Hormonal Roleplaying Therapy

Also From Microsoft’s own FAQ: "Note that Recall does not perform content moderation. It will not hide information such as passwords or financial account numbers. 🤡

Go into the power shell

then paste in:

reg add HKCU\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\WindowsCopilot /v "TurnOffWindowsCopilot" /t REG_DWORD /f /d 1

like this

Then restart. Also here is how to turn off the awful search suggestions:

all RIGHT:

Why You're Writing Medieval (and Medieval-Coded) Women Wrong: A RANT

(Or, For the Love of God, People, Stop Pretending Victorian Style Gender Roles Applied to All of History)

This is a problem I see alllll over the place - I'll be reading a medieval-coded book and the women will be told they aren't allowed to fight or learn or work, that they are only supposed to get married, keep house and have babies, &c &c.

If I point this out ppl will be like "yes but there was misogyny back then! women were treated terribly!" and OK. Stop right there.

By & large, what we as a culture think of as misogyny & patriarchy is the expression prevalent in Victorian times - not medieval. (And NO, this is not me blaming Victorians for their theme park version of "medieval history". This is me blaming 21st century people for being ignorant & refusing to do their homework).

Yes, there was misogyny in medieval times, but 1) in many ways it was actually markedly less severe than Victorian misogyny, tyvm - and 2) it was of a quite different type. (Disclaimer: I am speaking specifically of Frankish, Western European medieval women rather than those in other parts of the world. This applies to a lesser extent in Byzantium and I am still learning about women in the medieval Islamic world.)

So, here are the 2 vital things to remember about women when writing medieval or medieval-coded societies

FIRST. Where in Victorian times the primary axes of prejudice were gender and race - so that a male labourer had more rights than a female of the higher classes, and a middle class white man would be treated with more respect than an African or Indian dignitary - In medieval times, the primary axis of prejudice was, overwhelmingly, class. Thus, Frankish crusader knights arguably felt more solidarity with their Muslim opponents of knightly status, than they did their own peasants. Faith and age were also medieval axes of prejudice - children and young people were exploited ruthlessly, sent into war or marriage at 15 (boys) or 12 (girls). Gender was less important.

What this meant was that a medieval woman could expect - indeed demand - to be treated more or less the same way the men of her class were. Where no ancient legal obstacle existed, such as Salic law, a king's daughter could and did expect to rule, even after marriage.

Women of the knightly class could & did arm & fight - something that required a MASSIVE outlay of money, which was obviously at their discretion & disposal. See: Sichelgaita, Isabel de Conches, the unnamed women fighting in armour as knights during the Third Crusade, as recorded by Muslim chroniclers.

Tolkien's Eowyn is a great example of this medieval attitude to class trumping race: complaining that she's being told not to fight, she stresses her class: "I am of the house of Eorl & not a serving woman". She claims her rights, not as a woman, but as a member of the warrior class and the ruling family. Similarly in Renaissance Venice a doge protested the practice which saw 80% of noble women locked into convents for life: if these had been men they would have been "born to command & govern the world". Their class ought to have exempted them from discrimination on the basis of sex.

So, tip #1 for writing medieval women: remember that their class always outweighed their gender. They might be subordinate to the men within their own class, but not to those below.

SECOND. Whereas Victorians saw women's highest calling as marriage & children - the "angel in the house" ennobling & improving their men on a spiritual but rarely practical level - Medievals by contrast prized virginity/celibacy above marriage, seeing it as a way for women to transcend their sex. Often as nuns, saints, mystics; sometimes as warriors, queens, & ladies; always as businesswomen & merchants, women could & did forge their own paths in life

When Elizabeth I claimed to have "the heart & stomach of a king" & adopted the persona of the virgin queen, this was the norm she appealed to. Women could do things; they just had to prove they were Not Like Other Girls. By Elizabeth's time things were already changing: it was the Reformation that switched the ideal to marriage, & the Enlightenment that divorced femininity from reason, aggression & public life.

