All kink aside, can a matriarchy that primarily uses female soldiers actually survive? It feels that, at best, you can have female officers and leaders, but you still need men to do the actual soldiering.
Like, if you put an army of women (assuming trained, fit women) against men, and it seems like the men still have the advantage in ancient warfare.

>>95975701 (OP)
that's why you give the matriarchy magic bullshit, or techno-bullshit if it's sci-fi.
It's a work of fiction, you can just make things true in that world.

I assume that we're talking about a purely historical setting exclusively featuring realistically accurate humans.
If we're talking about any sort of fantasy and/or science fiction then yes, there are infinite ways in which a matriarchy that primarily uses female soldiers can survive.

>>95975701 (OP)
Sure, as long as the females in question aren't basically human anatomically. I'm sure a race with huge powerful females can have successful soldiers.

>>95975727
Women are subhuman garbage and i want them all dying slowly and painfully.

>>95975746
Let's assume a low-magic setting at best, where most warfare is resolved by nearly-conventional Bronze Age armies.

>>95975701 (OP)
No. If they are human females, they could be yoked out of their shitters but they're still mentally females so they'd inevitably fuck it up presuming similarity to IRL females.

>>95975727
>>95975746
>>95975752
Looking at OP image, they clearly just want their cake and to eat it too and are probably not actually interested in details or intricacies of a setting.

>>95975774
It's not OP's fault that women are weak.

>>95975760
Not enough information. Are all of the sapient races in this setting biologically identical to real life humans as we understand them, with no significant deviation?
If so, then sure, you're correct. You've crafted a fantasy setting close enough to reality that it operates according to the same rules as reality.

>>95975701 (OP)
I don't really want to dignify this with more effort than it deserves, but you caught me at a particularly boring time.

Men have a number of biological advantages that make them well suited to soldiering, but that is not to say that women cannot be formed into an effective army; only that their difference in capacities must be accounted for. One-to-one in a fair fight decided by brawn alone, the typical male soldier will best the typical female soldier; and so everything about a woman's legion must be organized to prevent this scenario. Women soldiers would be best trained as ambushers and skirmishers, equipped with weapons that afford them the reach and flexibility necessary to keep away from larger soldiers. Cavalry formations attacking from horseback with javelins and bows could be devastating and effective, turning a woman's army's smaller size into an advantage. Similarly, as partisans and spies, women are frequently underestimated and misjudged. In a more modern era the presence of concealed firearms can make women ideal insurgents able to inflict damage well in outsized proportion to their physical brawn. Settings with magic similarly equalize their capacities; though for the sake of unit cohesion and logistics any infantry adjacent unit will probably need to be unisex.

>>95975755
Underaged retard.
>>95975761
Probably too old of a retard.
>>95975781
Just a retard.

Performative misogyny is the security blanket of masculine failure. If you can't demonstrate the basic mental maturity to address the topic without desperately puffing out your chest, it would be better to simply remain quiet; we'd only have to address then a dull question and not a deluge of stupid answers.

>>95975802
Sure, why not?

>>95975818
Weird argument. Aside from the historically correct spying argument. Everything you brought up is still historically done better by men. If you have to account for such weaknesses why even bother when you could just have those women do more important logistics-related work.
As cool as wasting resources is, I'd rather just win the war.

>>95975818
You have a perfectly nice post there that you choose to fuck up by getting all buttpained about edgy comments from people you, yourself, recognize as being retards.

>>95975856
Can't provide a reason why not. What system are you using, GURPS? I can't think of any system in particular that has a low-magic setting where most warfare is resolved by nearly-conventional Bronze Age armies and does not feature any sapient race that is not functionally biologically identical to humanity.

>>95975818
>words words words
>still wrong
I appreciate the half-measure of effort you've applied here (I don't appreciate the white knighting), but force multipliers aren't ever going to compensate for how risk-averse and conflict-averse the average woman is, and how little autism she has. There is no all-female sailing crew, no all-female engineering team, no all-female reconnaissance scout that can come even remotely close to competing with men on an even keel. In no hunting society have women ever been expected to hunt as successfully as men. Throughout history, shortages of males have been frequent, but none of these have ever seen the mass mobilisation of women, or even seen it contemplated. It takes a one-in-a-thousand turbo-tomboy butchmaxxing bulldyke of a woman to compete with the psychological grit and aggression of a male soldier, before we even get to the point of considering his superior endurance, speed, and strength. Women wouldn't even get to the point of establishing a strict disciplinary leadership structure, because the female instinct is not to command and follow but to assert social control by including or excluding others from their clique.

The only circumstances under which a female force has a chance of winning a battle is against another female force, which would never happen because when women compete, they almost never settle their scores with open violence.

Just take the buxom magic elf maidens with scimitars and lightning bolts and be happy with it instead of trying to contrive ways for women to do the one thing women don't ever do.

>>95975755
>>95975761
>>95975781
Sorry to hear about your retardation, anons.

>>95975942
There a irony to you saying words words words in reply to someone when your stupid post is you using lots of words to say you are wrong because the idea women being good at fighting makes me butthurt.

>>95975985
You misunderstand, anon. I put chicks with swords into every campaign I run. I love the idea of women being good at fighting, the same way I love dragons and wizards.

I just don't pretend it's real.

>>95975701 (OP)
>All kink aside
Doubt.
Why would you expect a matriarchy use female soldiers?

>>95975701 (OP)
If their military objective is purely to capture men to become husbands then yes

Fantasy women, sure, those are just a different flavor of fantasy men. Obviously no such thing exist with real-life women. Such a society wouldn’t have a military, or any advanced national organization for that matter.

>>95975891
Well don't give them too much more attention anon, their poor little hearts won't be able to handle it.

>>95975886
OP's premise assumes a woman dominated military. Failing to address the circumstances and means by which this can be possible is failing to address the topic.

In an ironic sense, >>95975727 gives us the classic FPBP, in that any fictional female force can be given sensible means to fight on equal or superior footing to men, so long as you provide it to them within the fiction. Even relatively grounded fiction, such as modern thrillers or hard science fiction can make this happen so long as suspension of disbelief can be managed. Magic, psychic powers, "only women can be X, where X is a desirable and effective war asset", etc all resolve this.

For relatively modest and near to reality settings, if you don't hate summer blockbuster movies, I'd recommend watching Salt (2010) where the titular female spy has a few bourne-esque fight scenes. Choreography in these scenes are fairly relevant, in that where she is able to set ambushes and use weapons against unprepared police and security she can have her dramatic anti-hero bodycount, but in fights against prepared assailants she has to spend most of her time trying to reestablish that unpredictability and momentum, or else lose footing on every punch and grapple against bigger male foes. This maintains verisimilitude which is often lost with female action protagonists; where we have no trouble simply handwaving the other respects in which she is identical to a male blockbuster protagonist (inhuman recovery from concussion, inexhaustible stamina in chases, resistance to pain and bruising, etc). Bit of a digression, but reflected back on the notion of a fighting force, the same limitations and caveats applying to the topic can address and then safely dismiss misgivings over women soldiery. If they can't fight like men don't pretend they have to.

>>95975760
I could see female mounted skirmishers being faster on the smaller early breeds of horse. Very terrain-dependent though, they would probably want to be a diaspora or elite equestrian class in a nation that can still field conventional infantry

>>95975760
And what are the fantastical elements? That's kinda relevant.

>>95975755
Not everyone wants to choke on dick, anon.

>>95975701 (OP)
If we talking about something in the real world and current day. No, not really. You need some plot armor reason for why women are able to fight in line with men. Yes, even with modern weaponry. Outside of a few outliers. Most women couldn't cut it, again if you writing magic or high tech that basically will put them at a man level or higher then yeah, but to be fair would be better off using that shit on men to make them stronger. Can you have a woman who can hang with men in a firefight. Yes, but making a unit of women wouldn't be the best plan and would be better to make them spies and specialist over just a soldier. At best if you were to make a "matriarchy" that wasn't just some power fantasy and all. You still have men as soldiers and basically have a high honor system that both men and women follow. So you wouldn't have boss bitches and in fact their society would purge those out fast as if the men weren't given the respect and honor they deserved. They would take overrun and take over the society due to no reason to care for one that depends on them but doesn't respect them as such.

>>95975942
This feels like a sociological argument though. Women are on average more risk-averse and conflict-averse and part of that is biological to be sure, but overall that's women as we know them. Raised in societies that expect them to be that way. We don't really have a good answer for what a woman raised in a society of feminine soldiery would be like because they didn't really exist historically speaking.
Outside of maybe some niche tribal societies that I'm unaware of, although I doubt that.

Besides that though, the real problem with women soldiers goes beyond strength or mindset though really. Women can and have fought when necessary. Never in a widespread and consistent capacity, but to deny the EXISTENCE of female warriors is as ridiculous as saying they were commonplace, but I digress.
The real problem with women as soldiers is replacement.
If you lose 20 - 30% of your men you can recover in a generation. If you 20 - 30% of your women you run the risk of population collapse.

