Dragon Age Dragon Age: Dreadwolf - full reveal in Summer 2024, Solas fangirls rejoice

[Can't handle the bacon]

Stop pretending this is a real game with a serious setting you imbeciles.

That is exactly what I am arguing here, retard. Bioware will retcon the lore to fit the agenda of the current_year. It's ridiculous to argue otherwise.

 

[Fedora Master]

Stop pretending this is a real game with a serious setting you imbeciles.

That is exactly what I am arguing here, retard. Bioware will retcon the lore to fit the agenda of the current_year. It's ridiculous to argue otherwise.

And all I'm saying is that each and every one of you should shut the fuck up and never talk about this horrible franchise again.

 

[Can't handle the bacon]

You seem to think the Qunari are utilitarians instead of religious fanatics.

I'd like to remind everyone that Sten's questline in the first game revolved around him being cast off (or going into exile) because he lost his sword.

Not a magical sword, or a unique sword, or a sword made of expensive materials, or anything like that. Just an ordinary sword that happened to be assigned to him when he was assigned to the Qunari military. His "soul", according to the Qun, is that particular sword, and without it he is a failure. A perfectly utilitarian (or even just any normal) society would tell Sten "ffs, we'll give you a different sword, we're not in any shortage of iron, drama queen". Instead, his code of honor obligated him to remove himself from the society entirely, until he can find his sword again.

I'd like to also remind everyone that the Qunary questline in the second game revolved around their their military leader and his elite entourage spending an indefinite amount of time confined to a section of some random shithole city, far away from their homeland, because someone stole the original tome of the founder of the Qun, and they were honor-bound to seek it at all costs. They threw their entire military at this endeavor. A perfectly utilitarian society would say "who cares about the dusty old tome, we have millions of copies".

 

[Can't handle the bacon]

Stop pretending this is a real game with a serious setting you imbeciles.

That is exactly what I am arguing here, retard. Bioware will retcon the lore to fit the agenda of the current_year. It's ridiculous to argue otherwise.

And all I'm saying is that each and every one of you should shut the fuck up and never talk about this horrible franchise again.

NO!!!

It's fun to dismantle an illogical piece of crap. It's how you learn how not to suck cock.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Because if you accept the radical thesis that a man or woman can be "born with the wrong body", what is stopping you from thinking that men can do girly stuff or vice versa?

You are putting the cart before the horse. The Qunari don't have gender identities in the modern sense of the word, only gender stereotypes (men -> good fighters, women -> good merchants). There is no 'wrong' or 'right' body - just individuals with various aptitudes that make them better suited for this or that profession. And when the stereotypes prove to be unfounded, the Qunari acknowledge that:

• Cassandra: I am surprised you accept fighting at a woman's side, Bull. I understood Qunari women didn't fight.
• Iron Bull: If a Qunari woman really wants to fight and has a gift for it, she becomes an Aqun-Athlok. The Aqun-Athlok joins the warriors and is treated like a male. He becomes a guy, for all intents and purposes.
• Cassandra: But she wouldn't physically become male, surely.
• Iron Bull: Doesn't matter. In the Qun, your role is everything.

There's no transsexualism, only a woman being treated as 'one of the guys' due to her individual aptitudes. You might as well replace 'Aqun-Athlok' with tomboy.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Fedora Master, you don't have to follow this thread if DA lore doesn't interest you. Rest assured, Infinitron will make threads in the News & Content Feedback forum for the more important pieces of DA4 news if that's what interests you.

 

[Can't handle the bacon]

This dialogue from DAI is a direct contradiction of the dialogue from DAO. Also, wtf does Iron Bull mean by "If a Qunari woman really wants to fight and has a gift for it", I thought your individual desires were meaningless and to be discarded in favor of serving the Qun in whatever way your superiors decide. It's not the role of every individual to decide what they want. It's the role of the Tamassrans (or some other group that specializes in assigning roles) to decide what each child will grow up to be based on their characteristics. This is basic Qunary lore, lol. If you can't see the retcon, you are blind and stupid.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

This dialogue from DAI is a direct contradiction of the dialogue from DAO. Also, wtf does Iron Bull mean by "If a Qunari woman really wants to fight and has a gift for it", I thought your individual desires were meaningless and to be discarded in favor of serving the Qun in whatever way your superiors decide.

They *are* meaningless. That's why you must have a gift for it too (which has to be acknowledged by the Tamassrans or whoever).

 

[Can't handle the bacon]

They *are* meaningless. That's why you must have a gift for it too

No, if "having a gift for it" is something that comes IN ADDITION to "wanting to fight", then both factors are claimed to be meaningful. That's what "too" means in the English language - in addition, also, the same as the previous thing.

If aptitude is the only thing that matters (which pre-DAI Qunary lore explicitly established), then "wanting to fight" is completely irrelevant. Which means, Iron Bull has no idea what he is talking about, which is hilarious, considering he is one of the KGB/CIA agents that are in control of their entire society.

