Radio Free Genderfuck

I think that

Mon, 15 Aug 2005 21:00:08 GMT

I'm going to go back to using balthial, my old journal. I dumped it because too many people I knew in real life read it, but in retrospect I think that's ok. Anyway, I would love to have you all over there.

Edit: I think I added all of you to my Friends list there, if I missed you drop me a line.

Moral Dilemmas

Mon, 15 Aug 2005 18:01:29 GMT

First, some random info:

A very apt, chilling way of talking about women's issues:

...women in America have many problems, including rape. But the situation women face in Pakistan and other developing countries is an order of magnitude worse. One measure of that is that there are more women than men in America and women have a longer life expectancy. It’s the opposite in most of Asia, because females do not have the same access as males to food and medical care.
-Kristoff Responds

Weirdest Website Ever: Hottest Men of the New York Times . The weirdest part is, no one nominated John Tierny:

For people who love bad news: beawitness.org flash.

Thoughts: You hear a lot of "Bush has asked soldiers to make the ultimate sacrifice, while not asking the rest of us for anything at all" and "Why isn't anyone doing anything about Darfur?" (If you play Exalted, you've gotten a lot more between the lines moralizing.) These sentiments strike me as accurate - why arn't we doing anything about the moral crises in the world?

But we arn't. I'm not. I occasionally give someone $10 or post a blog entry or cast a vote, but that's it. I'm not doing anything about it. Are any of you?

What should I make of this? If those of us who are well educated and (somewhat) sensitive to world issues don't do jack, who will? But what do you do, and how do you do it in such a way that it doesn't just make you crazy?

I ask these as serious questions, not grandstanding. I don't know why none of us are doing anything about moral issues, and it troubles me.

Mon, 15 Aug 2005 15:41:49 GMT

John Crawford's book, the Last True Story I'll Ever Tell, is amazing. I looked through it in the Barnes and Noble yesterday and ended up reading 50 pages. Very well written, very fast, but there's a lot to learn there. Heavily reccomended.

Sat, 13 Aug 2005 22:07:06 GMT

From

[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<lj-user="benlehmen">') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]

From <lj-user="benlehmen">

"I had a stupid gag for a Cyberpunk parody novel: After the Japanese have bought all of California, they rename all the cities like this:

Diego-san
Jose-san
Francisco-san
Enselmo-san"

Sat, 13 Aug 2005 21:26:38 GMT

If anyone is interested in d20ish games, here's "z20", a very roughly written (but carefully thought out) point based d20.

http://home.uchicago.edu/~lampros/z20core001.rtf

Also behind
z20 Core System
Copyright 2005 DJ Grey
z20: Like d20, only French. Or Freedom, if you love America.

d20 has its strong points, but it isn't too everyone's likings. z20 removes the parts of d20 I don't personally enjoy, while perserving the parts of the game I consider to be most interesting. This game is intended for jaded and experienced roleplayers.

What I changed::
No Levels: Your rogue deals more sneak attack damage, but now your opponent has more hitpoints.
Now, characters without magic powers are roughly 4-8.
New Skill System: d20's skill system runs into problems outside its original genre. The new skill system is a bit more flexible, if a bit wonky.
Attributes are even more Important: The advantages which were represented by Hit Dice and Save Bonuses are now represented by Attributes.
Points: Its point based. You can use points to tune the power level up or down a little if you like, although its a highly imperfect system.
Simplified the Combat System a little: It plays more or less the same way, I just cut some terminology.
What I didn't change:
The Combat System: If you hated it, you hate it.

Quick Mechanics

Most rolls are roll a d20, add one of your ability modifiers. The higher the better.

Ability modifers now equal your Ability-10. So if you have Strength 14, you have a +4 Strength modifier. Taking 10 is real easy.

When do you make an ability roll?
Strength: Melee attack rolls.
Dexterity: Defense
Endurance: Fort saves
Intelligence: Some spells.
Wisdom: Will saves, ranged attacks.
Charisma: some spells.

For skill rolls, roll a d20 and add your skill rank. (Don't add your ability modifier)

When in doubt, assume DC 20.

Character Creation

Character Creation is point based. You gain a pool of points, which you may use to buy various advantages. The more points you spend on your character, the more powerful your character will be. 30 points should make a fairly scary character.
If you want your characters to be roughly equivalent to Level X, give them (x+5)x3 points. So if you want, say, Level 5 characters, give out 24 points. These points include race, magical items, and all other advantages. You don't get to pick an advantage unless you pay for it.
The GM should keep the point expenditures appropriate for the campaign.

Buying the Basics
You have six ability scores, which you may recognize. All start at 10. 1 points raises an Ability score by 1. You may sell off unwanted ability points. Every two points you take off an ability score gives you 1 point. You can take this as far as your GM will tolerate: if you're playing a Cat, Str 2 might be perfectly appropriate.

You may buy any skill you please for the bargain basement price of 5 ranks per point. The maximum number of ranks you can have in a skill is equal to the governing ability. So if you have Wisdom 12, you can't have more than 12 ranks in any Wisdom skill.

Here's an "official" skill list. Its intended as a jumping off point, feel free to abuse it as you see fit.
Alertness: Listen/spot.
Animal Empathy: Handle Animal
Athletics: Climb/Jump/Swim
Decieve: You can look people in the eye and lie.
Empathy: Sense Motive.
Medicine
Persuade: People do what you want, even if they don't like you. Maybe you're scary. Maybe your logical arguments are convincing, but not much fun to listen to. Maybe you're just annoying.
Politik: Dealing with big, obnoxious organizations like bureaucracies and high school cliques.
Socialize: You're good at making friends and getting people to like you.
Spellcraft
Stealth
Stuntage: Tumble/Balance
Survival

You'll note that there are no combat skills.

Next, choose appropriate equipment. Content yourself with cheap stuff or buy the Equipment advantage below.

You have hit points equal to three times your Endurance. Your Defense is equal to your Dexterity plus any armor bonus.

Feats
Feats cost 1 point each. Some Feats are not availible, but there are a ton of new ones.

Advantages
These are a few of the advantages you might buy for your character: The point cost is in parenthesis.

Alien (1+)
You're some kind of funky Alien thing, like an Elf or a Dwarf or something. Choose one of the fantasy races with ECL 0. Gain its racial package. Divide all ability score modifiers by 2 before applying them. Adopt other modifiers as you feel are appropriate.
Each ECL above 0 costs an additional 2 points. Ie, playing a ECL+2 Drow would cost 6 points.

Equipment (1)
You may start the game with armor, masterwork weapons, or other fanciesh equipment.

