Why do so many men want to see women as warriors when they're very obviously not designed for that?

No barmaid worth their wages wears heels! Only bar-sluts that are concerned with image rather than doing the job that they're paid for...

It's a failure for leading us to the state we're in. Hopefully in the future, we'll avoid our past mistakes.

>muh SJWs

It's because men and women are equal in the modern world and most people who aren't complete autists actually like that. Men enjoy the concept of having an equal partnership with their woman.

The appeal in the "ladyknight" shit that's gotten plastered around here lately isn't usually a femdom one, it's the implicit idea that Ms. Beautiful Lady Warrior is the counterpart to *user*, the strong male warrior, and that the two will go around fighting monsters together in equal partnership. It reflects changing cultural attitudes.

Plus there's more women in RPGs and fantasy in general now that it's no longer super uncool, and they like to be represented. Sure, women aren't designed to be warriors, but neither are a good many of the men who post on Veeky Forums.

That's fucking adorable.

Because roleplaying games are about fantasy, not reality... and because alot of people here want to try something different than their actual life and/or are waifufags who like the idea of playing badass anime women.

>Why do people like scat or snuff?
Fetishes are weird and people like a a lot of different kinds. Or they just like the aesthetics of female in armor, and it’s different point of view.

Darn right it is. Giant princesses are kino.

I like them, I just don't like the play them. But then again, they aren't mutually exclusive.

>Ms. Beautiful Lady Warrior is the counterpart to *user*, the strong male warrior, and that the two will go around fighting monsters together in equal partnership.

I've gotten the opposite impression. Most people here who stroke their dicks to ladyknights usually bring up a fantasy of being "rescued" by her, usually from muggers and bandits. It's become obvious to me the ladyknight thing on Veeky Forums has more to do with mommy issues and harem anime than actually finding equality attractive.

Why the fuck do people like scat and snuff?

...

Eating too much glue, vanilla master race!!

Why can't you go around adventuring in an equal partnership with a feminine and nurturing healer gf?
>it reflects changing cultural attitudes
It reflects artificial cultural attitudes

Despite every man ever, wanting to get the women they know into games with an amazing passion, they tend to be less interested than guys are. SJWs are ideologically obligated to ignore biological differences so they are forced to say this is because women are incapable of identifying with characters who have a penis, and since most warriors are men, women are scared off by this. So if they just trade out the genitals of the characters women will finally be able to appreciate it.

yeah this is pretty much it

Well, certainly there's some fair overlap. But to me the ladyknight fantasy seems more about just having a partner.

That's not to say it can't necessarily be both at once. People look for partners who can fill the gaps where they feel lacking. It's not unreasonable for people who don't feel particularly strong or powerful to desire a partner who has those things in spades.

Strong women have been my fetish since before SJWs were invented, user.

soyboys don't have the will to dominate and would prefer to be dominated, news at 11

>Strong women have been my fetish since before SJWs were invented, user
>The French Revolution was a period of far-reaching social and political upheaval in France that lasted from 1789 until 1799,
I'm impressed.

>It's not unreasonable for people who don't feel particularly strong or powerful to desire a partner who has those things in spades.

I don't begrudge people that. But I do get squicked out by people who are clearly into ladyknights because they want a protector figure who they can fuck. I don't subscribe to hyper-traditional masculine roles of protecting da wimminfolk, but a healthy and respectable man should be able to stand up for himself.

Maybe I'm just cynical, but when I see ladyknight posts I see a betafag jerking off to how badly he wants a bangmommy and I think that's creepy.

"Men" of today are weak-willed betas.

>Why can't you go around adventuring in an equal partnership with a feminine and nurturing healer gf?
>Why can't you
>you
And because there's a fair element of subservience in the healer archetype. It's hardly equal, as least as far as the undertones. The fact that "healer" is seen as a "feminine" role in the first place makes that apparent. Are doctors feminine? Not really. It's the idea of being behind the line and tending to the people doing the "real work" that is implied by the role.

>It reflects artificial cultural attitudes
I don't really understand that. Just because you don't feel the same way doesn't mean it's somehow not "real." Attitudes change, and it's increasingly okay for people to just like what they like rather than what they're expected to. That's a result of the internet, not of anyone pushing their ideology.

>when I see ladyknight posts I see a betafag jerking off to how badly he wants a bangmommy and I think that's creepy.
You can definitely play "spot the difference" between what is appealing about the concept between one user and another.

Some people who want a dominant lady are subconsciously looking for a mother figure. That said, I don't really think it's accurate to chock people who get off on strong, muscular, aggressive women up to "mommy issues."

>That said, I don't really think it's accurate to chock people who get off on strong, muscular, aggressive women up to "mommy issues."