Although interestingly the idea of the sexist Amazonian raider that kidnaps men and uses them for breeding purposes is kind of a female only trope, although it's fetishistic nature limits its use.
The gender inversion of men kidnapping women and treating them brutally doesn't really work or make sense. Part of the reason Goblin Slayer was so dumb.
(I know men did historically kidnap women and rape them occasionally, but this was either not done for replenishment and was simply sexual abuse, or the women were basically kidnapped and forced to become regular wives. Basically the idea doesn't make sense if you try to have your cake and eat it too.)

>>95975701 (OP)
If I have to, I just treat it like it’s from a fantasy species set up like an ant colony, with most of the females living to support the queen and protect the colony while the few males that are around live just to help make more members of the colony before dying. But then, I wouldn’t really treat them as human per se.

>>95976811
It's easiest to just not make them the exact biological equivalent of humans.
Amazons assuming they are a human offshoot could reproduce parthenogenetically using automixis to preserve genes and making sure the children are not clones of their mothers. How this came to be? Lost technology/magic maybe but it deals with the issues of gender ratios.
If you are ok with eusociality, >>95976966 is the gist.
Then you could pull the Outsider approach where the male birthrate is 8x lower than female and they are twinks so they won't be put in military roles.

>>95975701 (OP)
1/4

Well, what if they're not human? In my sci-fi setting, a species called the kyn is one I based off of housecats, not just in terms of being catfolk, but also in terms of social organization. As a result, they're matrilineal (ancestry is tracked through the mother's line rather than the father's line), have a tendency towards matriarchies, and while being a warrior or hunter is associated with masculinity in their culture, being a SOLDIER is for them a traditionally feminine pursuit.

"But wait," says you, "male housecats are bigger and stronger than females, so shouldn't they still be a patriarchy?"

Nope. Let's back up a step, and think about food, and specifically how obligate carnivores like housecats - and thus obligate carnivores like the kyn - could ever get a food surplus large enough to start building sedentary civilization.

It's not completely impossible to imagine; there's some evidence that the people of the Caral-Supe civilization in South America may have been able to have had a completely meat-based diet (in this case, fish like anchovies and other marine life). But it's definitely a major hurdle to overcome.

>>95977159
2/4

Since they're based on housecats, my thought process is that like cats, kyn societal organization was along sex lines. Male cats have large territories that may or may not overlap; females have smaller territories and will nest together with other (usually related) females and their kittens (of both sexes).

In kyn, the major change is that unlike cats, kyn practiced group hunting. Males work together to bring down large game, which could then feed them for some time (especially once the art of meat preservation was invented), as well as be traded with female kyn.

Females instead clustered together, but like the males would hunt in groups. While male kyn focused on large game, female kyn instead were the ones to develop agriculture and start domesticating small but fast-breeding animals, allowing them to hunt less and less and begin to develop a food surplus, which allowed actual civilization to (painstakingly slowly by human standards) develop, eventually creating writing, art, mathematics, etc..

Male kyn weren't completely useless, though; they developed herding, taming and domesticating large animals and following them rather than hunting them, making food more reliable. But they were still leading very mobile existences with comparatively few companions, while the females developed villages and eventually cities that would trade with the males.

Young kyn were raised by their mothers, grandmothers, aunts, and older sisters. When they became adults, male kyn were expected to go out and join the hunter-herder bands, while the female stayed in the cities, tending to the fast-breeding prey and developing their society. Each city had several hunter-herder bands associated with it. The bands would occasionally fight each other for the right to enter the city and take wives, but all the bands would close ranks and work together in the face of outside invasion. The territory controlled by kyn city-states tended to be very large in comparison to Earth.

>>95977160
3/4

>>95977160
3/4

Like any species there'd be exceptions, of course. In coastal villages with plentiful fishing options you'd probably see male and female kyn living together to maximize food intake, though overfishing would potentially be a problem that would keep their population down compared to the more traditional city-state arrangement mentioned above.

Even then I imagine that kyn society would lack much of a concept of monogamy; they would definitely be matrilineal more often than not: a kyn traces their family through their mother, grandmother, great-grandmother, etc.. Also, while male kyn are larger and stronger than females like with humans, the fact of the matter is that female kyn have sharp teeth and claws, and so even a naked female kyn is way more capable of badly injuring or even killing a male than a female human is when dealing with a male human. So between the females being more concentrated (and thus having a numbers advantage over any given band of hunter-herders), controlling the cities, and being very capable of defending themselves, their societies probably tend towards genuine matriarchies (not that the females can mistreat the males either - again, sharp teeth and claws).

I imagine sexual integration starts happening eventually as technology advances and the food surplus continues to grow and cities become gradually more pleasant places to live. In keeping with cats being fairly fastidious, the kyn would probably be big into things like plumbing, sewers, and public baths, so mass diseases might be less common in kyn history. In any event, eventually you end up with a significant number of male kyn who don't want to leave the cities to become ranchers. In some places this might be gradual shift, in others it's a major societal upheaval.

>>95977170
4/4

A couple other major points forced by being obligate carnivores.

1. Long campaigns and sieges are a nightmare and a half. You can't keep enough meat fresh enough and you can't hunt enough game. Even if the kyn don't have a cultural taboo against cannibalism, they still just aren't going to be able to sustain long periods of campaigning in a foreign field where you can't rely on finding food. Though on the other hand kyn cities also can't possibly provision a lot of food either, even with salted meats/jerky/etc., so if some clever kyn general can figure out the logistics of supplying their troops, then the cities will fold practically instantly by Earth standards. No Siege of Ceuta here.

2. The concentration of females in cities and their effective numbers advantage might mean that any large standing armies that DID develop in kyn history might actually be female-based and led. One can imagine a female city-army enforcing its will on male hunter-herders, or going to war against another city for all the usual reasons. "Warrior" could be a male tradition (battles between hunter-herders), but actual soldiery is a female tradition.

This pic is someone's fetish, I just know it.

3. The lack of ability to store food for a long time also means that kyn can't do long voyages of exploration unless they're also doubling as fishing/whaling trips. Again, an inability to store enough food for an extended period means that much of the kyn homeworld (Kass) probably remained unexplored for a very long time. Months-long sea voyages on ships carrying dozens of crew are right out.

>>95977176
Bonus pic of a city-state's queen c. the kyn's iron age equivalent. Feathers are heavily associated with war in kyn society, because when you have a planet with only 70% Earth's gravity, the term "terror bird" takes on a whole new meaning.

Though on the flipside, the lower gravity also means that achieving orbital space flight was comparatively much easier. Rockets fueled by gasoline or kerosene theoretically could've done it, potentially allowing the kyn to achieve orbit before they had even figured out wireless radio.

Why not just use the drow/spider answer: the women are bigger and more aggressive than the males

>>95977188
I figured OP wanted all-female armies, drow armies are mostly male and slave race with female commanders.

>>95977188
colorful bird answer: the males are just flouncy little twinks good only for dancing and mating

>>95977188
But if it's like that, the whole point is lost. OP's question is (presumably) "Can a matriarchy that uses human-baseline women as soldiers deal with conventional armies?"
The answer is that they can't. It's why we don't have matriarchies that use female soldiers, they can't stand up against male-lead armies.
The same issue is that they can't use men as soldiers instead, because the men would want to be in charge.

>>95977186
Sloppery aside, I like the idea.

>>95977319
I've tried and tried for years but I just can't draw for shit. I would never in a million years commercialize any slop or claim to be a "creator", but it is nice to be able to actually put something LIKE what's in my head into reality.

>>95977260
OP's question has nothing to do with Earth baselines. If it did, he'd be asking on /k/ and they'd be having the trillionth rehash of the topic there instead of here.

>>95975701 (OP)
Fantasy setting, anyone can enhance themselves with magic, women channel magic better thus the physical gap is closed because women enhanced by magic = men enhanced by magic.

There, shut up and quit ragebaiting you dumbfuck faggot.

>>95975701 (OP)

What game?

I personally like the concept of mass produced bio droids used sexual purposes reused for military applications. Essentially the b1 battle droids in terms of how they act(just watch the battle with the Gungans from Episode 1, the relentless tide that just kept coming until it broke the enemy army) but anime girls, becoming more alive and human if they can remain active long enough for their brains to function instead of just following their basal programming.
The more human they become, the more they advance up the ladder going to weapon specialists, to unit leaders, to machine operators, to more elite soldiers, all the way up to commanders in their own right.

>>95979756
Net Epic.

>>95976177
Is it really capture if I seek them out and volunteer?

>>95975701 (OP)
One look at women in the Marine Corps after holding them to make physical readiness standards show that women can keep up worth men in a fighting scenario. Historically it was just rare for a woman to be considered worthless enough to be expected to fight, and now we feel icky asking them to.
Men are naturally larger and thus inherently better at hand-to-hand combat, and it is easier for men to get into fighting shape than a woman, but once there the amount of work needed to maintain for men or women alike is about the same.

>>95980010
>show that women can keep up worth men in a fighting scenario.
* small percentage of them.
The vast majority of women wash-out because their bodies genuinely start breaking down if held to the standards of the average man in the military. You'd definitely need some kind of magic bullshit or genetic engineering to have a sizable army of women.

Everyone loves warrior women, it's why they've been a thing since always.
Ishtar is the lady of love and war and she's from over 5000 years ago.
No one actually cares about realistic depictions, they just want sexy girls with weapons.