Gemini (6)
You're actually two characters, each with identical stats. Photocopy your character sheet and grab another miniature.

Reach (2)
You have reach 10', as a large creature.

Safety (3)
You gain Regneration 0/-. All damage you take becomes nonlethal damage, but you heal nonlethal damage normally. Your character has some kind of funky vulnerability. Tell the GM what it is, or the monster hunters may figure it out at an inconvient moment.

Spell Reistance (2)
You gain Spell Resistance equal to your Wisdom.

Feats

Banned Feats: Iron Will, Great Fortitude, Lightening Reflexes, Skill Focus, Weapon Specialization, Improved Unarmed Strike

New Feats:

Armor Profiency
Prereq: Endurance 13
You may wear light, medium, and heavy armor.

Combat Alertness
You may make attacks of oppurtunity. (Without this feat, you can't make attacks of oppurtunity.)

Counterattack
Prereq: Combat Reflexes, Weapon Focus (any)
If you wield your Weapon Focus weapon in one hand and nothing in the other, you may Counterattack: When an opponent makes a melee attack againist you, you may make an attack of oppurtunity againist him immediatelly.

Unarmed Fighting
You no longer draw an attack of oppurtunity for making an unarmed strike. Your unarmed strikes deal 1d6 nonlethal damage. This feat counts as Improved Unarmed Strike for the purpose of meeting feat prereqs.

Martial Weapon Profiency
You're profienct with all martial weapons.

Second Strike
Prereq: Combat Alertness
When you Full Attack with a melee weapon, you may make one extra attack. The extra attack is made at a -5 penalty.

Speedy
Your move improves by10'. You lose this feat if you wear heavy armor.

Weapon Specialization
Prereq: Combat Alertness, Weapon Focus

Tiger Charge
Prereq: Two Weapon Fighting
You may make a Full Attack at the end of a charge. You may only use this advantage while fighting unarmed or wielding a light weapon (or two light weapons!)

Equipment List

Leather Armor: +2 AC Requires Armor profiency.
Breastplate: +4 AC Requires Armor profiency, lowers your speed by 10.
Platemail: +6 AC Requires armor profiency, lowers your speed by 10.
Shield: +3 AC Requires Martial Weapon Profiency.
Knife 1d4. Apply half your strength bonus to damage rolls. Light.
Mave 1d6. Apply half your strength bonus to damage rolls.
Staff 1d6. Apply your strength bonus to damage rolls. Two-handed.
Shortsword: Apply half your strength bonus to damage rolls. Critical: 19-20 x2. Requires Martial Weapon Profiency Light
Longsword 1d8. Apply half your Strength bonus to damage rolls. Critical: 19-20 x2. Requires Martial Weapon Profiency
Battleax: 1d10, 2 handed. Apply your full Strength bonus to damage rolls. Req Martial Weapon Profiency Two Handed.
Longbow: 1d8, Ranged. You may apply half your strength bonus to damage rolls. Req Martial Weapon profiency. Two handed.

Masterwork Weapons: Are expensive, but grant a +1 on the to hit rolls. If you don't have the Equipment advantage, you can't buy any.

Note that armor is always expensive.

Sample Characters

A few examples to get you going

Ranger
Str 12
Dex 16
End 14
Int 11
Wis 17
Cha 10
Hit Points: 42
Feats: Martial Weapon Profiency, Weapon Focus (Longbow), Weapon Specialization (Longbow), Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Combat Alertness, Armor Profiency
Skills: Alertness +5, Animal Empathy+10, Stealth +4, Survival+16,
Attack: Excellent Longbow +10 Damage 1d8+4
Knife +2, Damage 1d4+2
Full Attack Excellent Longbow +8/+8 Damage 1d8+4
Defense 18 (Leather Armor) Move: 40
Points Spent: Ability Scores 22, Feats 6, Skills 9, Equipment 1
Total: 36 (Level 7)

Barbarian
Str 18
Dex 16
End 18
Int 8
Wis 12
Cha 12
Hit Points: 54
Feats: Martial Weapon Profiency, Weapon Focus (Battleax), Weapon Specialization (Battleax), Power Attack, Speedy, Combat Alertness, Second Strike, Light Armor Profiency
Skills: Alertness+5, Persuade+12, Survival +8, Ride +5
Attack: Excellent Battleax +11 Damage 1d10+10
Full Attack Excellent Battleax +11/+6 Damage 1d10+10
Defense 18 (Breastplate) Move 30
Points Spent: Ability scores 23, Feats 5, Skills 6, Equipment 1
Total: 36 (Level 7)

Footmen
Str 17
Dex 15
End 15
Int 13
Wis 10
Cha 10
Hit Ponints 45
Feats: Martial Weapon Profiency, Weapon Focus (Longsword), Weapon Specialization (Longsword), Power Attack, Combat Alertness, Combat Expertise, Second Strike, Armor Profiency, Improved Disarm
Skills: Persuade +5, Fellowship +10, Alertness +10, Politik +5
Attack: Excellent Longsword +10 Damage 1d8+5
Full Attack: Excellent Longsword +10/+5 Damage 1d8+5
Defense 24 (Platemail, Shield) Move 20
Points Spent: Attributes 20, Feats 9, Skills 6, Equipment 1
Total 36 (Level 7)

Legal Information

Copyright 2005

Designation of Open Game Content: The game mechanics in this file are open game content and are licensed for such use as the Open Game License allows. Parts of this file which are not game mechanics are not covered by the terms of the Open Game License and may not be used without permission.
OPEN GAME LICENSE Version 1.0a

The following text is the property of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. and is Copyright 2000 Wizards of the Coast, Inc ("Wizards"). All Rights Reserved.

1. Definitions: (a)"Contributors" means the copyright and/or trademark owners who have contributed Open Game Content; (b)"Derivative Material" means copyrighted material including derivative works and translations (including into other computer languages), potation, modification, correction, addition, extension, upgrade, improvement, compilation, abridgment or other form in which an existing work may be recast, transformed or adapted; (c) "Distribute" means to reproduce, license, rent, lease, sell, broadcast, publicly display, transmit or otherwise distribute; (d)"Open Game Content" means the game mechanic and includes the methods, procedures, processes and routines to the extent such content does not embody the Product Identity and is an enhancement over the prior art and any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, including translations and derivative works under copyright law, but specifically excludes Product Identity. (e) "Product Identity" means product and product line names, logos and identifying marks including trade dress; artifacts; creatures characters; stories, storylines, plots, thematic elements, dialogue, incidents, language, artwork, symbols, designs, depictions, likenesses, formats, poses, concepts, themes and graphic, photographic and other visual or audio representations; names and descriptions of characters, spells, enchantments, personalities, teams, personas, likenesses and special abilities; places, locations, environments, creatures, equipment, magical or supernatural abilities or effects, logos, symbols, or graphic designs; and any other trademark or registered trademark clearly identified as Product identity by the owner of the Product Identity, and which specifically excludes the Open Game Content; (f) "Trademark" means the logos, names, mark, sign, motto, designs that are used by a Contributor to identify itself or its products or the associated products contributed to the Open Game License by the Contributor (g) "Use", "Used" or "Using" means to use, Distribute, copy, edit, format, modify, translate and otherwise create Derivative Material of Open Game Content. (h) "You" or "Your" means the licensee in terms of this agreement.