DAI had crap writers that injected copious amounts of libtard dogma with no regard for consistency or logic, thus creating direct contradictions and retcons. Accept this fact and move on, dummy.

 

[Can't handle the bacon]

By the way, the fact that you do not in any way choose your role in the Qun is not only explicitly established in DAO and DAII, it is also the reason Tal-Vashoth exist. Sometimes a person's individuality shines through the conditioning, and they decide that havig the ability to make your own choices is worth going full renegade.

So no, a woman's "willingness to fight" is not a factor to be considered alongside her aptitude, and her aptitude is not a factor to begin with. Women do not fight. What they want is irrelevant. That's the basic defining characteristic of the Qunary.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

They *are* meaningless. That's why you must have a gift for it too

No, if "having a gift for it" is something that comes IN ADDITION to "wanting to fight", then both factors are claimed to be meaningful. That's what "too" means in the English language - in addition, also, the same as the previous thing.

If aptitude is the only thing that matters (which pre-DAI Qunary lore explicitly established), then "wanting to fight" is completely irrelevant.

If you want to take the pedantic route, then rest assured - your argument is still crap.

'Really wanting to fight' in that context can be interpreted as meaning 'being willing to endure having her aptitudes as a prospective fighter tested'. And if one doesn't have the willpower to do that (which is a mental aptitude), then she simply isn't cut out to be a Qunari warrior.

 

[Dycedarg]

Because if you accept the radical thesis that a man or woman can be "born with the wrong body", what is stopping you from thinking that men can do girly stuff or vice versa?

You are putting the horse before the cart. The Qunari don't have gender identities in the modern sense of the word, only gender stereotypes (men -> good fighters, women -> good merchants). There is no 'wrong' or 'right' body - just individuals with various aptitudes that make them better suited for this or that profession. And when the stereotypes prove to be unfounded, the Qunari acknowledge that:

• Cassandra: I am surprised you accept fighting at a woman's side, Bull. I understood Qunari women didn't fight.
• Iron Bull: If a Qunari woman really wants to fight and has a gift for it, she becomes an Aqun-Athlok. The Aqun-Athlok joins the warriors and is treated like a male. He becomes a guy, for all intents and purposes.
• Cassandra: But she wouldn't physically become male, surely.
• Iron Bull: Doesn't matter. In the Qun, your role is everything.

There's no transsexualism, only a woman being treated as 'one of the guys' due to her individual aptitudes. You might as well replace 'Aqun-Athlok' with tomboy.

Interesting dialogue. So it seems like the part where only men can serve in the Qunari military is canon after all. One thing I don't understand is what you mean by gender identities. It's obvious the Qunari view men and women as having different aptitudes, hence the gender segregated roles. Do you mean gender identity not related to biological sex? Anyway, I think Inquisition completely fucked up what was left of DA's worldbuilding and the dialogue you quoted just confirms that. There are several problems with the Qunari as a fantasy society, but their bigotry is not one of them. In fact, it's unironically their most endearing quality and what sets them apart from Bioware's inane writing.

And last but not least, the horse should always come before the cart

 

[Can't handle the bacon]

'Really wanting to fight' in that context can be interpreted as meaning 'being willing to endure having her aptitudes as a prospective fighter tested'.

Your retarded mental gymnastics show that you're not only wrong, but that you've already realized that you're wrong, and are just arguing because of hurt feelings and ego. "Really wants to fight" means "really wants to be a soldier". There is no room for interpretive sommersaults and pole-vaulting.

And again - being willing to endure testing is also not a factor in the Qun. If a Tamassran (or whoever) decides that you show promise for a certain role and should be tested for it - you will be tested. Your willingness does not factor into this. It's the basic defining characteristic of the Qun. You haven't presented an argument, you just moved the contradiction a step back, where it remained just as much of a contradiction.

You've lost the debate. Now cower in the shame of your humiliation.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Women do not fight. What they want is irrelevant. That's the basic defining characteristic of the Qunary.

That's the defining characteristic of your reverse SJW train of thought which essentializes gender. Biological sex tends to correlate with certain aptitudes, but it doesn't cause them. So if a biological woman has the aptitudes for being a Qunari warrior, then that's all that matters regardless of gender stereotypes.

"Really wants to fight" means "really wants to be a soldier". There is no room for interpretive sommersaults and pole-vaulting.

Because you *feel* that it means that? Cry me a river, snowflake.

If a Tamassran (or whoever) decides that you show promise for a certain role and should be tested for it - you will be tested. Your willingness does not factor into this.

Seeing if one is willing to have her physical aptitudes tested can in itself be a test of her mental aptitudes.

 

[Can't handle the bacon]

Biological sex tends to correlate with certain aptitudes, but it doesn't cause them.