>>95980093
According to the Navy Times article about it from February, the primary cause of that "physical breakdown" you're talking about is poor diet.

>>95980185
>Ishtar is the lady of love and war
Anon, people didn't "Love" ishtar, they were scared shitless of her. She wasn't just the goddess of love and war, she was the queen of heaven and the goddess of raw human irrationality and emotions. She would Break your fucking mind.

>>95980195
Then why were the men fine despite having the same diet?

>>95980010
Read the 2010s Marine Corps study on this very thing lol. Women suffer wear and tear at about quadruple the rate of a man with the same physical performance. That's what pissed off the military boomers IRL. They thought they could import women by cherrypicking elite physical specimens, comparing them to low end men, banning the social-interaction problems and turning a blind eye when they emerged anyway.

But the injury rate ruined it. If a male soldier gets injured every 8 months he heals up and keeps going. Getting injured every 2 months leads to a negative feedback cycle where there's not enough time to heal and to keep training.

>>95980207
>she would Break your fucking mind
And that's hot.
It's comforting to know we haven't actually changed.

>>95976811
>The real problem with women as soldiers is replacement.
>If you lose 20 - 30% of your men you can recover in a generation. If you 20 - 30% of your women you run the risk of population collapse.

Right direction but not quite correct. If you are losing 20% to 30% of your female population to combat deaths regularly, you need the birth rate of the remaining female population to be 25% to 42% higher than the base replacement rate otherwise your population will contract with every generation.

>>95977260
Even if they could stand up to male majority armies there would still be issues than make female majority armies unsustainable. The number of females and their birth rate is what determines the size of the population's next generation and every female death increases the necessary birth rate to maintain the population.

>>95980214
That's the problem, the they don't. Female soldiers and marines typically choose to eat fewer calories per meal and those calories they cut tend to be proteins and fats that are important in staving off muscle decays and improve healing.

>>95980228
See the above reply, and please read the up-to-date articles. You're citing a 15 year old article basted on 18 year old data.

>>95980354
Sorry sweety, your cope article is citing a different article; you're invalid.

>>95980354
>up-to-date articles
>Is an ouroboros or article citing other articles citing other articles rather than any actual studies
Learn to read Citations instead of just believing any article that agrees with your biases.

>>95975701 (OP)
Suspension of disbelief in this case is optional.

I just think all female societies are a neat fantasy trope that doesn't need explanation or dissecting

>>95980725
It's gotten less believable in modern day thanks to recent events. It was a trope because a lot of people genuinely believed women were more civilized than men, but the truth is that women are just more vulnerable to peer-pressure. Even normies are realizing a female only society would go full Lord of the Flies fast.

>>95980800
>believable
why does it have to be believable?

>>95980824
Believably determines how many people you filter if you don't already have a group lined up. This is more of an issue now that the ttrpg hobby got crippled by 5e dumbn'dumbers.

>>95980845
sounds good, anyone that believes there shouldn't be female soldiers is someone to filter

>>95980725
Nah, it does, because it's one of those things that don't make a lot of sense. It needs some kind of justification, or your brain keeps going "Hey, wait a minute, this ain't right."

Man, I wish the topic of women combatants weren't so ideologically charged nowadays.
No one needs any explanation or is even bothered by muscular hunky men fighting shirtless or naked, but have women do the same in fiction and several people will throw a bitch fit. Here over how women are inferior and should not fight and in "normal" places it's about sexism and objectification.

>>95980941
>No one needs any explanation or is even bothered by muscular hunky men fighting shirtless or naked
This is objectively false. Where armor or Die faggot.

>>95980936
that doesn't happen at all, mostly because I am cognizant of that fact that this is a world that is completely different from reality

>>95980941
Anon, you're projecting so hard you could work in theatres playing movies. The medieval autists hate everything that deviates from realism, regardless of gender, not just your sacred cows.

>>95980725
I did a bunch of dissecting and figuring things out upthread (the catfolk posts) mostly 'cause I find it fun.

>>95980972
When people with critical thinking skills see something that doesn't make sense - even in a fictional setting - their typical response is to ask why, rather than to just blithely accept it, like a low Int comic relief character like yourself.
I know this must be hard for you to imagine, so you'll have to just blithely accept it.

>>95980958
Lmao.

>>95975701 (OP)
The two matriarchal civs in my setting are eusocial with the social organization of termites, and protandrous hermaphrodites (born male, become female in adulthood) with 7'+ females and little shota boys.

>>95975942
>In no hunting society have women ever been expected to hunt as successfully as men.
Not true. Women are historically at best a minority in war, but hunting isn't the same kind of work as war. To the extent the work was gendered in general (hard to say), it was mildly so; there are plenty of ancient female corpses buried with a bunch of hunting tools, most accounts of hunter-gatherers feature women hunting, ancient women injured in ways consistent with hunting large game, etc.

>>95980936
>>95981013
Do you also have an autistic conniption when goblins, dragons, wizards, and mimics exist in the setting without explanation?

>>95981105
They are very smart because they have no awareness, but are still pedantic.

>>95980338
>Right direction but not quite correct. If you are losing 20% to 30% of your female population to combat deaths regularly, you need the birth rate of the remaining female population to be 25% to 42% higher than the base replacement rate otherwise your population will contract with every generation.

Theoretically yes, but where are you getting this extra female population? Soldiers are typically young, breeding age men because you want them to be as fit, healthy, and disease resistant as possible.
This necessity doesn't really change if you're fielding women and that becomes a problem. How are you increasing your birth rate if a significant portion of your women capable of giving birth are being sent off? A notable difference between men and women is fertility window. It's probably not narrow enough to be a serious factor, but it doesn't help. Not to mention war is tough if it causes infertility by injury or sickness that's in a sense a casualty because now that woman can't give birth even after she's retired from military service.

So while yeah theoretically you could increase the birth rate to combat replacement, practically it's not really feasible. When factoring in all of the other variables.

Mind you I'm speaking mostly from a history/fantasy setting. I suppose it could theoretically work in a modern setting where military participation is lower on average compared to pre-modern societies. So it might work there with technology to help compensate, but that introduces other problems.

>>95981105
You appear to be implying that goblins, dragons, ect. don't make sense in a fantasy setting.
It's a rather embarrassing position to be in, frankly, and I certainly don't envy you.

>>95981105
Yes, but it's rarely a problem because most settings actually do have explanations anon. Which you'd know if you weren't a fucking shallow tourist.

>>95975701 (OP)
You can imagine any contrived scenario you want. Want a nation of female soldiers? There are literally infinite ways to make them a competitive fighting force. It's your setting. Make it whatever the fuck you want. They've got better tech. Religious reasons. Social norms. A society whose men all got killed in an ancient war and now the women are trained for war from birth. Whatever the hell you want. It works just fine.

>>95981211
>You appear to be implying that goblins, dragons, ect. don't make sense in a fantasy setting.
No, they do make sense, much like amazonian matriarchies make sense. Demanding a detailed explanation of every oddity is an autistic perspective - medieval fantasy settings have like 500 random bullshit made up things and you just have to accept them and move on or you'll never be able to play a game.

>>95981292
>medieval fantasy settings have like 500 random bullshit made up things and you just have to accept them
Anon, that's one of the core signs of a lazy setting. All of the best settings were made by autists who actually did consider every detail about their setting and used that to create unique ideas.
You're not beating the tourist allegations like that anon.

>>95981304
>calls other people tourists
>demands you read 500 pages of worldbuilding before playing the game
This is the most nogames shit you could possibly have said, faggot.

>>95981312
Nice strawman. I'm criticizing setting for not having the 500 pages for GMs. I know for a fact that most players are too retarded to bother reading own fucking spells.

>>95981312
>nogames
Ah, the classic go-to when someone loses an argument.
Did anon hit too close to home? Are you feeling called-out little-tourist-anon?

>>95981304
>All of the best settings were made by autists who actually did consider every detail about their setting and used that to create unique ideas.
That's just... wow that's just nonsense.

I mean if you think the only "best settings" are Tolkien and GRRM, then sure. But if you include literally any other setting? Then the amount of hand-waving is off the fucking charts.

>>95981344
Anon, do you even know a single ttrpg setting?

>>95981349
Name one D&D setting other than Greyhawk (which is the only one I don't know well), and I'll list you 5 bullshit handwaves.

>>95975701 (OP)
I have an ultra-low fantasy horse and musket setting where female soldiers exist in some armies - its not always common and often rare, but women are allowed to enlist in several nations, and theres even some units, such as the Maidguard of the Quizian Constitution, whom serve as the lifeguard of the Queen be she ruler or married to the King. Theres also one nation, Fecundia, which is a Matriarchy where men are seen as lesser. All the officers are female, but the infantry are all male, though poorly trained in comparison to other states. Fecundia is slightly backwards and traditionalistic, and places greater emphasis on its cavalry, of whom all the riders are female yes this is a Horsegirl reference theres some slightly more fanatical units that have very 'close' relations with their mounts, all of whom are derived from an aggressive carnivorous all stallion stock and I refuse to apologise for it which leads to them having excellent cavalry. The exception are the Empresses Guard, formed during the desperate days of the Mens Revolt when numerous Fecundian infantry regiments mutinied against the poor treatment of men in the Empire. The cavalry, good as it was, was unable to effectively attack Battalions in square and forced to rely on carbine armed skirmishing riders to fight them, or ambushing the men before they could form squares, and cavalry units where also ill-suited to holding ground, with generals resorting to ordering Dragoon and Ra'Orser units to dismount and hold urban areas and forts under Imperial control as there where too few loyalist infantry units left - and most of those where considered untrustworthy and likely to desert or mutiny too. This desperate time led to the formation of the Empress's Guard of Foot, an elite all female regiment (now Corps) of infantry tasked with holding ares and supporting the cavalry.
Sorry for the blogpost.