2. The License: This License applies to any Open Game Content that contains a notice indicating that the Open Game Content may only be Used under and in terms of this License. You must affix such a notice to any Open Game Content that you Use. No terms may be added to or subtracted from this License except as described by the License itself. No other terms or conditions may be applied to any Open Game Content distributed using this License.

3.Offer and Acceptance: By Using the Open Game Content You indicate Your acceptance of the terms of this License.

4. Grant and Consideration: In consideration for agreeing to use this License, the Contributors grant You a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license with the exact terms of this License to Use, the Open Game Content.

5.Representation of Authority to Contribute: If You are contributing original material as Open Game Content, You represent that Your Contributions are Your original creation and/or You have sufficient rights to grant the rights conveyed by this License.

6.Notice of License Copyright: You must update the COPYRIGHT NOTICE portion of this License to include the exact text of the COPYRIGHT NOTICE of any Open Game Content You are copying, modifying or distributing, and You must add the title, the copyright date, and the copyright holder's name to the COPYRIGHT NOTICE of any original Open Game Content you Distribute.

7. Use of Product Identity: You agree not to Use any Product Identity, including as an indication as to compatibility, except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of each element of that Product Identity. You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark. The use of any Product Identity in Open Game Content does not constitute a challenge to the ownership of that Product Identity. The owner of any Product Identity used in Open Game Content shall retain all rights, title and interest in and to that Product Identity.

8. Identification: If you distribute Open Game Content You must clearly indicate which portions of the work that you are distributing are Open Game Content.

9. Updating the License: Wizards or its designated Agents may publish updated versions of this License. You may use any authorized version of this License to copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under any version of this License.

10. Copy of this License: You MUST include a copy of this License with every copy of the Open Game Content You Distribute.

11. Use of Contributor Credits: You may not market or advertise the Open Game Content using the name of any Contributor unless You have written permission from the Contributor to do so.

12. Inability to Comply: If it is impossible for You to comply with any of the terms of this License with respect to some or all of the Open Game Content due to statute, judicial order, or governmental regulation then You may not Use any Open Game Material so affected.

13. Termination: This License will terminate automatically if You fail to comply with all terms herein and fail to cure such breach within 30 days of becoming aware of the breach. All sublicenses shall survive the termination of this License.

14. Reformation: If any provision of this License is held to be unenforceable, such provision shall be reformed only to the extent necessary to make it enforceable.

15. COPYRIGHT NOTICE
Open Game License v 1.0a Copyright 2000, Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

System Reference Document Copyright 2000-2003, Wizards of the Coast, Inc.; Authors Jonathan Tweet, Monte Cook, Skip Williams, Rich Baker, Andy Collins, David Noonan, Rich Redman, Bruce R. Cordell, John D. Rateliff, Thomas Reid, James Wyatt, based on original material by E. Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson.

Unearthed Arcana Copyright 2004, Wizars of the Coast, Inc.

z20 System Copyright 2005, DJ Gray. All Rights Reserved.

END OF LICENSE

Fri, 12 Aug 2005 18:38:22 GMT

Just finished Half-Blood Prince. I'm really curious about the next book. Not the big Voldemort plot, cuz its a little cheesy, more the personal aspects. So far, there's been a big dose of normal life in all of the books - Quidittich, the Dursleys, exams. What will the dose of normal be in book 7? Will Harry move out, and if so, where will he live, and who will he meet?

Anyway, I loved the book. I wonder if its possible to do something similiar, only more sophisticated and adult. hmmmm.

Wed, 10 Aug 2005 02:41:02 GMT

I feel that Furries ought to be funnier than they are. They're still good for a giggle though.

Mon, 08 Aug 2005 06:38:37 GMT

After reading Neph's commentary, I went out and bought Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. My little sister stole it promptly. She graciously loaned me Order of the Phoenix, which I'm now reading. Its an amazing book for someone who likes to analyze popular literature and fantasy worlds (ie, me.) Her world is incredibly well thought out and thematically consistent. Fantasy authors have a lot to learn from her - and why havn't they, given her immense popularity? From a writing perspective, I can see why the books are so much fun.

Almost every sentence could provide some new and wonderful fact or piece of writing. I think its the literary equivalent of a slot machine: intermittent positive reinforcement. Maybe I'm overthinking it.

Anyway, I love the book and the world. I hope someone will pick up the cooler elements of the book and work them into their own novel. Hopefully, it will have a somewhat more adult and somewhat less British perspective. The frequent food scenes always make me wonder what's going on in the rest of the world. British food totally ruins suspension of disbelief. 3D sports played on broomsticks I can accept, rashers and toast strike me as the work of a nefarious cumin thief.

So uh, yeah. Hope to finish OP in the next day or two and start on HBP in a week or two.

Wed, 03 Aug 2005 03:07:55 GMT

One of the most important (or loudest, anyway) occurences in Asia right now is the anger between China and Japan. This New York Times article summarizes it pretty well.

August 3, 2005
Ill Will Rising Between China and Japan
By NORIMITSU ONISHI and HOWARD W. FRENCH

TOKYO, Aug. 2 - Japanese lawmakers on Tuesday overwhelmingly passed a resolution that plays down this country's militarist policies in World War II, less than two weeks before ceremonies take place across Asia marking the 60th anniversary of the war's end on Aug. 15.

Though expressing "regret" for the wartime past, the resolution omitted the references to "invasion" and "colonial rule" that were in the version passed on the 50th anniversary.

The action will most likely be seen by China and Japan's other Asian neighbors as further proof of growing nationalism here. A right-wing vandal seemed to capture a growing sentiment last week when he tried to scrape off the word "mistake" from a peace memorial in Hiroshima that said of Japan's war efforts: "Let all the souls here rest in peace, as we will never repeat this mistake."

But in the weeks leading to Aug. 15, the leaders of China have been making sure that their view of the war, simply called the Anti-Japanese War there, gets across.

