. I did not look this up but I feel like I have read something about this, it is actually (and I could be remembering wrong and should probably check this) that women and men feel different amounts of pain for the same activity on average. If a woman was to get shot by a .22 caliber rifle in the arm, and a man was to get shot by the same gun in the same exact place, the man would feel more because of what I would guess to be more pain nerves in the body, now that has nothing to do with enduring, as that is just probably going to be dictated by who has dealt with more physical pain in their life, as I don't think anyone who has never been hurt will endure any pain very well, but someone who has been physically hurt a lot will endure it better, and since men are more prone to get hurt I would naturally assume men endure pain better.

Hopefully I remember what I read and that above paragraph is not total jibberish.


"Women are funny, get over it"  - Eric Theodore Cartman, 2016

[Boston]

Asides from you lot all falling for a clear Troll thread (great job), I would just like to mention that I have lost whatever respect I have had for certain members of this forum.

Just throwing this out there. Your opinions on gender are disgusting and you should be ashamed. This isn't the 1800's, for fucks sakes. Stereotypes are harmful, and if they are based on reality, they are highly exaggerated, to the point of being absurd.

Are men, in general, stronger than women? Yes, of course, basic biology. Does that mean women are less capable in combat than men? No, of fucking course not, as most modern militaries will suggest. Since strength, dexterity and other aspects of biology you people are discussing don't even exist in the game, this whole thread is a waste of time and energy the readers can never get back.

Your parents should be ashamed of you, and if they aren't, don't contribute to the gene pool, PLEASE.

user was warned for this post: personal attack (last line)

[mumblemumble]

Asides from you lot all falling for a clear Troll thread (great job), I would just like to mention that I have lost whatever respect I have had for certain members of this forum.

Just throwing this out there. Your opinions on gender are disgusting and you should be ashamed. This isn't the 1800's, for fucks sakes. Stereotypes are harmful, and if they are based on reality, they are highly exaggerated, to the point of being absurd.

Are men, in general, stronger than women? Yes, of course, basic biology. Does that mean women are less capable in combat than men? No, of fucking course not, as most modern militaries will suggest. Since strength, dexterity and other aspects of biology you people are discussing don't even exist in the game, this whole thread is a waste of time and energy the readers can never get back.

Your parents should be ashamed of you, and if they aren't, don't contribute to the gene pool, PLEASE.

First off, this is a very charged post, saying you "lost respect" for people. Stereotypes are not as harmful as you say. Please explain exactly how it is harmful, WITHOUT citing someones FEELINGS getting hurt. Feelings are so incredibly subjective, that they are not OBJECTIVELY important. Stereotypes CAN be wrong, but exist because a LOT of the time they are right, they are a pattern which is common, like cats being weird and playful, dogs being loyal, men being strong, women being empathetic.... They aren't always true, but are true enough that its what we expect, and more often than not it IS true. Yes, there are times where people are stereotyped incorrectly, but this isn't commonly an issue, and is almost unheard of to actually harm someones life.

Second, you must understand COMBAT has many levels. A brawl, a gun battle, are both combat, but one holds physical strength at a MUCH higher importance. The reason why militaries use them much more is spies, intel officers, snipers, and other roles do not NEED strength as much, and women are better at the social / cognitive aspects. Meanwhile, CLUB BOUNCERS are almost always exclusively men, as are body guards. This is because in MELEE circumstances, men can HIT harder, PULL harder, SHOVE harder, have longer reach, more weight, have more mass to sustain MORE punishment...everything about them makes them superior for THAT task. And yes, we realize strength and dexterity don't exist, but they should IMO.  Along with possibly endurance, modifying the general health pool by a few percentage points.

Also, keep the flaming to a minimal buddy, we try to keep ludeon a nice place, even if opinions here aren't always agreeing. Insults like that are not appreciated. Just because you don't appreciate someones views, does NOT mean its ok to bring up someones family into the matter. Its off topic, and a personal attack which isn't remotely related, its ONLY done as ad hominin.

And even if YOU think its a troll thread, there are still good points to be salvaged.

If you disagree, FINE....make your argument with logical points to CONVINCE me I am incorrect. Otherwise, if all you have is insults, you might want to leave the thread to cool off.

[Ramsis]

Hi there fellow RimWorlders, going to have to ask you all to tone it waaaaaaaaaay down before I start bashing heads. Think you all can learn to not treat each other poorly and have a fun argument?

[Tynan]

I also just want to drop in. I haven't read the thread.

I'll just say that I do value the forums here as a place where people of very different views can communicate. That's why we really try to let people have their say, even if their views step past the mainstream of the moment.

This requires everyone to set a higher standard for civility than in most places. Since we don't just silence every possible point of conflict, and we don't enforce one view, multiple views have to live next to each other. You have to be able to communicate without attacking.

Please interpret others' words in the most charitable way possible - remember we're all just flawed people trying to come to the best conclusions we can, according to our own values. If something seems absolutely absurd to you, it's likely based on a deeper reasoning or information you didn't think of or haven't heard before. This goes for everyone in all arguments.

It wouldn't be a terrible idea for anyone getting heated here to take a short break from the thread.

Again, I do value the interaction of different views. To a degree that I think is unusual in online forums. But y'all have to conduct that in a unusually adult way. Let's live up to this and make this a great forum. Nobody ever learned anything in an echo chamber anyway.

Thanks.

[pfhorrest]

A thought: in a character selection mode where you DON'T pick your character's traits or allocate a fixed # of points towards skills & attributes, it makes no sense to penalize or advantage any given character based on gender after the fact. The random generator can be thought of as encompassing the whole range of variance in skills & abilities.

[Razzoriel]

I also just want to drop in. I haven't read the thread.