No, but I can apply that to fapposts where anons talk about how they want a ladyknight to save them from attackers, then dress their wounds and reassure them everything will be fine. That's the kind of shit I'm talking about. Liking muscly women alone doesn't mean you have mommy issues, it means you have taste.

Virgin Traditionalist GM
>Sticks to the Tolkienesque views on fantasy.
>Tries to keep everything "realistic"
>Takes his games seriously, constantly tries to think of adventures that other people would find fun.

Chad Fantasy GM
>Has an equal amount of warrior and princess women, sometimes they're warrior princesses.
>Throws in a few traps as well, maybe a tomboy or two, maybe a few overly gay characters. But he does it all just because it's fun.
>Doesn't take anything seriously, makes adventures that sound fun to him.

>that other people would find fun.
>that sound fun to him.
These are mixed up

...

No, the insecure virgin is overly concerned with what people think of his stories and adventures, so tries to appeal to them as much as possible.

The Chad Crafter of Stories writes for himself, confident his audience will appreciate it because of that very authenticity.

Most of the time I find it better when a GM writes something that they think would be fun rather than trying to think of something that would impress other people. The adventures feel way more genuine that way.

I haven’t thought about it that way. Hmm, ok

Current culture is the result of people with money and power having more ways to influence and control your life than ever before.
Hence why it can be boiled down to commercialism and infantilization/feminization.

If the culture was genuine Trump wouldn't have won, Brexit wouldn't have happened, and Ghostbusters (2016) second sequel would be filming right now.

Kill yourself applesponge

A good bit of advice I once received is run the game you would want to play in. Whether it'll actually be successful is up in the air, but the game will definitely feel more sincere and you'll be more invested in it.

Traditionalism is the rebel who doesn't care what others think in current year tho

This isn't even a GM thing, it's an art thing in general. Authors, TV writers, whatever, as soon as a creator starts making what they think their audience wants instead of what they set out to make or what they think will be good, it usually goes to shit. People don't really know what they want until it is given to them.

Said the weak-willed beta

>Why do so many men want to see women as warriors when they're very obviously not designed for that?
I can answer this question extensively, but I doubt you will enjoy the answer.

The problem lies in the fact that I'm a 90's kid, a product of my time and the ideas and propaganda I've been fed. From day one I've been told by my environment and the media that men and women are equal, that in the past women were oppressed and now they're doing so much better and that in certain ways they're superior to men. Being the dumb little child that I was, I ate it all up without a second thought. What you do need to realize is that this deeply ingrained belief combined with some other experiences and sentiments during puberty (inadequacy, insecurity and loneliness) creates certain expectations of women. I expected them to be strong, protective and to basically assume the role a man usually assumes in a traditional relationship. If they're our equals they're more than able to do that, right?

By the time I hit my early 20s the realization sunk in that women are petty, irrational, selfish, and worst of all weak (in the broadest sense possible). Ask yourself what happens when you put a statue on a high pedestal and someone suddenly and violently removes that pedestal. There's an eardeafening crash that leaves you reeling for a moment, and when you open your eyes again the beauty you previously saw is gone. All that is left is something ugly, useless, a waste of space... trash. If you enjoy clean and orderly environments, it's only a matter of time before the trash begins annoying you. That's where I am in life now: feminism has ruined women for me, and I can forgive neither feminists nor women >implying there's a difference for that.

Had I been told this from the start and raised among women and girls who acknowledged this, perhaps I could find their incompetence charming in a way. But I guess we'll never know.

So your answer is you are a stupid faggot?

Yes, thank God good old traditional fearmongering is winning the day, instead of those nasty elites pushing all that equality on us so they can... uh... well, not really sure how they profit from that, but I'm sure it's there.

Pretty much. An intelligent child wouldn't drink the Kool-Aid and ask for seconds.

Is this pasta? If so, then take it back. I ordered the filet.

This

If you use fucking Veeky Forums, let alone Veeky Forums, than you have no right to call anyone else a beta

...

well said

Because confidence and competence is sexy.

Probably just redditing

it does make you wonder why gen z seems to be rejecting the propaganda while millenials like this ate it up so readily

I think this is being too harsh. "Treat others as you want to be treated" is a core value of the 90s. And it doesn't work, because people are dumb, selfish animals, and everyone preys on people with that mentality.

Congrats, user, you were raised correctly in an incorrect world.

The generation that's too busy filming their own farts on snapchat isn't capable of learning ANYTHING, let alone absorbing propaganda.

Gen Z also fucking eats detergent pods so I'm reluctant to endorse their intelligence.

That post could been some stupid pasta as well but either way: stay away from /r9k/ it kills brain cells.
Said the moron.
t. stupid millennial that does not know what millennials are

>What about princes and serving boys?
What do you think nuns do to choir boys? It's not just priests that sexually assault them.