China is spending $50 million to renovate a memorial hall for the victims of the Rape of Nanjing in 1937, when Japanese soldiers killed 100,000 to 300,000 civilians, at a time when details of it are disappearing from Japanese school textbooks. Chinese state television is broadcasting hundreds of programs on China's resistance against Imperial Japan.

The two countries find themselves playing out old grievances in a new era of direct rivalry for power and influence. Never before in modern times has East Asia had to contend with a strong China and a strong Japan at the same time, and the prospect feeds suspicion and hostility in both countries.

China has experienced 25 years of extraordinary economic growth, deeply extending its influence throughout Asia. But just when China's moment in the sun seems to be dawning, Japan is asserting itself: seeking a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, transforming its Self-Defense Forces into a real military and revising its war-renouncing Constitution.

Both governments are encouraging nationalism for their own political purposes: China to shore up loyalty as Marxist ideology fades, Japan to overcome long-held taboos against expanding its military. With the impending 60th anniversary, both are trying to forge a future on their version of the past.

In Japan, major newspapers have published articles defending the Class A war criminals convicted by the postwar Tokyo Trials, and a growing number of textbooks whitewash Japan's wartime conduct. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi makes annual visits to Yasukuni Shrine, where war dead including Class A war criminals are enshrined.

In China, a new television series called "Hero City" tells of how cities across China "fought bravely against Japan under the leadership of the Communist Party." In Beijing on Aug. 13, six former Chinese airmen from the Flying Tigers squadron are to recreate an air duel with Japanese fighters.

"On the one hand we have a victim's mentality, and on the other we don't see this much smaller country as being worthy of comparison with us," said Pang Zhongying, a professor of international relations at Nankai University in the northeastern Chinese city of Tianjin. "The reality is that they must accept the idea of China as a rising military power, and we must accept the idea of Japan becoming a normal nation, whether we like it or not."

To Japanese conservatives, becoming a normal nation amounts to a revision of the American-imposed peace Constitution that they feel castrated - a term they use deliberately and frequently - their country.

Arguing that Japan must draw closer to the United States, Mr. Koizumi's government has reinterpreted the Constitution to allow Japanese troops in Iraq and has reversed a longtime ban on the export of arms to join the American missile defense shield. Recent polls show an increasing percentage of Japanese favoring a revision of the Constitution.

The conservative news media have helped demonize China, as well as North Korea, to soften popular resistance to remilitarization. Sankei Shimbun, the country's most conservative daily, recently ran a series about China called "The Threatening Superpower."

One of the most emotional issues has been the dozen or so Japanese who were abducted by North Korea, mostly in the 1970's. The whereabouts of one woman, Megumi Yokota, remains a particularly sore point.

North Korea said she had died, and late last year gave Japan what it said were her remains. After DNA tests were done, the Japanese government accused North Korea of deliberately handing over someone else's remains, though most independent experts called the tests inconclusive.

Shinzo Abe, 50, the acting secretary general of the governing Liberal Democratic Party and the leading member of a young generation of hawks, immediately called for economic sanctions.

Hiromu Nonaka, 79, who retired as secretary general about a year ago, said the present situation reminded him of prewar Japan, when politicians manipulated public opinion to rouse nationalism through slogans like "Destroy the brute Americans and British."

"Mr. Abe, who has been in the forefront of the abductee issue, turned toward making all of North Korea into the enemy," Mr. Nonaka said.

Mr. Abe is also one of several conservative politicians who defend textbooks that have outraged Chinese and South Korean demonstrators by sanitizing Japan's wartime atrocities. References to the women forced into sexual servitude by Japan's wartime authorities, called comfort women, all but disappeared this year from governmentendorsed junior high school textbooks.

At a recent news conference, Mr. Abe was asked whether politicians had exaggerated the threat from North Korea and China to influence public opinion and ease Japan toward revising its peace Constitution. "Well, there may be such opinions, but I think it's rubbish," he said.

In China and Japan alike, hatred and suspicion of the other are being deliberately fostered, in many cases by the governments themselves.

In Tokyo, 291 teachers have been reprimanded in the last year and many may face dismissal for refusing to stand before the rising-sun flag at school enrollment and graduation ceremonies and sing Japan's national anthem, "Kimigayo," or "His Majesty's Reign," considered symbols of Japanese imperialism by most Asians and some Japanese. Those signals of respect used to be optional, or shunned because of their associations with Japan's past militarism.

Efforts to control how the Japanese, especially the young, view Japan and China have even reached the comics. Late last year, 47 local Japanese politicians from all over the country protested that a comic series called "The Country Is Burning," published in "Young Jump Weekly," had distorted the Rape of Nanjing.

The drawings did not actually depict Japanese soldiers committing atrocities, but showed ditches filled with Chinese cadavers. The magazine's publisher quickly backed down and announced that it would delete or modify the offending passages when the series was reprinted in book form.

Hidekazu Inubushi, a politician and leader of the protest, added that forcing respect of the Japanese national anthem and flag was necessary because postwar Japanese education had focused too much on wartime misdeeds and produced graduates who were not proud of their country.

"To correct the big mistake in our education in the postwar 60 years, we've got to introduce forceful methods," he said.

Today's Chinese have been shaped by an anti-Japanese patriotic education, overseen by a government that is aware that its own domestic credentials depend, in part, on a hard line toward Japan. Having a hated neighbor shores up national solidarity and helps distract people from the failings of the Chinese Communist Party. Besides the party's monopoly on power, few orthodoxies are as untouchable today as hostility toward Japan.

Yu Jie, a Chinese author who spent time in Japan researching a book on the two countries' relations, "Iron and Plough," and went on to write another book about his experiences in Japan, discovered that at his own expense.

The books are nuanced works, built around lengthy conversations with pacifists, right-wing activists, scholars of every stripe and ordinary Japanese. One chapter, "Looking for Japan's Conscience," warned against speaking of Japanese in blanket terms.

"In the 60 years since the war, numerous Chinese and Japanese people have worked for the difficult Sino-Japanese friendship, selflessly emitting a dim yet precious light," he wrote.

The books appeared briefly in stores and then disappeared. In a country where censorship is routine, that is a sure sign, the author said, that officials had put pressure on the publisher or the stores to withdraw them.

Mr. Yu said China's policy toward Japan was unlikely to become more balanced as long as an authoritarian government remained in place, because Japan offered an unrivaled distraction from China's own problems.

"We criticize Yasukuni Shrine, but we have Mao Zedong's shrine in the middle of Beijing, which is our own Yasukuni," he said. "This is a shame to me, because Mao Zedong killed more Chinese than the Japanese did. Until we are able to recognize our own problems, the Japanese won't take us seriously."