>>95981349
>>95981354
More to the point, though, D&D settings were never thought out in detail. They were iterated on over years and decades.

>>95981354
Mystara

>>95981354
Eberron my brother. (I actually agree with you overall I just want to know what you consider bullshit handwaves)

>>95981329
What you need for GMs is an explanation of *how* the amazonian society is organized, not an explanation of *why* the amazonian society is organized. Much like how you need to explain what dragons eat, or what sort of culture goblins have, but you don't need to waste page space on an explanation that will boil down to "a god did it lol" anyway.

>>95981368
Fair I shoulda said AD&D including FR, Dark Sun, Spelljammer, Jakandor, Dragonlance, Birthright, any of the FR sub-settings (Al-Qadim, Kara-Tur, the Horde, Maztica), Planescapes or Ravenloft.

>>95981369
That's not a D&D setting... it's WotC.

>>95981375
You don't need to explain goblin society and dragons eat whatever the fuck they want. There is absolutely zero need to list any of that shit unless you're running an adventure that calls for it. That's absolutely not how the well-established settings were made. Go read oD&D. They start out with monster stats and monsters in places for released adventures. The only reason that anything got fleshed out was because an expansion was released that explored it, an adventure was released that explored it, or a dragon article was good enough that it got adopted as canon. No: good settings are never, ever, autistically detailed from the start. That's absolute nonsense.

>>95981354
>D&D setting
Ever heard of warhammer, shadowrun, world of darkness, or literally Anything other than d&d anon?

>>95981382
Man I vouched for you and was ready to be on your side.
And you just let me down.
Of course Eberron is WotC. They're all WotC because WotC owns D&D in its entirety including all of the settings.
You can dislike specific settings or WotC in general, but saying they're not D&D is just ridiculous D&D is just a brand name.

>>95981382
>Anon instantly began moving the goalposts after getting proven wrong Twice.
Pathetic.

>>95981405
Which are perfect fucking examples. Not one single setting of any of those was ever autistically fleshed out until a specific adventure or supplement called for it. All of them are iterated. They get a release. Then the devs want to publish a new book so detail some more stuff.

Absolutely none of them came onto the market as an autistically detailed, fully fleshed out setting. Not one of them. Not ever.

>>95981382
You fucking coward. You said any setting, I said Mystara, now put out like you said you would.

>That's not a D&D setting... it's WotC.
You Fucking Coward II: Electric Boogaloo

>>95981413
Eh. Pick a setting I know and I'm happy to explain it. You're right: you picked one I didn't. That's not "moving the goalposts," anon. It's called a "conversation." It'd only be moving the goalposts if I pretended that what you picked didn't count, instead of saying "You're right--you picked one I didn't know. Here are the ones I do know."

>>95981424
But that's exactly what you did with my setting of Eberron.
So you did move goalposts just not for him specifically.

>>95981432
>But that's exactly what you did with my setting of Eberron.
Well that was just to be funny. You're right, though. I don't know that one. I know the ones I listed here: >>95981382

>>95981434
How in God's green Earth do you know all of those, but don't know Mystara?

>>95975701 (OP)
In setting with magic, females being warriors is perfectly fine. Magic is like a gun, you get and and it doesn't matter if you have a dick or not, you can fuck people up equally.

>>95975701 (OP)
Depends on the setting and the specific traits of the race in the setting

>>95981382
Maztica.

>>95981440
Because I played AD&D for 25 years, not B/X.

>>95981434
Alright fair enough, I guess I'll ask for Dragonlance then. At this point just to see if you can put your money where your mouth is.

>>95981440
Was Mystara ever especially popular? I'm an old zoomer so I don't have a ton of experience with TSR D&D, but from my limited knowledge wasn't it's biggest claim to fame being the setting for the arcade game?

>>95981414
>Not one single setting of any of those was ever autistically fleshed
Anon, wtf are you talking about? WoD 1e was autistic as hell

>>95981469
>Was Mystara ever especially popular?
It was the default setting for Basic. And Blackmoor and Hollow World were sub-settings of it. Also as you pointed out, those kickass arcade games. I mean it's no Forgotten Realms or DragonLance, but it was certainly popular back in the day as one of the defaults.

>>95981450
1. Monster races that are explicitly not present in the original release simply appear in later releases
2. Different gods explicitly made Maztica than made the planet
3. The 1 day feathered war provided enough captives to produce years of daily sacrifices despite capturing 2 people being seen as a storied deed
4. They are at a stone-age technology level but constantly use iron-age level technology
5. Half-orcs don't exist until introduced from the East despite orcs being literally one of the only monstrous races in Maztica

>>95981511
So your contention is that the setting of WOD was complete by 1e? Is that what you're claiming?

>>95981553
Anon, are you disqualifying all settings if they have any kind of later retcons or supplements?
Are you retarded?
The convo started with anons talking about explanations for shit existing. I side with anon >>95981413 you're moving the goalposts like a conveyor belt.

>>95981469
>Dragonlance
I mean that one is just too easy because you can google literal conflicting timeline problems in those novels because they were poorly thought out.
1. Huma appears in a book before Vinas Solamnus lived
2. Irda have interactions with Ogre from before they reach Ansalon
3. Psionic users appear despite explicitly stating that they don't exist on Krynn
4. Levels determine the sorcery test despite not existing in-world
5. Demidragons exist despite explicitly contradicting the lore that they can't

>>95981571
What I am saying, and have said, is that none of these settings are autistically detailed from the get-go. None of them. They only seem that way in hindsight because you're looking at them after years or decades of their being iterated on by release after release after release. Your challenge to that statement was that WoD 1e was. Which is a stupid challenge because it wasn't.

>>95981152
>Theoretically yes, but where are you getting this extra female population?

That is not extra population it is the remaining female population needing to give birth to more children. A population that is 50% male/50% female needs the average female to birth 2 children to maintain the population with the next generation. If 30% of the female population is lost each generation before reproducing each remaining female needs to give birth to ~2.86 children to maintain the population. If they give birth to fewer than 2.86 children the next generation will be smaller, but if higher then the population will increase.

>Soldiers are typically young, breeding age men because you want them to be as fit, healthy, and disease resistant as possible.

Not really. Those make for the most effective human soldiers in the short term, but what you really want for a long term sustainable army is actually disposability where losses this generation are easily replaceable by new population from the next generation. 90% of breeding age male humans could be lost and the remaining 10% would still be able to impregnate the female population so that the average birthrate was 2+.

Nomadic raiders were a regularly occurring generational issue for many civilizations due to this. You could nearly wipe out all the male nomads only for the survivors to take all the widows into their harems and then raise up another generation of raiders to attack 20 years later.

>So while yeah theoretically you could increase the birth rate to combat replacement, practically it's not really feasible. When factoring in all of the other variables.

A fair number of developing countries still have birth rates of 3+ and higher birth rates were historically normal in prosperous times. This is mostly the result of how risky human female pregnancy is and also how short life expectancy was.

>>95981571
What did you expect, anons answer to his first time getting called out was: >>95981424
>That's not "moving the goalposts," anon. It's called a "conversation."
Anon is a classic pseud roaching out at every opportunity.

>>95981608
I'm right though. I already admitted you picked a setting I didn't know, anon. That's not "moving the goalposts." It's admitting that you were right, dipshit.

>>95975701 (OP)
Traditional games?

>>95981614
>you picked a setting I didn't know, anon
I'm a different anon. I'm just here to shitpost and throw rocks at the people arguing.

>>95981631
Oh. Then enjoy? It still isn't "moving the goalposts" to say "you're right." That's, in fact, the exact opposite of "moving the goalposts."

>>95975701 (OP)
If you put a bunch of women on horses and give them a bows, they are going to be able to defeat an all male infantry force.
The real problem with an all female military in a pre-industrial setting is that women of military age are also of baby-making age, and they can't do both at the same time. So you need to come up with some bullshit for how their society keeps growing without their young women producing multiple babies, especially if infant mortality rates are realistic.

>>95975701 (OP)
A matriarchy would use primarily male soldiers.
A realistic matriarchy would not reverse the genders in their function but instead it would have women dominate men through social coercion of screeching women and the access to sex

>>95982264
Reminder that the mongolians got hard countered when they encountered their first enemies with proper structures and horse archers are entirely ineffective at sieges so they either skipped them because it would take too long or they just turned back.
Really good at fighting dudes living in teepees though.

>>95982413
>A realistic matriarchy would not reverse the genders in their function but instead it would have women dominate men through social coercion of screeching women and the access to sex
I mean, then what stops the men from just seizing control and having a bit of mass rape?
It's not like the women can actually stop them.

