The Witcher series

[m7600]

Was it disproved?

Yes.

How do you prove something doesn't exist?

You do a scientific experiment and see the results. If the results indicate that it doesn't exist, then one of three things might have happened: 1) it doesn't exist, 2) the experiment wasn't done correctly, or 3) both. The fourth result, (4), can never happen by definition, because it would be equivalent to saying "none", and if "none" is the case in this case, then: 4) it exists and the experiment was done correctly. But that doesn't prove that something doesn't exist, it only proves that something does exist.

Totally agree. But the Pythagorean Theorem had way more sex appeal back in those days. Nowadays, it's just a creepy uncle showing up to your geometry class. Nobody really respects it anymore, just like nobody respects midochlorians.

I think that it's not a matter of respect, but of truth. Pythagoreanism (understood as a set of philosophical beliefs that are unique to that school) is false on all accounts.

 

[JustKneller]

You do a scientific experiment and see the results. If the results indicate that it doesn't exist, then one of three things might have happened: 1) it doesn't exist, 2) the experiment wasn't done correctly, or 3) both. The fourth result, (4), can never happen by definition, because it would be equivalent to saying "none", and if "none" is the case in this case, then: 4) it exists and the experiment was done correctly. But that doesn't prove that something doesn't exist, it only proves that something does exist.

I have to disagree with that. Even with the scientific method, you can't prove something doesn't exist. The closest you can get is that you failed to support the hypothesis.

Pythagoreanism (understood as a set of philosophical beliefs that are unique to that school) is false on all accounts.

That seems contradictory to an absolutist view of reality, which you expressed.

But the million dollar question is, what does this all have to do with The Witcher?

 

[m7600]

I have to disagree with that. Even with the scientific method, you can't prove something doesn't exist. The closest you can get is that you failed to support the hypothesis.

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that, then. This topic might be better suited for Philosophical Musings than for the Witcher thread. I endorse scientism, and I'm unapologetic about it.

That seems contradictory to an absolutist view of reality, which you expressed.

I don't think so, honestly. Mathematics isn't part of reality, as far as I'm concerned. Mathematical objects are just brain processes. I'm open to the idea that they're not, obviously. But I've never seen a convincing case for that. I don't buy Platonic accounts of mathematics, no matter what color of stripes such accounts have.

But the million dollar question is, what does this all have to do with The Witcher?

My original question was: what is the difference between men and women based on, in The Witcher's world? Genes? Or something else (i.e., a Hard Magic explanation, such as midichlorians)?

 

[JustKneller]

My original question was: what is the difference between men and women based on, in The Witcher's world? Genes? Or something else (i.e., a Hard Magic explanation, such as midichlorians)?

Are gender dynamics something that is significantly part of the narrative in that game? I mean, most fantasy settings (and settings in general) take for granted some form of gender conventions and don't explicitly explore them.

 

[m7600]

Are gender dynamics something that is significantly part of the narrative in that game? I mean, most fantasy settings (and settings in general) take for granted some form of gender conventions and don't explicitly explore them.

Hmmm.... my Lore on Gender Dynamics is low, you could say. As in, I don't think that anyone has much scientific knowledge about that. You should tell us. You're the sociologist / Game Theorist dude, aren't you?

 

[m7600]

I do, however, have quite good Lore in Biology, including Human Biology. But Gender Dynamics are sociological phenomena, it's not a series of biological phenomena. Not all animals have genders. Sea Sponges are animals, they don't have gender. Jellyfish are animals, they don't have gender. Or do they? You tell me.

 

[JustKneller]

Hmmm.... my Lore on Gender Dynamics is low, you could say. As in, I don't think that anyone has much scientific knowledge about that. You should tell us. You're the sociologist / Game Theorist dude, aren't you?

I suppose. By why do gender differences matter in a game like The Witcher versus Baldur's Gate, Pillars of Eternity, or Final Fantasy? Or, is there a reason we're curious about the cause of gender differences in this game?

I do, however, have quite good Lore in Biology, including Human Biology. But Gender Dynamics are sociological phenomena, it's not a series of biological phenomena. Not all animals have genders. Sea Sponges are animals, they don't have gender. Jellyfish are animals, they don't have gender. Or do they? You tell me.

Actually, no animals have gender, they just have sexes. Gender is entirely a social construction based on culturally valued criteria.

 

[m7600]

I suppose. By why do gender differences matter in a game like The Witcher versus Baldur's Gate, Pillars of Eternity, or Final Fantasy?

Because the entire premise that all these kind folk plus ourselves have been discussing this whole time is if Ciri (being a woman) can be a Witcher just as much as Geralt (being a man) can. And the devs have said, "she can". Does that sit well with the fanbase and the lore? It sits well with the lore, apparently (though I'm ignorant in such matters), but it does not sit well with all of the fanbase. Apparently.

Actually, no animals have gender, they just have sexes.

Hmmm... are there sexless animals? I think not, though I could be wrong.

Gender is entirely a social construction based on culturally valued criteria.

Do I agree with this? I'm not so sure.

 

[JustKneller]

Because the entire premise that all these kind folk plus ourselves have been discussing this whole time is if Ciri (being a woman) can be a Witcher just as much as Geralt (being a man) can. And the devs have said, "she can". Does that sit well with the fanbase and the lore? It sits well with the lore, apparently (though I'm ignorant in such matters), but it does not sit well with all of the fanbase. Apparently.

