Women Have Always Fought

[Steerpike]

A very nicely written and informative article here:

“‘We Have Always Fought’: Challenging the ‘Women, Cattle and Slaves’ Narrative” by Kameron Hurley  A Dribble of Ink

 

[ThinkerX]

A few weeks ago I paged through a non-fiction book at the store titled 'The Mongol Queens' (if I remember right).

The opening section described a document called the 'Secret History of the Mongols'. Seems that Ghengis Khan, while a masterful ruler himself, had sons that were most politely described as 'incompetent'. Fortunately, he had some very capable daughters who 'took over' - ruling nations, leading armies, all that wonderful stuff. Apparently too much wonderous stuff for the editor/author of 'Secret History'. Their mere existence offended him so much he literally excised a hundred years worth of history - apparently cut the actual manuscript apart. Didn't even attempt any alternative narrative, just decided a century's worth of female generals and queens didn't happen.

The author of 'Mongol Queens' had to make his entire case from secondary sources (non-Mongol peoples) because of this excision.

 

[Chilari]

I'm going to have to read that book about the Mongol Queens. Sounds interesting.

 

[Jessquoi]

I found that article incredibly interesting, because there are a lot of feminists who argue that it's actually wrong to try 'make a man out of a women', that making female characters to have 'masculine' characteristics is faux-feminism. They say that rather than seeing the inherent values of women, actually you're just turning women into men. I thought, yeah OK. Women want to be women, not men, and we want to be credited for being women, not women who act like men. And yet I always took a little issue with that because the argument wasn't specific enough. Basically, the idea was that if you put a gun in the hand of a women and make her less emotional (poor men, they just aren't aloud to have feelings!) then you're making her into a man. But this article shows that history has not been kind to its subjects. Especially females. The whole make-up of what is Man and what is Woman has in many cases been rewritten. Actually, more often that even the feminists thought, we are all human, and a woman being a rough-tough fighter is not a masculine woman, she is just who she is. And a man who is sensitive and caring is not a feminine man. He's just a man! In fact, if he wants, he can be a sensitive, caring, rough-tough fighter all at once!
And our characters can, too. I like that Kameron Hurley starkly points out here that fiction writers can change how we see our real world, too. It's not just up to the historians to do their freaking job, thankfully.

 

[Jessquoi]

A few weeks ago I paged through a non-fiction book at the store titled 'The Mongol Queens' (if I remember right).

The opening section described a document called the 'Secret History of the Mongols'. Seems that Ghengis Khan, while a masterful ruler himself, had sons that were most politely described as 'incompetent'. Fortunately, he had some very capable daughters who 'took over' - ruling nations, leading armies, all that wonderful stuff. Apparently too much wonderous stuff for the editor/author of 'Secret History'. Their mere existence offended him so much he literally excised a hundred years worth of history - apparently cut the actual manuscript apart. Didn't even attempt any alternative narrative, just decided a century's worth of female generals and queens didn't happen.

The author of 'Mongol Queens' had to make his entire case from secondary sources (non-Mongol peoples) because of this excision.

The Secret History of the Mongol Queens: How the Daughters of Genghis Khan Rescued His Empire: Jack Weatherford: Amazon.com: Books

Is this the one?

 

[Scribble]

In many cultures women fought alongside men. Romans have accounts of British and Germanic Celt women fighting. You have to grow up in a culture where learning to fight is possible before you are going to take to the field. For most of us here, I will assume that Christian Europe was the major influence on our current cultures. Those early medieval leaders did a solid job of devaluing and de-powering women both legally and religiously. I seem to recall there was a Scottish decree ca 500 AD declaring that women should no longer go into battle with men. That's our inheritance. Who do we know of... Joan of Arc?

The amazons have no known historical basis, but it is important I think to consider why it is such a pervasive and powerful image. Early explorers went looking for them, asking people in new lands if they knew of them. They always seemed to be just over the horizon. Now, we've run out of horizons, but the image of them remains. The Greeks had them in their art, the Romans, and from then on amazons featured in our literature, and now in television and movies. Also Athena. What is it about the idea of the woman warrior that is so magical for us? It's an important myth, for it to persist so long, it must represent something vital to us.

 

[ThinkerX]

Is this the one?

Yep.

Last night, I took a peek at a couple of my olde college textbooks on Russian history. They talk about the mongol conquest which shaped Russia early on, give names of some of the male mongol rulers...but say nothing about Mongol Queens, even though the time period is right.

In many cultures women fought alongside men. Romans have accounts of British and Germanic Celt women fighting. You have to grow up in a culture where learning to fight is possible before you are going to take to the field. For most of us here, I will assume that Christian Europe was the major influence on our current cultures.

Kinda sorta what inspired me to create the 'Amazoni Legion' for Solaria. (Solaria being very roughly comparable to a merger of Charlegmanes Empire and the old eastern roman empire). In my notes, the Amazoni Legion was created as a desperation measure in a time of barbarian invasions. At the time of my tales, most of the recruits come from what might be termed German or Celtic parts of the empire, though I don't use such terms. The Church is dead set against the concept of female fighters, continually attempting legalist end runs to get the legion disbanded (and erased from history), as are the vast majority of people in the more civilized (romanish) eastern empire.

 

[Nihal]

Basically, the idea was that if you put a gun in the hand of a women and make her less emotional (poor men, they just aren't aloud to have feelings!) then you're making her into a man. But this article shows that history has not been kind to its subjects. Especially females.

This reminded me of a comic I've read few days ago:

Spoiler: Amazons! Some almost bad language

The end kinda twists away from their argument, but the comic still expresses the "wtf" reaction to this idea in a humorous way.


*ahem*
Anyway I have some curiosity about the Mongols and their lifestyle and had no idea they had any sort of queens. Nice food for thought.