>>95982498
Depending on the culture, likely other men who will gladly punch the shit out of idiots like you who suggest the idea.

>>95981584
Demidragons not existing was kinda dumb given that there were people having sex with dragons from the beginning of the setting.

>>95980001
Depends on the individual but definitely a possibility

>>95980354
Okay, male Marines eat the exact same shitty MREs and mess chow as females they still get injured less often during normal activity

>>95982581
Have you actually been to a country like India or in the Middle East before? There are men who will happily help hold the woman down so they can take a turn.

>>95981246
Noooo it has to be a realistic medieval setting for that coveted hint of verisimilitude

>>95982851
I mean this is true in 40K too, no? Sisters of Silence are there for their anti-psyker aura, first and foremost. Every depiction of them fighting has them rely on their null aura to disorientate or terrify the opponent so they can land a killing blow.
The absolutely strongest one is basically perma-invisible, and she died when Kharn turns her into blood pudding (since he couldn't see or detect her, but was in such a rage he carved up her general direction anyway.)

>>95982873
Yes but female custodes aren't. Although long before that happened 40k broke realism by Lelith being the best dark eldar fighter even though she is a woman and doesn't use the magic roids every other dark eldar does.

>>95982844
As I said depending on the culture. Those rape gangs are the result of the current situation and no inherent. India, and much of the Middle East, is trapped in a behavioral sink caused to utopic overpopulation. They have become rats trapped in paradise and gone insane.

>>95982900
Not quite. Eldar were originally presented as having a much lower amount of sexual dimorphism (i.e. practically none when it comes to combat) between the sexes than humans.

>>95982920
Originally wyches didn't exist and Eldar fighters were all male as well as their war god, and even if we ignore that the Lelith becomes double unrealistic with the no roids thing, since those would give a boost impossible to overcome without aid.

>>95975701 (OP)
>All kink aside
This concept literally only exists for kink purposes. Own it instead of trying to sanitize it into some safe, boring libtard diversity sludge.

>>95983047
But my kink is buff chicks

>>95983088
What do you think Amazons are for, retard?

>>95983127
No one seems to like them any more. I feel like an ancient greek with my tastes.

>>95983169
Because they've been tainted by modern girlboss slop. Hard to be a softcore inversion gender norms wilhen that's just the modern default.

>>95983173
It should be easy enough to differentiate Amazons from regular human societies, just make the standard bodytype bigger.

>>95975701 (OP)
>Like, if you put an army of women (assuming trained, fit women) against men, and it seems like the men still have the advantage in ancient warfare.
Depends on the battlefield commanders. Once you get past a certain number of soldiers it becomes less about the individual and more about the commands given assuming you're not trying to just shitpost about biological realism or whatever that meme term was

>>95981152
I mean if you went full totalitarian caste system, could have you have a small breeding caste create a 'replacement rate surplus'? Like if you run the numbers, what percentage would need to be in this caste to create a surplus to endure the military death deficit of females over a more egalitarian natural breeding replacement rate?

>>95983218
Perhaps but that's kinda convoluted, and you'd have to further specialize the breeding caste so it can breed people specialized for soldiering and not breeding. Having female biased sex ratios for births or even full parthenogenesis would be easier for world building.

The Greeks, who actually lived in extremely patriarchal, highly militarized societies, genuinely believed the Amazons were a real culture-group, but a bunch of fa/tg/uys who live in the most gender egalitarian societies in all of human history can't dare to imagine it in a fantasy setting without an autistic explanation. Make it make sense.

>>95975701 (OP)
We have a worldbuilding general. You missed it.

>>95980800
>Even normies are realizing a female only society would go full Lord of the Flies fast.
Except Lord of the Flies itself is pure misanthropy bullshit cope that is actively contradicted by every analogous IRL scenario.

>>95982264
No they're not
Crassus and the boys ran the parthians out of arrows
Horse archers are the ultimate meme and only style on untrained peasants, their real purpose is to tire out actual well trained infantry but you need actual heavy cav to do the job. And it is a hard sell to make a regular human woman be a cataphract

This has been very eye opening. Someone needs to get in contact with Zelenski and the Ukrainian military and tell them about how women are just as combat effective as men. This will literally solve all their wo/manpower issues.

>>95983192
You've completely bounced off the topic you yourself introduced. Character.AI bots have better coherency than you.

>>95983420
Skill issue.

>>95983270
If Homer lived in modern times he'd have been mobbed by realism autists. If your amazons are human you need a convoluted explanation or you'll be accused of being woke or whatever.

>>95983218
Maybe, I'm no mathematician so I'm not sure.

It seems unlikely though. You could probably do it temporarily and be fine but, pre-modern societies have a rough time of it already with infant mortality, poor medical knowledge, among other things.
Like obviously you can supplement anything with magic and make it work but ignoring that and looking at it from a purely historical utilitarian perspective I just don't think it works.

Like say you keep it up for awhile, but a bad bout of the flu comes through while you're trying to recover from a war. That would essentially decimate the society and even if it lived through it anyone with half a brain and ambition is going to conquer it while it's crippled like that.

And I mean that's not truly damning I guess all societies fall eventually, but you've effectively tied bricks to your society while asking it to swim.

Overall in a purely historical context a society with a purely female warrior class kind of just dies to logistics. Ignoring the factors of strength.

Although this whole time I've really been playing devil's advocate. I don't think anyone should feel the need to justify what they want in their setting.
If you want a super low fantasy setting with women soldiers I think you should do it. I don't think most people are actually going to really dwell on it too hard.

>>95983433
Yes, you lack basic conversation skills

>>95983270
>genuinely believed the Amazons were a real culture-group
lmao no they didn't they were literally a thought experiment/fantasy of
>man what if women weren't so shit how cool it would be
The greeks were inventing antiquity version of MGE monstergirls

>>95982900
>>95982944

There is no reason to assume that Eldar have as great level of sexual dimorphism in term of their physical abilities as humans have.

If anything their lore seems to consitently indicate that both Eldar men and women can become extrmely capable physical combatants given that all Eldar factions have quite lot of women in their armed forces, so presumably Eldar men are not stronger or more physically capable than their women are in any signifigant enough degree to matter for them.

>>95983527
>lmao no they didn't
Yes, they did.

>This was the origin of the war with the Amazons; and it seems to have been carried on in no feeble or womanish spirit, for they never could have encamped in the city nor have fought a battle close to the Pnyx and the Museum unless they had conquered the rest of the country, so as to be able to approach the city safely. It is hard to believe, as Hellanikus relates, that they crossed the Cimmerian Bosphorus on the ice; but that they encamped almost in the city is borne witness to by the local names, and by the tombs of the fallen. For a long time both parties held aloof, unwilling to engage; but at last Theseus, after sacrificing to Phobos (Fear), attacked them. The battle took place in the month Boedromion, on the day on which the Athenians celebrate the feast Boedromia. Kleidemus gives us accurate details, stating that the left wing of the Amazons stood at the place now called the Amazoneum, while the right reached up to the Pnyx, at the place where the gilded figure of Victory now stands. The Athenians attacked them on this side, issuing from the Museum, and the tombs of the fallen are to be seen along the street which leads to the gate near the shrine of the hero Chalkodus, which is called the Peiraeic gate. On this side the women forced them back as far as the temple of the Eumenides, but on the other side those who assailed them from the temple of Pallas, Ardettus, and the Lyceum, drove their right wing in confusion back to their camp with great slaughter.
This is Plutarch, summarizing an array of different Greek sources available to him, and his skepticism is not about whether Amazons exist at all, but specific details of the battles they participated in.

They genuinely believed the Amazons were real, bro. Sorry to inform you that you are actually more misogynistic than the ancient Greeks on this count.

>>95983270
>/tg/ has pseudo-pol/r9k trolls
Whoa what a scoop.

>>95983047
Based take, I did just that in my worldbulding project. I needed an all female fighting force for a matriarchal fertility cult that is one of the major factions of the setting, and I ended up designing their aesthetics to be suitably themed.

>>95983538
The visual depictions of Dark Eldar men in Warhammer material like the Daemonifuge comic show that males are giganiggas while the wyches are about as fit as the Sororitas protagonist who even looks like one with a wych helmet on. So there is in fact reason to assume dimorphism.

Also there's the point about combat drugs, Lelith is allowed to be better than her space-roiding peers by the rule of girlbossing.

>>95983555
Work on your art

>>95983551
Plutarch believed in all sorts of crazy bullshit. I don't think you can observe from this that everyone else did too.

>>95983572
I would take comics like daemonifuge with a grain of salt, because if we go by the lore, there is no fucking way a human could pass for an eldar given how Eldar are about a head taller than humans and also move far faster and in more agile and graceful manners that only perhaps a trained assassin of the imperium could hope to match.

Lelith just being so fucking good that she does not need combat drugs is less "girlbossing" whatever the fuck that even means in 40k, and more just named character provess.

>>95983600
>durr hurr Plutarch believed "all sorts of crazy bullshit," [citation needed] therefore when he mentions like five different Greek sources on the details of the battle and the fucking TOMBS OF THE DEAD, that's fake
Just admit you're full of shit, retard.