On one hand, I don't understand why anyone would give a shit whether or not a Witcher (whatever the hell that is) can be a woman or a man. Then again, I know this hobby and how women are often portrayed and perceived and so I could see why some neckbeards would get their Star Wars panties in a twist about it. Case in point, this came up in a conversation I was having regarding a character concept for a play-by-post game. I was a tad annoyed because I couldn't find appropriate art for a (human female) character with low Charisma who wasn't terribly dainty or attractive. I ended up having to make my own character portrait, but I'm a shit artist so it looks like this:

Spoiler: fantasy art woman

Hmmm... are there sexless animals? I think not, though I could be wrong.

Probably not. Some animals are hermaphrodites, but I would consider it the opposite of sexless since they have all the sexes.

 

[m7600]

Yes, we seem to be in general agreement here, @JustKneller . Metaphorically speaking, using your "Game Theory", it is as if you and I were Generals, and we have achieved an agreement. Negotiation succeeded? Possibly.

 

[JustKneller]

as if you and I were Generals, and we have achieved an agreement.

And so the villagers rejoice!

 

[m7600]

And so the villagers rejoice!

No they don't, lol. We can burn any village to the ground, if we're Generals. I don't know about you, but I'm most definitely not a general. And I would never like to be one, in all honesty.

 

[JustKneller]

We can burn a village to the ground, but they rejoice because we don't. On top of that, we may have negotiated our way to removing the barriers to women becoming Witchers. That's not bad for a Thursday night, if you ask me.

 

[m7600]

we may have negotiated our way to removing the barriers to women becoming Witchers.

I don't think so, it has nothing to do with Witcher Lore.

That's not bad for a Thursday night, if you ask me.

Actually, it is. Any way you look at it. It's terrible.

 

[Cahir]

I'm still not convinced Ciri cannot be a witcher. Yes, there is 100% mortality rate on girls who are undergoing Trial of Grasses, but even if this may sound as a little "lazy" explanation (and I admit, it kind of is, unless it will be expanded in a way that makes it more interesting), I'm still not buying Ciri's blood cannot make her resilient enough to survive it. I also can't see why the idea there was an ancient school of witchers who perfected the formula, to work on Ciri (not necessarily on all girls). Maybe all they lacked was a testing subject (one is not seeing a woman with an elder blood everyday).

I agree with @Bruce_O there are traps here, waiting for developers, of reaching for oversimplified explanations, that would make the whole thing unbelievable, but CDPR writers has proven to us many times already, they are masters of their craft. Let them cook.

As for Ciri being a protagonist, I admit I wasn't happy at first, but not because I have anything against her, or more broadly, anything against playing a female character. It's just seeing how well CDPR performed with CP2077 protagonist, I cannot see why this could also not work in TW4. I simply hoped to play a custom witcher, with a fixed background (like V or Shepard from Mass Effect). But now I'm soaking the idea of playing as witcher Ciri and I see now, it was always meant to be Ciri. I just hope she will much more customizable than Geralt, also visually.

 

[JustKneller]

I'm still not convinced Ciri cannot be a witcher. Yes, there is 100% mortality rate on girls who are undergoing Trial of Grasses

I'm not sure what intentionally writing in gender discrimination adds to the story. Like, what value does this bring to the lore?

 

[m7600]

I'm not sure what intentionally writing in gender discrimination adds to the story. Like, what value does this bring to the lore?

None. From what I can make of it, it's a "boy's club" type of thing. And it's hard-coded into the lore of that setting / game. The devs changed that up, so there's a bit of a fuss.

 

[JustKneller]

None. From what I can make of it, it's a "boy's club" type of thing. And it's hard-coded into the lore of that setting / game. The devs changed that up, so there's a bit of a fuss.

This reminds me of the uproar that came out of Siege of Dragonspear (and to a lesser extent, the EE editions). I was never interested in either, but people seemed to get up in arms about the wokeness of it. However, it got rather messy because there was also a camp of people who where up in arms because people getting up in arms about the woke-ness were overshadowing the fact that it wasn't very good, even without the woke-ness.

Well, if devs are going to establish a "boy's club" premise, they knew the risks when they took the job. I honestly don't see the point of creating these narratives. There's little to gain and a lot to lose.

 

[m7600]

This reminds me of the uproar that came out of Siege of Dragonspear (and to a lesser extent, the EE editions).

It's a bit like that, only more baseline. We're not talking about trans characters, or black lesbian vampires, or bisexual half-orcs. They're trying to decide if a woman can be a Witcher.

I honestly don't see the point of creating these narratives. There's little to gain and a lot to lose.

Well, @Cahir said that he read the books 25 years ago, so there's that.

Edit: the first book was published in 1986.

The Witcher - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[O_Bruce]

It's pretty cute that we have reached the point of mentioning "gender discrimination". I guess it would be pretty progressive to write a story in which women were allowed, and encouraged to, go through torturous procedures with insane high mortality rates and lasting, unpleasant, consequences for their entire lives, all in order to beat allegations of the Witcher being "boy's club".

Rethortics like these can only be made if one has absolutely no idea what Witcher, as a profession (excluding the most basic definition), is and what it entails. I guess that in the same instance, valuing concepts over people/characters also applies.

Sometimes I really don't want to live on this planet anymore.