Genderalisations

Something else I've missed during my time out in the big bad world of no internets is the blog over at RoughKut. It's nice to know I'm not the only one who thinks too hard about fedding. Of the blogs I missed while I was away, one jumped out at me on the grounds of it being on a subject near and dear to my heart: women's wrestling. People think of me as a big fan of women's wrestling; really, I'm just a wrestling fan, but unlike many wrestling fans - so it seems - I consider women's wrestling equal to men's. Even though Kut's blog on playing female characters is a few months old now, I can't not respond to it. Go read his excellent blog, as well as Sky's equally excellent reply in the comments field, then come back and read the rest of this, biznitches :p

To clarify, first off, I am a man. I have played a number of characters over the years, both male and female, but far and away my most successful was female. I don't think this is weird at all - what I'm interested in is a character's personality, and gender is just another small part of the myriad things which make up one's personality. Playing someone of a different gender to oneself needn't be any more of a problem than playing someone of a different age, nationality or socioeconomic background. In fact most fedders of my acquaintance, male or female, have played characters of both genders. It's not just in fedding; I have two current characters for pen-and-paper roleplay games, one of whom is male and the other of whom is female, and again, I'm in games with both women who play men and men who play women.

Kut's blog focuses on the question of intergender combat - and lawdy, is this a contentious subject. The first point which always comes up is the physical mechanics - the question of whether or not men are physically capable of fighting women. Kut and Sky weigh up the two sides pretty effectively in the linked blog. I have to say, I agree with Sky over Kut. To my mind, the idea that women can't fight is ridiculous. In a lot of martial arts, intergender combat is an accepted part of the sport, and IRL I've fought women and won, and I've fought women and lost. Neither gives me any shame at all, and I don't care who thinks it should.

However, it's a clouded issue in wrestling somewhat, because wrestling - as a martial art - is based around weight and upper body strength, where men have the undeniable advantage. The average woman isn't going to be able to take on Kurt Angle on his terms. The answer to that is, naturally, to not go on his terms. Size is one thing which can be used as a physical advantage. So, if you know how to use it, is being small. In general smaller people are harder to hit, faster, and have better conditioning and thus more stamina. Remember, fights are won in the mind, and it's how you use your own strengths and your opponent's weaknesses that matter.

All that is only one part of the debate, however. From those who don't know combat well, there are some darker stock responses to intergender combat. First, it's some kind of dirty sexual thing. It's for people who want to see someone dominate another person. And sadly, while I know that I don't have any sexual interest in intergender combat, and nor do most of the handlers I know, I can't deny that a handful do. All I can say to those people is: please respect that some of us just like to portray two fighters competing, and don't care about their genders.

The other is that it's sexist, or that it's promoting violence against women. Here, I disagree entirely. People too often confuse 'violence against women' with domestic violence. Domestic violence is abhorrent, no matter what the genders of the respective parties. But two adults competing in a fair fight is not domestic violence. What's sexist, to my mind, is telling women that because of their gender, they shouldn't be allowed to compete if they want to. But of course, there are certain branches of feminism which aren't actually interested in equality - just in making a stink about any vaguely related issue they can find. Same as anything, really.

The other big area Kut touches on is allowing women to compete for men's titles. Those who know me personally will know that I have always, always opposed gender-based titles in fedding, as well as titles segregated by weight category and nationality. This is as much about practicality as anything else; it's often hard enough getting enough people interested in chasing titles as it is without imposing restrictions which are based along fundamentally arbitrary lines. I understand the realism question - WWE and TNA keep things separated, so feds should too - but you know something? As far as I'm concerned, it's WWE and TNA who need to catch up there.

But then we're getting into the question of 'wrestling logic' where what happens in the world of pro wrestling, no matter how unrealistic, is accepted as the correct reality for fedding. I've been thinking about that one for some time, and there will be a post coming about it. For now, if you want to test 'wrestling logic' for yourself, here's an experiment: Try doing a front suplex on someone, then try doing a fisherman's suplex on someone, and decide which was easier.*


*Don't actually do that :p. Y'know - don't try this at blah blah blah whatever.