>>95982427
>Reminder that the mongolians got hard countered when they encountered their first enemies with proper structures
Are you trying to suggest that China didn't have "proper structures"?

>>95983649
Yes, they lived in yurts just like the Central Asian Persianate world.

>>95975701 (OP)

females would make great soldiers, the only disadvantage would be sanitary issues and lugging around heavy things like wounded comrades or machine guns, but carrying equipment and stabbing/shooting people is more about endurance than strength and anyone who's reasonably physically active can handle it with enough motivation.

the real reason why no one uses female soldiers is because the average 1st worlder has been spoiled by modern convenience, especially the women, and hellhole countries experiencing prolonged war are trying to keep their women alive for repopulation after the soldiers die off.

a fantasy nation with female soldiers would have to solve the repopulation issue before anything else.

>>95984153
Back in the day Warhammer amazons reproduced through parthenogenesis so they had no problems like that and didn't need men.

>>95983628
My guy, plutarch thought that north africa had giant firebreathing ants and rock that could melt people on contact.

>>95983350
>that is actively contradicted by every analogous IRL scenario.
Unfortunately not. We've actually tried this experiment and modern women tend to be closer to the book's face panting menace than guys.

>>95984406
My guy, he's literally citing a bunch of different Greek authors as his sources. Were they all lying to him?

>>95984422
>Were they all lying to him?
Anon, the greeks lived before the internet and video records. Most of their info passed through a thousand different people, who all only half-remember it or poorly worded how they told the next guy, like a national game of telephone.
99% of all the historical records we have from before 1950 are full of fantasy fiction garbage that has no scientific value.

>>95985173
So you agree that the Greeks believed the Amazons actually existed.

>>95975701 (OP)
>All kink aside, can a matriarchy that primarily uses female soldiers actually survive?
Do a matriachy that used only female soldiers then sustained WWII Soviet tier casualities like 20-30 millions KIA, mostly at breeding age (<40s)
now do the future demographic pyramid

>>95976811
>If you lose 20 - 30% of your men you can recover in a generation. If you 20 - 30% of your women you run the risk of population collapse.
Poor Ukrainians, they lost both already

>>95985418
Having <1,5 fertility rates already does that, might as well go out killing russoids

>females are born more often than males
>females are more muscular and taller than males on average
>females have year-long cycles so they don't get incapacitated for 2 days every month
>bullshit space elf telepathy/telekinesis/mind control
>most combat happens in space so it doesn't matter who pushes the "all the missiles" button
>it's my fetish
All valid reasons why it would succeed.

>>95983559
Still waiting for the setting book.

>>95985182
On review of the thread, I assumed you were arguing the amazons actually existed and was calling you a retard.

>>95975701 (OP)
If you want a hot amazoness army, no. Gears of war (not /tg/, sorry) fixes it by making the female locusts blind, nigh invulnerable crazed beasts with only two purposes: getting chained up and raped by the men (they don't survive the mating otherwise), and being unleashed on the enemy when shit goes south.

>>95986202
The queen of the locusts is a hot chick though
also I want my hot amazoness army.

>>95975701 (OP)
Yes, a matriarchy could obviously be the primary soldiers.
Look at ants. Look at bees. EVERYBODY'S a fucking lady in those societies besides designated breeder males that exist only for that purpose.
Not every species has this whole "males are stronger" thing going on.

>>95986100
Unfortunately drawing is what I naturally am more inclined towards rather than writing stuff, besides adding massive autistic walls of text to my infographics. Gotta get my arse up to speed and make a coherent and lore up to date setting document, if only as some sort of word doc one of these days. The infographics are themselves too big to be uploaded here in their full size and now that hiroshima disabled the ability to upload pfds I can't even upload the pdf document versions I made of them here.
You can see the full sized infographic to which this drawing is from on my deviant art gallery.
https://www.deviantart.com/screeble/art/The-Chorus-Militant-of-the-Sisterhood-1170562380

>>95983664
> Yes, they lived in yurts just like the Central Asian Persianate world.

This is a yurt?

>>95986852
>Everyone lived in Pagodas Anons!
And all europeans lived in cathedrals, even the peasants.

>>95987938
Well what exactly are you talking about, then? It's not like China didn't have walled cities and castles, if that's what you're trying to imply.

>>95986315
False equivalence. Only the queens have reproductive capabilities. The "workers" are effectively genderless golems with no sexual organs, gametes or sperm. Go back to elementary school biology class.

>>95975818
Good Point - I kinda allways liked Fire Emblems Handling of Pegasus Riders in a somewhat similar manner - which are as far as I know, are only females, because those creatures don't trust men and of course are lighter and thus more suited to flying - with strength beeing less of a deciding factor, because they moustly joust at their enemies.

>>95990132
Nah, in many species the workers are just dormant females who can turn into queens if the colony is left without one.

>>95975818
>Similarly, as partisans and spies, women are frequently underestimated and misjudged.

I feel like in a world where women are constantly participating in war, this kind of stuff would disappear rather quickly. If magic exists, then the "women are underestimated" would never exist at all.
Humans are exceedingly fast to adapt to things that are dangerous to their lives, in a world where women can use magic to call fire from the sky, and Matriarch kingdoms with all female military are a thing for more than 100 years, you would have men everywhere being trained from birth to disregard mercy for the female gender and be ready to kill dangerous foreign women at any time. Seduction and spying for women would become ten times harder to pull off, no Mata Hari is ever going to exist in a world like this.

It really makes my blood boil when authors have stuff like "both men and women have been using magic to fight in wars for the last 3,000 years", and yet somehow, boys are still bulling girls for being "weak" in a world where five years old girls can learn rune magic and make someone head explode from 100 meters away. It's like they want women to be badass warriors, while still retaining the innocent victim status that is looked down by men. No, pick one or the other, you can't have both in the same story.

>>95990320
>Humans are exceedingly fast to adapt to things that are dangerous to their lives
Yet men continue to fall for red flag women and BPD whores

>Open thread
>No mention of hyenas
>Read title more closely

If you're going to keep the normal human dimorphism, then no, being weaker than the enemy is going to send is never going to work out in the long run.

If you want a matriarchy with female soldiers, then you actually have to base it off an animal that can pull that off, your choices either being

A: Some weird eusocial species
B: A classic role reversal, like in some birds
C: A mammalian clusterfuck, like the hyena.

The last one would be the most hard to write, seeing as female hyenas are the more aggressive sex DUE to being the childbearers, since being aggressive made it more likely your children would live to spread their genes. Consequently, this is also a species with a high female reproductive skew, so a minority of females are responsible for the majority of the descendants in a clan.

(Be aware this isn't a full role-reversal, males are still the ones to approach females, and this skew is more due so to how unequally food is distributed rather than females fighting over mates, although the males certainly are pickier than other mammalians. Then again, if you want the species to stay somewhat relatable, I guess they could fight over mates if the males partook in caretaking for whatever reason. My point here is your males will still have stuff that's well, male about them when it comes to things other than aggression.)

While it's alien, this is as about close you get to your answer while basing the species off mammalians, like humans.


>>95976811
I'm not sure how inherently true that is, given we've already had societies where a good portion of women took the backseat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_European_marriage_pattern

(This did come with a lower fertility rate though, as expected, oops, and I don't think your going to find this pattern outside of Europe, hence the name.)

>>95991059
With that said, if you're seriously writing a matriarchal species that sort of works like a mammal so they're somewhat close to humans (If you want something that isn't, go ahead, basing this off something like birds would be far simpler from what little I know about birds :c )

Please, for the love of god, do not take too many aspects from polygynous cultures, I have a feeling a lot of elements from these could fall downstream from this, and flipping the aspect of which sex is in the harem isn't going to work, which gets right over to my second point.

Please do not try to portray polyandry and polygyny as the same. These are two strategies that pose very different ideas, seeing as how one is resulting in more children, while the other is you trying to pool resources INTO one child.

There's probably a reason it's rarer, since the two reasons for it would be:

A: The female needs additional males to help raise children, which the males benefit from, or at the very least, do not suffer TOO much from. (To be fair, your females are still the gatekeepers, so males do basically have to deal with it, and the females who would be doing this are likely the 'best' ones, so there's that.)

B: Resources are limited, and so the species is better off with just one female doing the reproductive work (Who would want to write about molerat people though?)

If you wish to have polyandry, which is likely in some form, then it's probably going to be fair to keep in the mind those are going to be small harems, and so it's better to think of this as a nuclear family with additional fathers, as weird as that is.

(I'm sorry, I just hate it whenever these systems are portrayed as direct equivalents in stories with matriarchies.)

>>95991059
>>95991102
With of all that in mind, the question you'd have to answer is how do the females handle pregnancy and give birth while being the more 'primary' sex, for the lack of a better word. This is where you'd have to make concessions (and to be fair, if the females are like this, it's going to be likely their pregnancy is going to be handled differently anyways so it isn't as inhibiting, whether that be to being shorter, or their bodies being designed differently to accommodate it more easily, a faster period of recovery, etc.

Albeit, it's a bit ironic saying that knowing what animal we're basing this off of.