I'll just say that I do value the forums here as a place where people of very different views can communicate. That's why we really try to let people have their say, even if their views step past the mainstream of the moment.

This requires everyone to set a higher standard for civility than in most places. Since we don't just silence every possible point of conflict, and we don't enforce one view, multiple views have to live next to each other. You have to be able to communicate without attacking.

Please interpret others' words in the most charitable way possible - remember we're all just flawed people trying to come to the best conclusions we can, according to our own values. If something seems absolutely absurd to you, it's likely based on a deeper reasoning or information you didn't think of or haven't heard before. This goes for everyone in all arguments.

It wouldn't be a terrible idea for anyone getting heated here to take a short break from the thread.

Again, I do value the interaction of different views. To a degree that I think is unusual in online forums. But y'all have to conduct that in a unusually adult way. Let's live up to this and make this a great forum. Nobody ever learned anything in an echo chamber anyway.

Thanks.

I've tried to be as civil as possible, with a small dose of sarcasm exactly when there is no thought given to the arguments being had. Obviously, my objective is first and foremost improve the game experience. However, when a dissenting opinion gets dismissed as a troll thread/post, when the "troll" is backing his opinions with evidence in both the anedoctal and scientific fields and the one calling others trolls are using shame tactics and fallacies exactly like the one in the RPS hitpiece, it's quite obvious who is trying to add to the game.

Don't do the mistake other companies are doing by pandering to these people, Tynan.

[mumblemumble]

I also just want to drop in. I haven't read the thread.

I'll just say that I do value the forums here as a place where people of very different views can communicate. That's why we really try to let people have their say, even if their views step past the mainstream of the moment.

This requires everyone to set a higher standard for civility than in most places. Since we don't just silence every possible point of conflict, and we don't enforce one view, multiple views have to live next to each other. You have to be able to communicate without attacking.

Please interpret others' words in the most charitable way possible - remember we're all just flawed people trying to come to the best conclusions we can, according to our own values. If something seems absolutely absurd to you, it's likely based on a deeper reasoning or information you didn't think of or haven't heard before. This goes for everyone in all arguments.

It wouldn't be a terrible idea for anyone getting heated here to take a short break from the thread.

Again, I do value the interaction of different views. To a degree that I think is unusual in online forums. But y'all have to conduct that in a unusually adult way. Let's live up to this and make this a great forum. Nobody ever learned anything in an echo chamber anyway.

Thanks.

I've tried to be as civil as possible, with a small dose of sarcasm exactly when there is no thought given to the arguments being had. Obviously, my objective is first and foremost improve the game experience. However, when a dissenting opinion gets dismissed as a troll thread/post, when the "troll" is backing his opinions with evidence in both the anedoctal and scientific fields and the one calling others trolls are using shame tactics and fallacies exactly like the one in the RPS hitpiece, it's quite obvious who is trying to add to the game.

Don't do the mistake other companies are doing by pandering to these people, Tynan.

I really agree with this sentiment, often time these people scream they wont buy it as a scare tactic, when there's nothing really behind it. Or even more common, people who never heard of rim-world will vow "never to buy it" when they never even wanted it anyway.

Plus, the RPS article I'm sure got a spike in sales from people who detested the tone. I heard several folks saying they would purchase BECAUSE of the article...

Actually looking at steam spy http://steamspy.com/app/294100 Indicates that on the 1st, shortly before the article hit owners went DOWN, but AFTER the article hit, owners went steadily up. Granted, I'm not statistics expert, but it seems to suggest people are buying the game MORE since then. (But this could be due to people getting paid at the pay period possibly...)

Granted, I might be very wrong, but who knows. I share the sentiment that, in my opinion, tynan should ignore the SJW bull, and do what he does best, which is being glorious tynan, and making cool updates for rimworld. And if SJW's don't like it, its their issue.

Even separate from gender, strength as a stat sounds great, so hauling, construction, melee isn't JUST tied with consciousness and manipulation. But strength higher among men, in a randomized BELLCURVE would be even better. This way MOST women are weaker, but hardass women still exist.

[daduhweewah]

Tynan, great post... much appreciated.

Mumble, very eloquent posts in this thread.
Razz, very eloquent posts in this thread.

Its not the 1800s though guys! Women are much stronger today than they were then! (that's what I got out of that) Regardless, you can not argue or debate with those people. They just scream and beat their chests the loudest like cave men while accusing you of being the cave man. There is literally no purpose in engaging, they never have facts, they never have substance, they just tell you that you are a piece of crap and you should not breed, and similar insults. It is absolutely pointless, and they will absolutely positively never ever ever see your side of things, and you will always be a piece of shit for seeing things like you do, when the way you see things is actually the rational way not the emotionally charged way.

My 2 cents.

[mumblemumble]

To be honest, I think some women are much WEAKER than before, due to the safe space culture where criticism isn't allowed. (iron sharpens iron) And besides that, physically women are STILL weaker than men on average! So even if they did become stronger (no evidence on this) physically, they are still not equal with men in strength.

Btw, I did say women should have higher cognitive ability, and empathy...meaning women are better snipers, better traders better at detail work like tailoring and crafting.. I am not by any means saying men are better at EVERYTHING. They aren't.

In this way I REALLY support the 90s idea, of men being men, women being women....but never to say that men or women CANNOT do stuff the opposite sex does.

[jmababa]

Um, ok, I know you are going for a 90's view but this seems more like Victorian times.

You may consider this funny, but I would consider it silly and useless as a suggestion, and frankly sexist.

-3 Melee, +1 Social, +1 Medicine, +1 Artistic
Yes it is that's why it's in Medieval mod that one he wants those skill but you have to be a backstory medivial one of em has it but downside no hauling no cleaning WTF that why i never take that