I always judge the Japanese much more harshly for their racism. Partially because they're a wealthy democracy whose had a long time to deal with these issues. Partially cuz I like China so much. Partially because everytime I watch Anime, the blatant sexism make me want to start yelling about how my Grandfather prosecuted those damn Nip war criminals in Taiwan. Partially cuz, I dunno, its just so much fun to beat up on the Japanese.

In case you never knew, I'm not always a very nice person.

Iron Heroes First Impressions

Tue, 02 Aug 2005 17:21:19 GMT

Bought Iron Heroes first thing yesterday, spent an hour or two reading through it. Lots of interesting combat tactics in there. If you run crunchy D&D with all the trimmings, you might find a lot to love in the book. The new special abilities give a warrior type a lot more options in combat. The new feats and classes let you distinguish 8+ different types of fighter. He also introduced some things which needed to be in the game since Day 3, such as skill challenges. (power attack for skills, basically.) Generally, the design looks solid if a little rough around the edges.

The writing is horrible, though. His writing is wordy, convoluted, and generally unreadable. Grammatical mistakes jump at you. Some paragraphs I read three times and still didn't understand. The bazillion complicated subsystems didn't help. Do I really need class features, token pools, AND feat mastery? Between the systems and the writing, the game looks unusable.

But again, the systems are great. I'm going to steal as many of his ideas as I can in my own d20ish work. I highly reccomend the book to anyone who has the d20 skills and patience to use.

Thoughts on Abortion

Tue, 02 Aug 2005 16:52:08 GMT

Prompted by John Snead's latest commentary:

"Abortion is murder" is, to me, an intellectually coherent statement: It's internally consistent, you could defend in a class on logic. (As opposed to, say, the "strict constructionist" view of Judicial Philosophy.)

"Abortion is a human right" is not, to me, a coherent statement. Women have the right to not have children. I think a perfectly valid solution is "Don't have sex." Sex without risk is not a human right. We have the right to have and enjoy consensual sex, sure. But risk is in the biology.

To me, abortion is a question without an obvious answer. Personally, I am prochoice. If we're not sure if something should be illegal or not, it should probably be legal. If abortion raises the quality of life (I think it does), then it should probably be legal.

I think the politics are driven by that "Don't have sex" part. To some people, "Women, be chaste" is awfully appealing. Those people are, I think, sexist and hypocritical. They lobby againist abortion, but they have a closet full of hardcore porn. (how did the porn get made, asshole?) And they arn't prepared to make fathers truly responsible for their children. Those with Christian motivations can be even more hypocritical. Divorce is OK, being rich is ok, but abortion is sinful - which Bible are they reading?

The prochoice people have problems with the "Don't have sex" part as well. Prochoicers seem to think "women have the right to not have kids, so abortion needs to be legal." The possibility of not having sex is impossible to consider. Or they don't see any reason why abortion might be wrong because of what abortion is, not because of the condition that necessitated the abortion.

Anyway, those are my long winded thoughts. Opinions?

Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:23:37 GMT

I agree with Friedman 100% here. The US needs to stop squabbling about internal issues and see the big picture:

July 27, 2005
Learning From Lance
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

There is no doubt that Lance Armstrong's seventh straight victory in the Tour de France, which has prompted sportswriters to rename the whole race the Tour de Lance, makes him one of the greatest U.S. athletes of all time. What I find most impressive about Armstrong, besides his sheer willpower to triumph over cancer, is the strategic focus he brings to his work, from his prerace training regimen to the meticulous way he and his cycling team plot out every leg of the race. It is a sight to behold. I have been thinking about them lately because their abilities to meld strength and strategy - to thoughtfully plan ahead and to sacrifice today for a big gain tomorrow - seem to be such fading virtues in American life.

Sadly, those are the virtues we now associate with China, Chinese athletes and Chinese leaders. Talk to U.S. business executives and they'll often comment on how many of China's leaders are engineers, people who can talk to you about numbers, long-term problem-solving and the national interest - not a bunch of lawyers looking for a sound bite to get through the evening news. America's most serious deficit today is a deficit of such leaders in politics and business.

John Mack, the new C.E.O. at Morgan Stanley, initially demanded in the contract he signed June 30 that his total pay for the next two years would be no less than the average pay package received by the C.E.O.'s at Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns. If that average turned out to be more than $25 million, Mr. Mack was to be paid at least that much. He eventually backed off that demand after a howl of protest, but it struck me as the epitome of what is wrong in America today.

We are now playing defense. A top C.E.O. wants to be paid not based on his performance, but based on the average of his four main rivals! That is like Lance Armstrong's saying he will race only if he is guaranteed to come in first or second, no matter what his cycling times are on each leg.

I recently spent time in Ireland, which has quietly become the second-richest country in the E.U., first by going through some severe belt-tightening in which everyone had to sacrifice, then by following that with a plan to upgrade the education of its entire work force, and a strategy to recruit and induce as many global high-tech companies and researchers as possible to locate in Ireland. The Irish have a plan. They are focused. They have mobilized business, labor and government around a common agenda. They are playing offense.

Wouldn't you think that if you were president, after you had read the umpteenth story about premier U.S. companies, such as Intel and Apple, building their newest factories, and even research facilities, in China, India or Ireland, that you would summon the country's top business leaders to Washington ask them just one question: "What do we have to do so you will keep your best jobs here? Make me a list and I will not rest until I get it enacted."

And if you were president, and you had just seen more suicide bombs in London, wouldn't you say to your aides: "We have got to reduce our dependence on Middle East oil. We have to do it for our national security. We have to do it because only if we bring down the price of crude will these countries be forced to reform. And we should want to do it because it is clear that green energy solutions are the wave of the future, and the more quickly we impose a stringent green agenda on ourselves, the more our companies will lead innovation in these technologies."

Instead, we are about to pass an energy bill that, while it does contain some good provisions, will make no real dent in our gasoline consumption, largely because no one wants to demand that Detroit build cars that get much better mileage. We are just feeding Detroit the rope to hang itself. It's assisted suicide. I thought people went to jail for that?

And if you were president, would you really say to the nation, in the face of the chaos in Iraq, "If our commanders on the ground say we need more troops, I will send them," but they have not asked. It is not what the generals are asking you, Mr. President - it is what you are asking them, namely: "What do you need to win?" Because it is clear we are not winning, and we are not winning because we have never made Iraq a secure place where normal politics could emerge.