>>95991059
>>95991102
>>95991167
>spouts a bunch of basic bitch common knowledge aa if he's prometheus bringing fire to man
God I hate midwits

>>95991202
I didn't see anyone bringing up actual ways to solve the problem other than shitty sex ratios that are found in animals like fucking elephant seals, I didn't see anyone link to rates of female celibacy either to deal with the issue of birth rates.

Don't tell me this shit is common knowledge on this board when I see faggots on here argue shit like swords being meme weapons or that crossbows were the end of knights, if they can't get that right, then I seriously doubt they're going to know the above either.

>>95991245
>I didn't see anyone bringing up actual ways to solve the problem

Oh come on, I had an autistic multi-post rant using societal justification and everything.

>>95977159 >>95977160 >>95977170 >>95977176 >>95977186

>>95991245
You didn't even look at the thread, you just ctrl+f'd for your precious psuedopenis scavenger dogs

>>95990267
Fire Emblem is pretty interesting with it. Despite the fact that armies are pretty gender equal, classes are very much not. Even classes like cavalry, which can have both men and women, tend to be male dominated. Only mages have a true 50/50 split.

>>95991245
Everyone knows about hyenas because you hyenafags can't shut up about em. Just like how horsefuckers can't shut up about horse anatomy

>>95991261
This is about as close as it gets, although it's all banking off them staying meat eaters, every con makes sense with that, although growing up with a father sounds sad.

>>95991286
>Everyone knows about hyenas because you hyenafags can't shut up about em.

Because they're great.

>Just like how horsefuckers can't shut up about horse anatomy

Who even says this? What kind of discussion leads to a discussion about horse cocks?

>>95991313
Well I mean this one just did so that kind of answers the question.

>>95991059
I don't think a societal pattern of slightly later marriage and lower fertility levels is going to accurately model the same stresses that a female warrior class society is going to face.
Those are constants that are kept relatively in balance. With warriors your population is going to be spiking up and down during times of war and peace.
That instability will cause problems when introducing other variables such as famine, disease, or natural disaster.

But as I said this isn't necessarily absolutely damning just highly unlikely to last for a long period of time. Especially if you factor in living in an area where other societies are fielding male warriors.

>>95991269
Reminder that hyenas are feliforms

>>95991245
Hyenas are a boring choice for a model anyways, especially cause discussions always devolve into "lol psuedo-penis". If I was going mammalian, I'd base it off say lions to justify a rapid mobile army with the lionesses on the offensive and the males in charge of home defense as bodyguards or siege defense, or as individual fighters such as on-call duelists or dedicated monster hunters if it's a fantasy world.

>>95991313
>Because they're great.
>Translated: mmmyummy i love "girl"cock!
We know
>What kind of discussion leads to a discussion about horse cocks?
Not just horse cocks, but horse anuses and horse vaginas. I've been unwillingly exposed to all of this just on /tg/ alone because you animal rapists are as loud as you are demented.

>>95991439
Bestiality greentexts are time honored tradition on 4chan coward.

>>95991366
I doubt it, just think it's the closest human reference you can get if you want some elements of a matriarchal society . I wouldn't say western europe was free of all of those variables (17th century europe especially, that's one of the centuries I'd call actively miserable with the 30 years war and cromwell's autism.), but then again this is still in a society where men are the warriors, although you're atleast dealing with monogamy here for the most part.

Other than that, better off with animals IMO.

>>95991415
>Hyenas are a boring choice for a model anyways, especially cause discussions always devolve into "lol psuedo-penis"

Their fault for only focusing on the aspect that should've never evolved then if the animal was slightly more sane when it came to infanticide.

Aren't male lions the fighters anyways though? For prides at least, would the sex ratios be any different from real life or do the males still deal with a billion hurdles?

>>95991439
I just find them interesting as an exception, given the other matriarchal animals don't have females as autistic (Unless they're meerkats)

Your fault for getting into discussions where horses are relevant.

>>95991483
>I just find them interesting
Sure sure, that's what they all say

>>95991483
In proper prides, male lions are indeed bigger and bulkier, but their job is primarily to sit around and guard the homestead and very occasionally hunt particularly big game. The females are the ones who do most of the hunting and rearing. So I guess that depends on what your idea of "fighter" is, but in such a hypothetical situation both males and females are fighting capable, with females far better suited to pack tactics aka being in an army.

And as far as trying to get what OP's weird matriarchal army setup is getting at, I don't imagine the ratios would be much different, with like 10% males to females or so to achieve their matriarchal army. Heck, could make it a detail that to maintain the gender ratios they send the remaining unwanted males out to other countries or mercenary companies like lion coalitions.

>>95991527
I just view it as which sex is built for fighting, well, their own kind first and foremost, that, and male lions aren't the ones to sit around all that much.

https://blog.londolozi.com/2018/01/27/are-male-lions-lazier-than-females/

As for the surplus males, I feel like this setup is vulnerable to the fact whichever society can mobilize the male portion now has access to the sex that is stronger in nature, which simply feels too good to let go.

>>95991611
Granted those sort of exist through mercenaries and the like, but it does seem odd no one would simply enlist a portion of the male population into some form of a citizen army given that dimorphism.

>>95990320
Most writers aren't actually capable of writing outside of the basic human experience, which is why AI and robots always want to become human. It's not like they know anything else.

>>95991313
> This is about as close as it gets, although it's all banking off them staying meat eaters, every con makes sense with that, although growing up with a father sounds sad.

Intelligence nullifies evolution, by which I mean that once a species has reached a certain level of intelligence it starts exerting pressure on its environment rather than vice-versa. Kyn became an intelligent species while they were still obligate carnivores; once that happened, their intelligence allowed them to solve problems that might have otherwise encouraged them to evolve a more omnivorous diet. Maybe some kyn with a mutation that allowed them to more efficiently digest plant matter was born, but that kyn was not more or less likely to survive than other kyn because they’d figured out other ways to ensure a steady food supply via herding, ranching, gamekeeping, etc..

Kind of like how with humans, we figured out how to keep women alive after childbirth despite a human baby’s head really being too large for the female birth canal. So natural selection isn’t selecting for women with wider hips or babies with smaller heads, so women are stuck with their more-or-less current hip size.

>>95975701 (OP)
You have to meet every setting where it is. Objectively some settings do not match reality in terms of the respective biological realities of men and women.

A very common thing is to have it so an untrained man and an untrained woman have similar strength differences to reality, but making it so the upper threshhold of what can be achieved with exercise and training is way higher, such that a dedicated woman can easily and by far outstrip the majority of men and be an elite combatant. This is extremely common in genre fiction of all kinds.

Similarly, keep the everyday difference, but give men and women a similar cap. In DC comics, a random man in an alley is likely to be much stronger than a random woman he attacks, but a similarly genetically gifted woman who trains as hard as batman will tend to be close to the same level as batman.

DC is an extreme example where the upper level has people punching through stone pillars, but you also see it with for example 40K, where female combatants without serious biological enhancement can be among the most elite human combatants in the setting, but what discussion there is of sexual violence implies that on average there's a strength difference that mirrors real life.

If you want a "grounded" setting that doesnt completely exclude women from combat you end up with like game of thrones, where there is literally one seven foot women whos an excellent brawler and one or two that are vaguely so skilled with weapons and steering fights away from relying on strength that they do really well. But 99.99 percent of soldiers are men for a reason.

If you ever introduce super soldiers, whether magical or technological, it all goes out the window and you can just have the process work on women no problem.

>>95995335
Let's say it matches reality i.e. Men and women have the same biological differences as in real life.

>>95995396
Well yeah in real life a male army and a female army at remotely similar levels of technology is going to be a disaster for a female one.

It reminds me of how really logically dubious it is for human armies to be able to fight Orc armies in like warcraft. Like how are you going to tank a single swing from an ork mace when they're literally more than twice your size.

>>95995425
In all fairness, orcs are dumb as shit and of a lower tech level. Meanwhile a male army and a female army are basically parallels, but the female army simply isn't as strong or as resilient.
I mean if armies consisting primarily women had any value in the field, ancient cultures would 100% have done that.

>>95991483
>Aren't male lions the fighters anyways though? For prides at least, would the sex ratios be any different from real life or do the males still deal with a billion hurdles?
Male lions are too busy not getting killed by other male lions to hunt. The woms do all the work while the menfolk kill each other (the woms let the men sit around at home because if another man came in, he'd kill their husband and then their children). So I guess the males are the "fighters" in a certain sense, but it seems probable that in an actual war scenario they'd be worse, like how the traits that make you a good thug don't make you a good soldier.

>>95994812
Humans from regions with sustained cow domestication have lactose tolerance. Ability to eat food is probably a sufficiently good selective pressure to actually be selected for even with an intelligent species.

>>95991611
Lions remind me of when they find "matriarchal societies" in the world or in history, and not only are they always small societies in peaceful and abundant areas, but in the cases I saw had it as law that if anything serious happened, the men took over again.

It was literally just dudes sitting around eating sweaty pawpaw fruits on the beach while women played politics, unless some strangers on boats arrived and then suddenly the men are in charge again. These were some of the few cases being used as evidence that women would frequently rule their societies.

>>95979987
>mass produced bio droids
"Bio"?