I don't like people who are walked over. I don't mind princesses and barmaids, but I'm not going to play as a princess or barmaid with no real agency. I'm not here to be an average joe who accomplishes nothing. We have the real world for that. If I'm going to have a character or tell a story I want it to be exceptional. I want them to have agency and competence. I want someone who will stand up for themselves and do so competently. That doesn't always means violence. A princess who is a master of manipulation or politics will have the most effective agency in a political sphere. That's still fun and interesting. A bumbling princess who just gets kidnapped and that's the end of it isn't.

Why do women do better than men in school?
Why are so drastically fewer women criminals than men?
why did slave masters in the US elevate the women and put them in charge of the other slaves?

Why do we always have to have at least one /pol/ or /r9k/ thread in the catalog?

It's just a mole right now, but soon it's going to turn into the same tumor that overtook /v/ and /tv/

Can a woman not have these traits without masquerading as a man?

i think men always liked female warriors, it's the tomboy appeal; male-ish personality that's not as annoying as a normal woman, but a woman's body.

she's like a bro you can fuck.

Yeah, mommy issues for sure. On top of that these are men who usually take on a feminine role in relationships (all relationships, not just romantic ones). So these fantasies also empower them in a perverse way. The Warrior Princess is emasculating the kinds of men who have relegated them to submissive positions in real life and hence have cut off their access to the affections of women. At least in the mind of the nerd, as he can't accept women having agency which is also why they feel comfortable turning them into superpowered mommy gf props.

Women overwhelmingly don't have these fantasies. A lot of the options for character creation in CRPGs are specifically put there to appeal to women based on market research and they aren't the options which men choose for their Admiral Mommy avatar. "Empowering" women and "equality" doesn't enter into the fantasy at all. To the extent that it is about equality it isn't gender equality but equality of sexual attraction between men women want and men women don't.

This whole thing is basically a Barclay episode Star Trek TNG where he casts Riker as the villain and Troi as some benevolent actor in his holodeck fantasy, except worst as the Troi stand-in is cast as the hero doing the emasculating on behalf of the Barclay damsel. Half-fag nerds also don't realize that airing these fantasies publicly is supposed to be embarrassing. Unfortunately this lack of shame is really the principle source of their problems in the first place.

Lots of women who play warrior archetypes often play male characters or explicitly mannish lesbians. The problem you are witnessing is that like 80% of feminist activists and the most obnoxious ones are men, as women aren't really interested in getting in people's faces to push radical politics nearly as much as men are either.

Because I love my wife as the warrior queen she is. Someone who can fight life with me, and sometimes she is the one saving me. And to all drumpfsters out there: keep pleasing yourself with "muh male superiority" as long as you like. What I learned is that Humanity wins, not male or female (or anything between).

user, you seem like you've got a manifesto I really want to read.

I love the kind of woman who can kick my ass.

Stop it /pol/. You're not fooling anyone

Also, nobody actually uses the word drumpf anymore

You're talking out your ass. You've got no basis for any of that, you just make the assumption that "guys who like strong women = submissive feminine men" because reasons.

You're a moron who doesn't get out much.

t. submissive feminine man

>the nerd [...] can't accept women having agency
>Which also why they feel comfortable turning them into [hyperagents]

>"Women overwhelmingly don't have these fantasies" says man who has never seen a woman's romance novel cover, let alone read one
>Let's also not forget about the best selling romance series of all time
But you're not going to imply women have daddy issues, I'd wager. Me neither, I'd say "daddy issues" is the basic modus operandi for women, but I'm not a hypocrite about it.

Now that I think about it, feminists do tend to treat "strong independent womyn who don't need no man" in the same way they treat sex positivity: it's fine until men start enjoying it, because when men start enjoying it there's something wrong with them (daddy issues, perverts). But men aren't allowed to enjoy the opposite either because then there's something wrong with them too (patriarchs who are afraid of strong women, Religious Right backwards oppressive shitlords). That's the problem with feminism: men aren't allowed to enjoy ANYTHING because, in order to sustain the very fragile belief of total equality between the genders, women must see micro-agressions EVERYWHERE in order to justify that they can never live up to that ideological equality.

It's like I said earlier: if women and men are truly equal, then why aren't their social roles interchangeable? Because they aren't equal.

>I think this is being too harsh.
Perhaps. I fully acknowledge that as a possibility. Hence the statue analogy: if the pedestal was never there, perhaps the statue would still be pleasant to look at.

>Muh golden rule
Not a 90's value friend, it predates even Christianity in one form or another. Even then it doesn't imply total equality between men and women. Not even close.