Oh, well, maybe we have the leaders we deserve. Maybe we just want to admire Lance Armstrong, but not be Lance Armstrong. Too much work. Maybe that's the wristband we should be wearing: Live wrong. Party on. Pay later.

I hope this guy wins:July 27, 2005
Veteran of Iraq, Running in Ohio, Is Harsh on Bush
By JAMES DAO

CINCINNATI, July 22 - In the Second Congressional District of Ohio, which Republicans have controlled for the last two decades, the quickest route to political oblivion could be the one chosen by Paul L. Hackett: calling President Bush a "chicken hawk" for not serving in Vietnam and harshly criticizing the decision to invade Iraq.

But Mr. Hackett, the Democratic candidate in the Aug. 2 special Congressional election, is not an ordinary politician. Until four months ago, he was serving in the Marines, commanding a civil affairs unit in Iraq.

If Mr. Hackett is elected, he will become the first member of Congress to have served in the Iraq war. That alone has helped Mr. Hackett, a 43-year-old lawyer, unexpectedly turn this potential walkover into a sharply contested race.

"When you tell people he just got back from Iraq, they stop and listen," said Timothy Burke, the chairman of the Democratic Party in Hamilton County, one of seven southern Ohio counties in the district. "He'd not have nearly as many people paying attention to him if it weren't for that initial grabber."

Mr. Hackett's Republican opponent, Jean Schmidt, has poured more than $200,000 of her own money into her campaign and traveled tirelessly across the district. Her campaign has received tens of thousands of dollars from national Republican committees, and Mr. Bush has agreed to record a telephone message that will be delivered the weekend before the special election.

"I'm a runner, and when you are overconfident, that's when you see your competition's shadow," said Ms. Schmidt, 53, who has completed 54 marathons. "And I won't see his."

The candidates are competing to fill the seat held for 12 years by Rob Portman, who resigned to become Mr. Bush's trade representative. Mr. Portman routinely won the district, which stretches from poverty-stricken communities along the Ohio River to affluent Cincinnati suburbs, with more than 70 percent of the vote.

The national Democratic Party initially ignored the race. But Mr. Hackett has changed some minds, and the party has begun dispatching young staff members to the field, hoping to send a message that Mr. Bush is weak in one of his most loyal districts.

In addition, the Democratic strategist James Carville was the headliner of an event in Cincinnati on July 19 that raised nearly $100,000 for Mr. Hackett, who trails Ms. Schmidt in fund-raising three to one. On Thursday, Max Cleland, a former Democratic senator from Georgia and a Vietnam veteran, campaigned with Mr. Hackett, calling his decision to volunteer for Iraq "an act of conscience."

"Someone who has led on the battlefield, that's the kind of person you want to see in the United States Congress," Mr. Cleland said at a rally in Blue Ash.

Mr. Hackett, the son of a traveling salesman, joined the Marine Corps in college and was honorably discharged in 1999. He joined again in 2004, commanding a civil affairs unit in Ramadi and Falluja. A lean 6-foot-4, he is garrulous, profane and quick with a barbed retort or a mischievous joke. He and his wife, Suzi, have three children, ages 8, 4 and 1.

If he loses the race, he says, he will probably return to Iraq next year.

Ms. Schmidt is the daughter of a well-known local banker who owned Indianapolis race car teams on the side. Small, wiry and intense, she exudes seriousness and is given to long pauses before answering questions. She is married to an investment counselor, Peter, and they have a 27-year-old daughter.

Mr. Hackett, who said he had never had political ambitions before, jumped into the race the day he returned from Iraq in March when a friend told him about Mr. Portman's nomination.

Ms. Schmidt, a former state representative, said she formed an exploratory committee, studied a straw poll and contemplated the race for a week before joining the crowded Republican primary.

The candidates are even more different on most issues. Ms. Schmidt supports making Mr. Bush's tax cuts permanent, but offers no plans for closing the federal deficit other than trimming "unnecessary pork" and bureaucratic inefficiency.

Mr. Hackett opposes making those cuts permanent, asserting that troops in Iraq are not receiving adequate supplies or benefits.

Ms. Schmidt, a leader of Right to Life of Greater Cincinnati, wants abortion outlawed. Mr. Hackett says he opposes abortion but believes government should not dictate a woman's health care decisions.

The two, however, support broad gun rights. His opposition to banning assault weapons has gotten Mr. Hackett, who says he owns military-style rifles and has a permit to carry concealed weapons, into arguments with many Democrats.

"The Democratic Party is wrong on this," he said. "We don't want government dictating a woman's right to choose. How do I tell people it's O.K. to dictate their gun ownership?"

Mr. Bush has also emerged as an issue. Ms. Schmidt contends people in the district, which voted 64 percent for Mr. Bush last year, adore the president. Her only difference with the administration, she said, is on Mr. Bush's proposal to create private accounts in Social Security, which she says could be risky.

Mr. Hackett has been bluntly dismissive of Mr. Bush, saying the United States should have focused on capturing Osama bin Laden instead of invading Iraq so quickly. In a public forum, he called Mr. Bush the biggest threat facing the United States, a remark that has infuriated voters, Republicans say.

Yet Mr. Hackett has also tried to exploit Mr. Bush's popularity here, opening his lone television commercial with Mr. Bush saying, "There is no higher calling than service in our armed forces."

Republicans have derided the spot as hypocritical. "I want to win," Mr. Hackett replied.

Democrats are also hoping that disgust with a scandal involving the administration of the Republican governor, Bob Taft, and a Republican coin dealer who is accused of misappropriating $13 million from a state workers compensation fund will hold down Republican turnout.

Mr. Hackett has tried to tarnish Ms. Schmidt's integrity as well, criticizing her for not disclosing free tickets to a Cincinnati Bengals football game she received from a lobbyist last year. Ms. Schmidt blamed the lobbyist for the oversight, and has repaid him $644.

But Ms. Schmidt is a proven battler, having bested several better-known candidates, including Pat DeWine, the son of Senator Mike DeWine, in the primary. She contends that although voters respect Mr. Hackett's military service, it will not be the deciding factor.

At the Warren County fair, where Ms. Schmidt bought a 230-pound pig from a 9-year-old girl and watched a demolition derby, Charles Hartman, a Democrat turned Republican, agreed.

"It's a positive thing for him," Mr. Hartman, a substance-abuse specialist with a nonprofit group, said after meeting Ms. Schmidt. "But we're not at war here."

But Todd Schulte, a Republican, said Mr. Hackett's service had caused him to consider voting Democratic on Aug. 2.

Mr. Schulte, a 40-year-old business owner, happened on Mr. Hackett's event in Blue Ash and was impressed with the candidate's decision to volunteer for Iraq.