For more on this topic, read Katherine Hager's article "Endowed With Manly Courage: Medieval Perceptions of Women in Combat" on women who transcended gender to occupy a liminal space as warrior/virgin/saint.

So, tip #2: remember that for medieval women, wife and mother wasn't the ideal, virgin saint was the ideal. By proving yourself "not like other girls" you could gain significant autonomy & freedom.

Finally a bonus tip: if writing about medieval women, be sure to read writing on women's issues from the time so as to understand the terms in which these women spoke about & defended their ambitions. Start with Christine de Pisan.

-Byzantium was a civilization that spanned a millenia and a huge geographical area. The treatment and experience of women was not constant at all times in all places.

-Women had different levels of autonomy at different periods of their lives. Many women gained great autonomy after their husband's death (and he usually died much before her), and could be registered as the head of household.

-There are basically two career options for Byzantine women: wife/mother or nun. Sometimes both, but never at the same time.

-Just as in the Latin West, class mattered a lot, and basically determined a person's entire life. Peasant women worked in agriculture and trades, while noble women had a much softer life.

-the idea that noble women were confined to the house is likely an exaggeration. (A byproduct of Byzantium's "distorting mirror") Furthermore, the women's quarters were nowhere near as closed off and restricted as the later Ottoman harems. In many places, women could move freely between their own quarters and the rest of the house. However, if a non-related male was visiting it was customary that the women would not be seen. This seems to be a mainly noble/middle class practice, and not an elite or peasant practice.

-Women played important ceremonial functions at the royal court. The Augusta (one of three titles for an empress) received the wives of visiting nobles, and was so important that, even if the emperor was unmarried, he might crown his daughter for the role. (See Leo the Wise) Additionally, there was an office reserved just for a woman, she was called "the lady with the sash" and she was placed very close to the emperor, and thus highly influential.

-Imperial women were highly influential, and could be incredibly masterful politicians.

-Women weren't forced to have endless babies until they died in childbirth. Byzantine women had access to both contraception and abortion, and there was some amount of recognition of a woman's right to choose. Furthermore, if a woman already had kids, but decided she didn't want to be a mom anymore, joining a convent was always an option. (For wealthy women)

A sketch where I attempted to apply lighting principles to a character for whom the photo reference was differently lit. This is a character I’m playing in a solo game of the OSR TTRPG MÖRK BORG. He is Torvul, an inquisitor seeking an effigy of the basilisk HE for the high priestess. With this effigy, she hopes to appease HE and delay the End of All Things.

As I'm working on my own TTRPG system (my first attempt at it!) I've been reading a lot about game design producing stories. (Shout out to @anim-ttrpgs, @imsobadatnicknames2, and @thydungeongal for some especially interesting posts on the topic!)

That all got me thinking about Dungeons & Dragons, specifically modern D&D, and how it's designed. Despite having played/run quite a bit of D&D, across multiple editions, and having played/run a pile of other systems I like a lot more than D&D, I don't often sit down and actually think about D&D's game design in detail.

It's common to talk about how D&D 5e (and, by extension, its 2024 revision) is especially hard on DMs, and it's true. It's one of the systems most prone to lead DMs to burnout and it helps to propagate the narrative that DMing (and GMing in general) is a laborious process. But why is that? What exactly about the system makes it so tough for DMs to run?

The first and most obvious is that it's a system that wants you to care about competitive game balance (both PC vs. NPC and also comparing PCs to one another), but the tools it offers to achieve that are completely broken. But everybody knows that part. And while D&D is more complex than it presents itself, I don't actually think that's the major factor in it being especially difficult to run. There are plenty of reasonably-complex or crunchy systems that are easier to run, and simpler systems that are harder to run. Complexity isn't the real culprit here, either.

Instead, I think the problem is about storytelling.

Doing some first-time map making! This cozy little abbey in the mountainside was abandoned due to new routes, but Nomen, Fialca @offended-dragon and Salamander moved in to start their own dojo!