|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:05 pm
Mary Shelley--exemplar par excellence of the quintessential steampunk woman; liberated, literate, and lovely.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:20 pm
KnitChaos  Burn the Land & Boil the Sea...
My opinion on the matter is short and direct:
Let she with a dangerous implement decide for herself.
...You can't take the Sky from Me! huzzah! I like this opinion. If a female is holding something that could cause damage near one of your vital organs, you best be for her rights xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:26 am
From what I've read in the steampunk genre, female heroines don't follow the "path laid out for them" they tend to be strong run aways and law breakers anyway, so men respect them on an equal level. Most women in the steampunk universe live by victorian standards and codes, that's part of what makes it neo-victorian, but the main characters or lead females tend to not follow the same set of rules. Steamship captians for instance might be female, but they have the full respect from their crew having proven themselves as capable or more so than any man.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:46 pm
Akonite Berzerker_prime My group pretty much said "eh, we're altering history anyway. One more detail wouldn't hurt it." In our universe, we had something called the "Great Reform Act" happen sometime around 1850 which put women on completely equal footing as men. We do have it somewhat loosely established, though, that older military institutions are still working through a certain amount of growing pains with it, even fifty years later. Basically, we had to come up with a reason why about 60% of the Badger's crew seem to be women, including her captain. When more than one cast-member wrote into their backstory "it was the only military branch where she felt openly welcome," we decided to take that as a sign. The bit of alternate history that piques my interest is the oft-cropping-up airship. So many SP stories and universes have well-established flight in the form of airships in the Victorian era, decades before the Wright Brothers. I would be interested to try and pin down the historical consequences of having widely-used flight thirty or even forty years earlier than we did in the real world. I could see things like Japan opening its boarders and the Russian Revolution happing a lot sooner than they did. Berz. I think it's safe to assume that Da Vinci's flight inventions got sponsoring rather than sitting in a old note book for a few centuries. Imagine the speed of scientific advancement if he'd been the forefront. I can. I would be rather awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:50 pm
Personally, I like the idea of a military steampunk setting with female soldiers, even female infantry. There is something about a sexy woman with a gun...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:16 pm
tatteredoll I realize steampunk is based in primarily in the Victorian and Edwardian periods but I was wondering how steampunk and women's rights work together? It's not nescessarily based in but rather based on. Steampunk is usually propelled forward with futuristic technologies running off of old technologies. Plus, The victorian era went all the way to the late 1890's, and the remnants of it drifted into the early 1900's
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 9:40 am
FreakishFox KnitChaos Burn the Land & Boil the Sea...
My opinion on the matter is short and direct:
Let she with a dangerous implement decide for herself.
...You can't take the Sky from Me! huzzah! I like this opinion. If a female is holding something that could cause damage near one of your vital organs, you best be for her rights xd Eh, I agree with these. x] Outstanding understanding of the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 10:31 am
Now, I apologize for not being a woman, but I do not mean to offend when I say this.
Men and women are not the same. This does not, by any means, imply that women are inferior to men, or vise versa. Simply different.
What woman would have the strength to wield a 280 pound eather powered plasma cannon? What man has nimble enough fingers and small enough hands to properly maintain a steam engine? It is a woman's precise attention to detail that most men simply do not have that would make them essential when dealing with complex machinery.
The fact of the matter is, that aside from voting, during the Victorian era, it was not that men were superior, and therefor did not have to worry themselves with cooking, and washing up. They simply did not know how. The went to a barber every morning because they did not know how to shave their own faces.
Having said all that, if a woman can rule the British empire...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 10:51 am
@ Dr Phineas Snow
I don't take any offence whatsoever. I'm rather proud of being female with it's ups and downs. Whilst I do martial arts I know I'm not going to work up the upper body strength of a man and I don't think I'd want to, I can kick more flexibly anyway.
I find it silly when women say that men and women are the same since as you've pointed out, they're obviously not. Women are not just men with breasts! x] Victorian men weren't taught how to care for homes which is part of why they didn't, that and they were more interested in things like science and maintaining large factories.
Women can evidently do a wonderful job ruling the British empire, I'm sure men do quite well at cleaning too. Strangely Queen Victoria was apparently against women branching out and not being house wives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 11:11 am
I think that has a lot to do with Queen Victoria being a traditionalist. She was already on shaky ground being a woman. Even though she was not the first Queen of England, she was one of the first who wasn't psychotic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 3:07 am
If a lady has the skills to work aboard an airship, then I say work aboard and airship she may.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 8:57 pm
The driving historical force behind women's suffrage was the wars, mostly WWII and the increased amount of women in the workforce. If technology advanced ahead of its time and brought about a similar extreme war situation, then the suffrage movement would also have come early.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 11:54 pm
Dr Phineas Snow I think that has a lot to do with Queen Victoria being a traditionalist. She was already on shaky ground being a woman. Even though she was not the first Queen of England, she was one of the first who wasn't psychotic. Uh, no, not really. England has had 5.5 actual queens as the ruling monarchs, and only one of them was "crazy."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 12:06 am
Rasabon Dr Phineas Snow I think that has a lot to do with Queen Victoria being a traditionalist. She was already on shaky ground being a woman. Even though she was not the first Queen of England, she was one of the first who wasn't psychotic. Uh, no, not really. England has had 5.5 actual queens as the ruling monarchs, and only one of them was "crazy." I think that's pretty much what he said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 4:15 pm
The main reason for the sudden increase in women's rights and feminism was WWI (Not WWII, Mylian. Suffrage was almost over by WWII). Here's a link so you don't get hit by a wall of text: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/britain_wwone/women_employment_01.shtmlAnd so I think that, as WWI may not have happened, women would still be quite inferior socially to men. Therefore a Steampunk world would be mysognistic. I myself, however (as the political activist), would be all for the Suffragists!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