"He's got a wife, kids and a good job but he's not sitting in the back row," Mr. Schulte said. "That gives me something to think about."

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 14:06:41 GMT

"Mr. Lehrer is not restrained by such inhibiting factors as taste."

Neither, apparently, is Rapping Hitler

Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:49:33 GMT

Still in China, back on Friday.

I visited Yunnan. Lijiang is the happiest place on earth.

Why is Harry Potter so much fun? I read the first book, I don't understand the appeal.

Why is there so little good d20 design? Or have I not seen it? On a related note, good d20 design often isn't all that exciting.

Thu, 14 Jul 2005 05:55:59 GMT

Writing from a Beijing internet cafe. More info on the trip later, just wanted to say hi.

Fri, 08 Jul 2005 00:26:15 GMT

Here's hoping for White Wolf's new pay-to-play LARP announcement. I think it makes perfect sense. New revenue for White Wolf has to be a good thing for gamers.

Of course, I guess it could turn out to be legal manuveuring or a desperation move of some nature, but I'm inclined to give WW the benefit of the doubt.

Thu, 07 Jul 2005 18:10:37 GMT

I leave for China tommorow morning. I will return on the 22nd. I can best be reached at my gmail account or my uchicago.edu email. (the part before the at symbol is "lampros") Anyone with reccomendations, feel free to leave 'em. We have a week in Beijing, we're still trying to figure out the second week. We'll probably try to fly down to Yunnan to escape the heat, but we don't have that much time to play with.

Tue, 05 Jul 2005 05:41:56 GMT

Very relevant piece on marriage from the nytimes. Homosexuals arn't changing marriage, hetrosexuals did back in the 70s.

July 5, 2005
The Heterosexual Revolution
By STEPHANIE COONTZ

Olympia, Wash.

THE last week has been tough for opponents of same-sex marriage. First Canadian and then Spanish legislators voted to legalize the practice, prompting American social conservatives to renew their call for a constitutional amendment banning such marriages here. James Dobson of the evangelical group Focus on the Family has warned that without that ban, marriage as we have known it for 5,000 years will be overturned.

My research on marriage and family life seldom leads me to agree with Dr. Dobson, much less to accuse him of understatement. But in this case, Dr. Dobson's warnings come 30 years too late. Traditional marriage, with its 5,000-year history, has already been upended. Gays and lesbians, however, didn't spearhead that revolution: heterosexuals did.

Heterosexuals were the upstarts who turned marriage into a voluntary love relationship rather than a mandatory economic and political institution. Heterosexuals were the ones who made procreation voluntary, so that some couples could choose childlessness, and who adopted assisted reproduction so that even couples who could not conceive could become parents. And heterosexuals subverted the long-standing rule that every marriage had to have a husband who played one role in the family and a wife who played a completely different one. Gays and lesbians simply looked at the revolution heterosexuals had wrought and noticed that with its new norms, marriage could work for them, too.

The first step down the road to gay and lesbian marriage took place 200 years ago, when Enlightenment thinkers raised the radical idea that parents and the state should not dictate who married whom, and when the American Revolution encouraged people to engage in "the pursuit of happiness," including marrying for love. Almost immediately, some thinkers, including Jeremy Bentham and the Marquis de Condorcet, began to argue that same-sex love should not be a crime.

Same-sex marriage, however, remained unimaginable because marriage had two traditional functions that were inapplicable to gays and lesbians. First, marriage allowed families to increase their household labor force by having children. Throughout much of history, upper-class men divorced their wives if their marriage did not produce children, while peasants often wouldn't marry until a premarital pregnancy confirmed the woman's fertility. But the advent of birth control in the 19th century permitted married couples to decide not to have children, while assisted reproduction in the 20th century allowed infertile couples to have them. This eroded the traditional argument that marriage must be between a man and a woman who were able to procreate.

In addition, traditional marriage imposed a strict division of labor by gender and mandated unequal power relations between men and women. "Husband and wife are one," said the law in both England and America, from early medieval days until the late 19th century, "and that one is the husband."

This law of "coverture" was supposed to reflect the command of God and the essential nature of humans. It stipulated that a wife could not enter into legal contracts or own property on her own. In 1863, a New York court warned that giving wives independent property rights would "sow the seeds of perpetual discord," potentially dooming marriage.

Even after coverture had lost its legal force, courts, legislators and the public still cleaved to the belief that marriage required husbands and wives to play totally different domestic roles. In 1958, the New York Court of Appeals rejected a challenge to the traditional legal view that wives (unlike husbands) couldn't sue for loss of the personal services, including housekeeping and the sexual attentions, of their spouses. The judges reasoned that only wives were expected to provide such personal services anyway.

As late as the 1970's, many American states retained "head and master" laws, giving the husband final say over where the family lived and other household decisions. According to the legal definition of marriage, the man was required to support the family, while the woman was obligated to keep house, nurture children, and provide sex. Not until the 1980's did most states criminalize marital rape. Prevailing opinion held that when a bride said, "I do," she was legally committed to say, "I will" for the rest of her married life.

I am old enough to remember the howls of protest with which some defenders of traditional marriage greeted the gradual dismantling of these traditions. At the time, I thought that the far-right opponents of marital equality were wrong to predict that this would lead to the unraveling of marriage. As it turned out, they had a point.

Giving married women an independent legal existence did not destroy heterosexual marriage. And allowing husbands and wives to construct their marriages around reciprocal duties and negotiated roles - where a wife can choose to be the main breadwinner and a husband can stay home with the children- was an immense boon to many couples. But these changes in the definition and practice of marriage opened the door for gay and lesbian couples to argue that they were now equally qualified to participate in it.

Marriage has been in a constant state of evolution since the dawn of the Stone Age. In the process it has become more flexible, but also more optional. Many people may not like the direction these changes have taken in recent years. But it is simply magical thinking to believe that by banning gay and lesbian marriage, we will turn back the clock.

Stephanie Coontz, the director of public education for the Council on Contemporary Families, is the author of "Marriage, a History: From Obedience to Intimacy, or How Love Conquered Marriage."

I got four RPGs in the mail yesterday.

Sun, 03 Jul 2005 23:52:39 GMT

First Impressions:

X-Crawl: There were a few cool ideas here, but not nearly enough to fill the pages. Poor production values and mediocre crunch don't help the game to make an impression. And it ddn't.

Blue Planet: A great example of how to use and not to use ideas already in the culturesphere. The game's vision of bioengineered apocalypse and designer babies seem relevant and plausible; although they probably arn't. But its all sort of trite. Knock off Polynesians with loose sexual morals vs. U.N. sponsored Western exploitivie corporate scumbags? The ideas arn't original, and they don't seem to add up to anything. The system seems needlessly crunchy and antique, but I havn't looked into it too carefully.

