A few days ago, published author and political commentator Andrew Klavan commented on Netflix’s recent Witcher fantasy series. Noting a scene where a queen swordfights with great skill, he says the following:
“There’s a couple of scenes where women fight with swords. And I just hate these scenes, because no women can fight with swords. Zero women can fight with a sword.”
Many around the internet took him to task for saying this, but the best responses were by Shadiversity and by this HEMA (Historical European Martial Arts) practitioner. They are not propagandistic cringe, but educated explanations by folks with practical experience. Give them a watch (and watch Shadiversity’s channel; trust me, it’s excellent and educational.)
Rawle
Both Benjamin and John C Wright addressed the issue.whatceverone forgets is that the Ancient world armour was made in metal not as heavy as plate armour but still.
Bottom line women back then women were much shorter and would struggle with the armour and close quarter fighting.
However, the whole point of fiction is to suspend credibility to enjoy the story. So while I understand Klaven’s complaint, it’s ok to have warrior women but you can still incorporate their physiological differences
xavier
Bottom line women back then women were much shorter and would struggle with the armour and close quarter fighting.
I wouldn’t assert that they were 100% the same as men. The male/female strength difference does matter, especially when it comes to marching and armor and the like. It’s more than just fights. I’d say that the people in the videos were addressing Klavan’s specific assertion that women don’t have a chance against men in (non-firearm) armed combat at all.
Rawle
Thanks for the clarification. I would disagree somewhat with the critics who state women have NO chance against men in unarmed combat. It depends on planning and opportunity.
A common method is seduction where the woman distracts the target and kills him
Poisoning of course was the most favoured equalizer. So much so that if men resorted to it they were looked down upon.
Ambush from a high position (hill, parpet, etc) which she drop a small rock or pours oil.
In any case, the bottom line is that over the centuries women have come up with sound methods to defend themselves in pre-firearms times. A writer will need to take into account many factors and then choose what makes sense in the context of the scene or overall stories.
I understand Klaven’s criticism and it’s a welcome one but writers shouldn’t be deterred from writing about women warriors. It comes down how well you weave the story so readers can suspend disbelief and be entertained.
And that’s the most important goal.
xavier
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
Rawle,
Thanks. We shouldn’t lose sight of telling good stories with warrior women
xavier
Any woman can kill a man if he makes a serious mistake. The most common serious mistake is to forget she can kill him if he makes a serious mistake.
Yup, luck matters in fights too.
Andrew Klavan still fails because of St. Joan of Arc. If God wants you to fight, then your sex doesn’t matter.
http://cdn.monasteryicons.com/images/large/st-joan-of-arc-icon-437.jpg
Hans
To my knowledge St Joan didn’t fight hand to hand. She was a ralling point and moral booster.
Yeah she might’ve slashed hearcand there but none of the historical records explicitly mention her fighting like a knight of the time.
So Klaven isn’t wrong and St Joan was a special case.
xavier
An excellent point.
Can’t argue with God.
Pingback: On Martial Maidens II -Rawle Nyanzi