Imbecile.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Interesting dialogue. So it seems like the part where only men can serve in the Qunari military is canon after all. One thing I don't understand is what you mean by gender identities. It's obvious the Qunari view men and women as having different aptitudes, hence the gender segregated roles. Do you mean gender identity not related to biological sex?

They stereotype them as having different aptitudes based on their biological sex, but a stereotype doesn't necessarily imply essentialization of those traits onto all of the individuals belonging to that particular group. So there's no gender identity of 'I am a [gender] therefore [essentialized aptitudes]' (this sort of gender identity being what led to the phenomenon of transsexualism irl since gender came to represent more than just a simply descriptive term for one's biological sex).

As for gender segregation, the Qunari don't have roles segregated on the basis of gender. You have the craftsmen and the warriors whose roles tend to correlate with biological sex (female and male respectively) and then you have the priests whose role go across gender lines based on aptitudes that do not correlate with biological sex. In neither case are they assigned those roles on the basis of their gender (unless maybe if some IdPoler would like to interpret the priestly caste as representing biologically intersex individuals.)

Anyway, I think Inquisition completely fucked up what was left of DA's worldbuilding

Agreed.

And last but not least, the horse should always come before the cart

Whoops. Fixed that.

 

[Dycedarg]

They stereotype them as having different aptitudes based on their biological sex, but a stereotype doesn't necessarily imply essentialization of those traits onto all of the individuals belonging to that particular group. So there's no gender identity of 'I am a [gender] therefore [essentialized aptitudes]' (this sort of gender identity being what led to the phenomenon of transsexualism irl since gender came to represent more than just a simply descriptive term for one's biological sex).

I really don't know if this is the reason why transsexuality emerged in real life. But this is a poor justification for the surgical interventions people do in order to "fix" the issue. Like, if a girl likes lifting weights it doesn't mean she should have a penis. And if a man likes barbie dolls, it doesn't mean he should cut his own off.

As for gender segregation, the Qunari don't have roles segregated on the basis of gender. You have the craftsmen and the warriors whose roles tend to correlate with biological sex (female and male respectively) and then you have the priests whose role go across gender lines based on aptitudes that do not correlate with biological sex. In neither case are they assigned those roles on the basis of their gender (unless maybe if some IdPoler would like to interpret the priestly caste as representing biologically intersex individuals.)

I think this is where we disagree. When The Qunari say only men can be soldiers and only women can be craftsmen, this an essentialist argument. They are not talking about correlation here, but instituting a rule. And by that rule, certain roles in society are only avaiable to men and others to women. The existence of the priesthood doesn't refute that argument, since it's only one path that happens to be open to both women and men.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

I really don't know if this is the reason why transsexuality emerged in real life. But this is a poor justification for the surgical interventions people do in order to "fix" the issue. Like, if a girl likes lifting wheights it doesn't mean she should have a penis. And if a man likes barbie dolls, it doesn't mean he should cut his own off.

It is a poor justification, but that's where it comes from. Without the notion of gender identity, there'd be no transsexualism. You need transgenderism as an intermediary step for one's mental gymnastics to go from gender as a purely descriptive term for one's biological sex to gender as a sociocultural identity associated with one's biological sex and then to biological sex itself as a sociocultural identity.

I think this is where we disagree. When The Qunari say only men can be soldiers and only women can be craftsmen, this an essentialist argument. They are not talking about correlation here, but instituting a rule.

Debatable unless stated outright pre-DAI. And in DAI, they've done away with it given the notion of Aqun-Athlok.

 

[Dycedarg]

Debatable unless stated outright pre-DAI. And in DAI, they've done away with it given the notion of Aqun-Athlok.

Yeah, I'm purposefully ignoring DAI. Honestly, Inquisition is so retarded I don't think there's a point seriously discussing anything about that game. I started treating Bioware as lolcow after that.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

I wonder how much they'll butcher Tevinter's lore in DA4.

 

[Outlander]

Imagine discussing Dragon Age lore

 

[Tyrr]

Even the writers stopped caring about DA lore long ago.

 

[d1r]

I wonder how much they'll butcher Tevinter's lore in DA4.

Imagine being actually invested in Dragon Age's story past Origins.

 

[Can't handle the bacon]

Imagine discussing Dragon Age lore

Imagine defending DAI retcons, being proven wrong, and then intentionally lying and unironically talking about the follies of "gender essentialism".

 

[Can't handle the bacon]

Even the writers stopped caring about DA lore long ago.

Yup, Gaydar uses exactly the same type of mental gymnastics and retarded word redefinitions that we see from DAI fanboys. "Really wants to fight doesn't mean really wants to be a soldier, it means really wants to be tested to be a soldier... oh wait, this is just as much of a contradiction of the lore established in earlier games. Oh well, better not mention that part and instead start spouting drivel about gender essentialism. Lulz!!!"

Abysmal dishonesty bordering on mental illness.