I also tink the GM's Guide/Player's Manual dichotomy is a poor distribution model. The first book needs to sell the consumer on the product. Probably, that means including your most interesting background material and the most important pieces of crunch. Lists of powers and hardware can wait for a later supplement. I think I'll adopt that method if I ever publish a game. Anyway, I found the background material in Blue Planet unsatisfying. The mediocre writingmight have had something to do with that, though.

Fading Suns: Good stuff, lots of potential. The setting has a lot going on: ultratech, magic, alien "races", pseudomiedival society, weird science, a glorious past - what else does a game need? (Exalts). The ideas arn't superoriginal, but they all fit together plausibly thanks to solid writing and a strong theme. The theme, of course, is struggle, mystery, and the sins of the past. But I'm not quite sure what the PCs do and why their actions are cool. I assume "Dig up mysteries of the past", but I'm not quite sure what to dig up, what sort of opposition the PCs should face to do it, how what they dig up should effect the setting, and so forth. Still, I enjoyed reading through the game and would like to run a series at some point. A lot of that has to do with the system, which is simple and elegant but also fairly crunchy.

I also dislike some of the genre conventions of "Sci Fi RPG". Each planet and alien species is presented with as much depth as one would give to, say, a small kingdom of elves. Why are the alien socities always mononlithic? For that matter, why does one culture seem to dominate all of human society? One Earth has room for thousands of cultures and ideas, but one universe doesn't? The shallow portrayal of the aliens is particulalry irritating. Sci Fi can pose some pretty serious questions, and Fading Suns certainly aspires to do so. From a gaming perspective, it looks like the PCs are expected to be fairly low powered, and to go along with the rest of the society. The sample quest puts the players in the role of helping a nobleman, a classic and tiresome plot. Fading Suns's setting is begging to be shaken up - I want PCs that are set up to shake up the setting, and GM advice on how to do so.

But I definitily want to spend some time with the game. Its quality.

Godsend Agenda: As an amateur game, Godsend Agenda is intimidatingly good. The layout is nice, the text is well written and fills 300+ pages of small print, the art is fun but a little jarring in places. Jarring is to be expected though, given the violent genrefuck of the setting. Characters are at once mythological figures, superheroes, sci-fi creations from the distant past, and agents of international conspiracies. I'm a big fan of genrefuck, so I enjoyed it quite a bit. But like a lot of games set in a pseudomodern world, the potential of the setting feels somewhat constrained. Modern America is a pretty nice place, so why am I killling shit? Also, I can't tell if the various factions represent anything deep or just wear cool costumes. I havn't spent too much time reading the game yet though, so maybe I'll figure it out later.

I don't like point based systemms. Between the points and the power and the restrictions and the archtypes and the dice and the pips and average roll beingg 3.5xdice the system seems fairly confused. Inconsistent style and the sheer quantity of text don't help the authors communicate their system either. I think the system is probably quite good, but I couldn't tell you for sure because I havn't figured it out yet.

Anyway. Creativity cures a lot of ills, as do good art and layout. I reccomend buying this game.

Sat, 02 Jul 2005 22:16:33 GMT

On rpg.net, someone asked for suggestions about how to portray fictional Amazon cultures. Naturally, an argument about women warriors ensued. I felt like archiving my response, comments welcome.

Why do most societies have male warriors? There are several reasons which are supported by research from several disciplines.

Men fight more because they like to fight more. If you put a bunch of little boys in a room and don't watch them too carefully, chances are they're going to wrestle with each other, scream, take each other's toys, and generally tear the place apart. When they grow up, men are much more likely to be violent. 90% of murderers are men. 90% of women murderers murder their husbands or boyfriends. The equivalent number is much smaller for men.

So if you want to recruit soldiers, you'll have better luck talking to men. This principal holds across all human cultures, period, full stop. God only knows why.

In terms of capability: There is no *inherent* reason why women couldn't fight as well or better than men. But men tend to have much more practice. If you've been picking fights since you were 2, you're going to have some kind of combat instincts.

Of course, lessons learned punching your buddies may not help when someone hands you a gun. And I'm just talking trends, here. There are plenty of girls who roughhouse and plenty of boys who don't. (Particularly if their Moms keep a close eye on 'em and don't like 'em fighting.)

So, how is this science relevant to a fantasy Amazon society? Hmm.

In most premodern cultures, the "army" was basically a bunch of guys with spears. The soldiers were forced into the army, either by economic need or conscription. As such, these armies were extremly ineffective. If some general (Alexander the Great) did put together a well trained and disciplined force, they ran over their neighbors.

Amazon cultures would have a hard time convincing soldiers to join the army, so they would use conscription. And their recruits would not have any idea how to fight, so they would have to train them well. The result might be a force that was much *better* than their neighbor's militaries.

Thu, 30 Jun 2005 09:02:03 GMT

Man, Sam Adams is fucking good.

I'm revising my opinion on beer. It is not piss only good for getting drunk. Its a very reasonable drink for mild tipsiness.

Running Low on Knightliness!

Tue, 28 Jun 2005 07:53:50 GMT

a Man with No Name

You scored 7 Honor, 3 Justice, 8 Adventure, and 6 Individuality!

It's one thing to be a gunslinger. It's another to wander into town,
leave nothing but a trail of those who'd try your skill and take the
town's gratitude and cash with you. Hero or villan? It's all in how you
look at it and whose side you're on.

Cigar in your teeth and colt on your hip, you are ready to step into the hazy desert horizon. You'll do just fine.

My test tracked 4 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:

You scored higher than 36% on Ninjinuity
You scored higher than 15% on Knightlyness
You scored higher than 75% on Cowboiosity
You scored higher than 63% on Piratical Bent

Link: The Cowboy-Ninja-Pirate-Knight Test written by fluffy71 on Ok Cupid

Tue, 28 Jun 2005 07:44:11 GMT

I got a whole new case of asshole awards in the mail today. First recipient: Andrew Sullivan

Thu, 16 Jun 2005 03:51:45 GMT

I'm going to buy "I Am Charlotte Simmons". Yeah, it got horrible reviews, but Tom Wolfe is still awesome. We'll see how it goes.

So, I want to add a second book to my order. I'm thinking Burning Wheel or Heroquest. Any suggestions?

Tue, 14 Jun 2005 06:53:47 GMT

Haujobb's Speed of Pain remix is pure bliss.

I find Marilyn Manson in general very comforting. I've never figured that one out.