>>95995818
>Male lions are too busy not getting killed by other male lions to hunt
Male lions do plenty of hunting, they just tend to be nocturnal hunters. They also defend the kills of female lions from hyenas or other scavengers. Also, after male lions reach maturity but before getting a pride, male lions have to hunt themselves or they'll starve; they often do so with their brothers from the same pride.

The idea of male lions just sitting around doing nothing is a myth about as accurate as the "alpha wolf" theory.

>>95995818
Yeah but note that the lactose tolerance isn't universal even in those populations. Case and point, I'm 100% Irish but also lactose intolerant. Also, that's a relatively minor mutation, compared to obligate carnivores developing the ability to eat vegetables and fruits. I think an equivalent mutation in the kyn might just be the ability to, like, taste sweetness.

>>95994812
>Kind of like how with humans, we figured out how to keep women alive after childbirth despite a human baby’s head really being too large for the female birth canal. So natural selection isn’t selecting for women with wider hips or babies with smaller heads, so women are stuck with their more-or-less current hip size.
Actually I saw an article that dissected this concept.
Turns out, baby head sizes aren't actually the decisive factor for the relatively undeveloped state human infants are born in.
Hips could very easily be wider with little extra developmental cost, but we'd all still be shat out half grown, likely due to a balance in cost/benefit between nursing undeveloped young over simply birthing them fully developed.

>>95996055
Kill yourself ND

>>95994812
>Intelligence nullifies evolution

Only the most basic selection pressures. Exerting pressure on the environment results in alterations to the environment cycling back.

Or, tl;dr, "Well well well, if it isn't the inevitable consequences of my own actions."

>>95975701 (OP)
There are already a lot of good points itt about the physicality.

On the mental side of things:
My understanding is that women are less able to get into the 'battle trance' state that preserves cohesion and willingness to act as a group. It's a cool phenomenon, I've felt very similar things. Not sure exactly how real it is because ive never been in a spear wall.

That being said, it would make sense that women would be less capable simply because they're the more valuable sex from a strictly evolutionary perspective.

>>95979987
lol just jack off dude

>>95996083
That's basically around it, they have to be competent to even get into a pride in the first place.

>>95997043
That's what also sort of irked me, I think you need to make a species where either the females undergo harder sexual or natural selection, so that can lead to some form of higher female aggression and willingness to get dirty, for the lack of a better word.

(Since every 'matriarchy' I've heard of, for the lack of a better word, has read similar to this. >>95995986 or was just matrilineal.)


Actually, mentality counts for a lot now that I think about, given that morale is one of the important things here, don't most casualties in warfare from this period come being the first to run away?

>>95984416
Social experiments trying to imitate LotF have the same problem as the Stanford Prison Experiment — there's an innate bias introduced by the scenario that pushes participants to behave in ways they actually wouldn't IRL because everyone can intuit the intended result while being aware of the absent consequences.

>>95997119
I agree with you, that's a good tangent. Selection pressures make human women what they are and what they are will invariably be inferior fighters to men in aggregate.

I think the only way around this is a highly ritualized concept of warfare that not only precludes men in large scale struggles, but is so dominant that any male dominated societies would be so primitive that the warrior women outclass them technologically in such an overwhelming manner that it is sensible. Like iron vs neolithic society type imbalance. Mass organization that can overwhelm any scavenged equipment

>>95996055
Yes. Think of those super artificial soldier girls from sengoku rance, only they're actually cannonfodder and go down as easy as a black Delmo.

>>95975701 (OP)
>if you put an army of women (assuming trained, fit women) against men, and it seems like the men still have the advantage in ancient warfare.
Easy mechanical fix. Just give the ladies a base size 2/3rds that of a male. That way you can pack in more ladies into a front.

Like, if you did that in Warhammer Fantasy and gave girls 2 Strength and 2 Toughness (weaker than goblins) but you had 50% more girls fighting than the enemy then they'd balance out against guys. Will need high strength weapons to compensate against tougher opponents, though.

Imagine a pike wall 50% more dense than anything guys can do.

They'd also cost fewer points. Girls would certainly need to eat less and their armor would require fewer materials which would alleviate some logistical burden or have the same burden support a greater number of soldiers.

>>95997119
If you want a matriarchy with women frontline soldiers, just make your women have a biology that is different from real life humans. It's not hard, you can ask AI to list you ways to do it if you completely lack imagination.

>>95998059
nigga what do you think i've been saying this entire time? My very first post basically said
>This isn't going to work.that way.
and went on a giant tangent about hyenas, because trying to make women frontline soldiers with human biology doesn't work.

The other ideas are interesting (like the lion one) because they aren't trying to fit a round peg in a square hole.

>>95997786
>I think the only way around this is a highly ritualized concept of warfare that not only precludes men in large scale struggles, but is so dominant that any male dominated societies would be so primitive that the warrior women outclass them technologically in such an overwhelming manner that it is sensible.

This is where'd I would like to get my /pol/ thinking cap on.

>>95998118
>This is where'd I would like to get my /pol/ thinking cap on.

go on

>>95998102
We know, you want a "girl" to peg you up the ass with "her" "girl"cock, just like every other hyenacuck.

>>95975701 (OP)
By the very concept of biology: No. War is exahusting the enemies ability to do war, which is intrinsically linked to killing their warriors. Having the one with the larger gonadial tissue suffer the losses of war means you inevitably lose by numbers as the enemy will simply retain most of their reproductional capacity after every campaign while you would need centuries just to catch up to where you started. If your first victory isn't a 100% genocide the next war will see you completely outnumbered. The reason we don't send women to war is not because they are weak and tactically retarded, they are weak and tactically retarded because sending the ovaries to die was suicidal so having them be strong warriors was a waste of energy and a detriment to our combined evolutionary success.

If you were to change the biology of the female so child rearing is now the male's focus: Congratulations! You just turned the females into males and the males into females. This cannot be escaped because biology has defined the specifics of gender so that this is ultimately intrinsic to the definition. (inb4 muh sea horses)

>but what about species were the female is bigger and stronger than the male?
Those do not engage in warfare and thus do not suffer from the evolutionary pressure of something as smart as you specifically targetting your reproduction capacity. You will find that all species that adopt warfare automatically seperate reproduction from warfare the longer this evolutionary pressure persists.

>what about artifical wombs
At that point sex would become vestigial and dimorphism would be a pointless evolutionary holdover as the species moves away from natural selection towards something resembling an ant hive where the spawning machine is a mindless automaton fed by a system of drones to maintain the system and any warfare is done by disposable specialist drones.

Nature simply doesn't give a flying fuck that you can't have everything.

>>95998220
Fallacious priors. When you're at the point of having artificial wombs you're at the point where *you*, not "nature" decides how vestigial a baby's sex is and how big their brains are.

>>95975701 (OP)
No, if you're talking a human setting with no magic bullshit an all female fighting force gets curb stomped even up to modern times. Until advanced cybernetics become a thing this will continue to be the case.

>>95975818
Every technology you have mentioned there would be available to men and men would simply do it better.
>Archery
Mosy women would struggle to pull a conventional longbow of the time.
>Equestrain
Moot, the horse does most of the work so it comes down to combat which men will have the advantage.

Men are faster, have better reflexes, denser bones, thicker skulls and skin, denser muscles. These are biological facts.

>>95998297
>Men have thicker skulls
Threads like this have shown that over and over.

>>95997788
I'm aware of the concept of Bioroids Anon, I was just humoring that you could do the same with non-organic domestic constructs, AKA Sexy B1s.

>>95997786
Not necessarily, you could always use the copout of whatever premier combat technology favoring women for whatever reasons.

Like in BattleTech, it's 80's combat egalitarianism makes a lot of sense since it's primarily mechanized warfare and the apex Warmachine is a giant Stompy Robot you mentally link to.

And no Pardoe, you don't need a Penis to pilot the Robot...

>>95975701 (OP)
I refuse to read any of the (I assume) braindead takes in this thread. Go watch the first 20 minutes of Andrew Wilson's debate against Foodshops to put this question to rest forever.

>>95982920
>>95982581
In a world where women hold the power, they bestow it on men. So among men it becomes the symbol of status to score with the hottest women and rape is seen as the tool of a lowly man who can't compete. Ideally even a woman of medium status can bestow her social power on a decent working man and have him protect and provide for her in exchange for the social credit of having a wife who speaks well of him to the other women.

>>96000602
Kill yourself ND

>>96000058
lul, xhe's seething

>>96001718
Yes, you and people like you are retards who hit their heads on their keyboards.

>>96001107
If you can't be bothered to read the thread then why should any care about some faggot video.

>>96001748
>Yes
lul, and there's the admission.

>>96001107
I don't watch vtubers.

>>96001768
If you fail at reading and thinking.

>>95997788
I'm aware of the concept of Bioroids Anon, I was just humoring that you could do the same with non-organic domestic constructs, AKA Sexy B1s.

>>95997786
Not necessarily, you could always use the copout of whatever premier combat technology favoring women for whatever reasons.

Like in BattleTech, it's 80's combat egalitarianism makes a lot of sense since it's primarily mechanized warfare and the apex Warmachine is a giant Stompy Robot you mentally link to.

And no Pardoe, you don't need a Penis to pilot the Robot...

>>95980983
That assumes they are even honest about that and not just trolling.

I assume equally that everyone means what they say and they say it specifically to troll.