You know. The whole badass knight woman who harbors the desire to be someone's loving wife and sort of conform to gender roles in her society has really made me want to do something else I know I'll never get to play.

I'd like to play a badass drow male, who has embraced good in his life, but still has that yearning for his traditional gender role.

I'd love to do this alongside the badass knight woman. He respects her for her strength, the goodness in her heart, and he so wants to show it by wearing a collar for her and calling her 'mistress'.

I love the idea of meeting someone and he's just as armored as her. Upon introductions he refers to her as 'mistress' and she starts blushing furiously because it's embarrassing to her but deep down she kinda likes it.

As an actual femdom fetishist, I think women should be under sharia tiers of social and legal oppression. Fetishes aren't cool if they're not taboo. No appeal on strong women on bed if strong women are common out there.

t. submissive feminine boy

And here's the problem, you ask why aren't social roles interchangeable. But in a fantasy world, one where the shitty aspects of reality like how dreadfully dull being a soldier can be and the sheer amount of filth present in a pre-18th century city can be ignored for the sake of making it more enjoyable, why can't this inequality also be ignored?

Really masculine men do tend to be attracted to really feminine women

Just accept maybe when it comes to women you are feminine, no one is gonna crucify you for that, in fact they will appreaciate the fact you own your preferences instead of pointlessly trying to subvert the standard

Because an interesting military campaign and proper hygiene in a major city is a lot more realistic than women who are equal to men. The previous two are unlikely in a pre-modern context but achievable, the latter is a biological impossibility that would ruin intergender relations even more than they already are if it were possible.

Not that user, but one might similarly imply that if you're afraid of strong, powerful women it's because you aren't confident enough in your own masculinity and feel the need to have a submissive partner to reassure you.

>if women and men are truly equal, then why aren't their social roles interchangeable?
...Are they not? That seems to be increasingly the case

“You are sexist and evil. What do you mean that’s not an argument? Fuck off!” And then you get banned.

If I were to actually answer your question, I would be banned from HERE, too. You should be smarter than you are and just not post here.

This sounds nice, but there’s nothing wrong with regular women if you’ve ever been with them. Tomboys are top tier though

Pre-18th century is a lot of time to generalize

...

>Can a woman not have these traits without masquerading as a man?
Yes. That's the problem with even discussing this in the context of women. Talking about women in regards to this is basically as off topic as discussing the perspective of women as it relates to what kind of lube is good for wanking. Women aren't involved in this fantasy outside of their ability to look and sound pretty. The fantasy is fundamentally about psychosocially excising women from the realm of moral goodness which exists wholly within the realm of male behavior and stereotypes in the minds of the people who actually brought this sexual fetish into the hobby and broader culture.

Yeah, because cities were filthy prior to then, I don't just mean a couple of centuries prior, I mean all the way back to the dawn of cities as a concept

Major cities still are filthy today unless they aren't filled to the brim with undesirables like in East Asia

Reminder that warlocks are the male equivalent of lady warriors

How so?

Jesus Christ that cringe

I enjoy fantasy settings that reflect real life historical periods. It never occurred to me to change simple things like gender roles until I saw all the irrational, overly political people who freak out about it.

The sanitised, high fantasy, modern morality with swords crap you get in current D&D type games does not appeal to me in the slightest.

Everyone wants a capable partner. The pleasure of dominating your partner is transient and engenders disdain rather than affection. A partner who is string and capable in a way you can respect is attractive.

Combine this with the fact a warrior woman is likely to be physically fit, which is in itself attractive, and the idea has an allure yes? Even if you don't want a strong partner, the fantasy of dominating a stronger being makes you that much stronger, and the idea of being cared for by someone stronger than you means you have value - a sense many men these days don't have

How the fuck is this thread still up it has nothing to do with this board and is some sort of autistic /pol/ bait where people can ONLY fantasize about what OP perceives as """design"""

But strength isn't feminine, as a man I just can't ignore my attraction to femininity enough to enjoy tomboys

Someone does not understand how dom/sub relationships work. If you disrespect your partner for being a submissive/less strong you are not a very mature person.

Also its just unrealistic to judge women for being weaker than men, that is just how biology works.

>It's because men and women are equal in the modern world and most people who aren't complete autists actually like that.

What do you mean by this? If you simply mean that men and women should have the same rights then sure.They do

But if you mean they are completely equal biologically and mentally and there are no differences in personality, attitudes etc. Sorry bud that's empirically wrong.

Men and women gravitate towards different occupations for specific reasons. High danger, maximal lethality, stressful competitive jobs. i.e. adventuring - attract men.

Lady Knights are a fantasy, women interested in these roles are outliers.

>they're very obviously not designed for that?
You'd be surprised user...

user, people aren't equal and that's ok.

Maybe because it’s fun?