Lunasmeow
Verified Dragon Deity
- Location
- Tirana, Albania
- Pronouns
- Lord/Master
Violation of Rule 4 - The QM Said 'Stop', Not 'Give Me 3600 Words Of Myths About Sex And Chastity Belts'.
Please do not post pseudoscience in my quest. This is not appropriate or welcome here. If you want to argue it, go make a separate thread but do not bring it here.
No, quite frankly you are very misinformed on what medieval lives were like. For example, did you know during the medieval period that if someone was accused of impotence the local wise women would have to witness the man perform in order to confirm if the accusation was true?
More importantly for the longest time privacy was a luxury of the very rich. If you were dirt poor you had a hut, which you had to share with often your entire extended family and animals. When traveling you didn't have the luxury of a hotel or even inn. Sleeping at the side of the road was so common there are surviving guides on what to do and how to avoid getting murdered by Bandits. Bathhouses were unisex, with meals often being taken in the baths though they were often operated by brothels. We have surviving images from the time period clearly showing this. Doing laundry was something that needed to be done, and is backbreakingly hard work that leaves little time for being scandalized.
This mindset didn't disappear in the early modern period, not amongst the poorest segments of the population. Course at this time what the nobility got up to left the puritan Victorians absolutely scandalized and they did their best to hide it away. Why do you think it's only now coming out that the Romans decorated everything with penises? Our idea of the chaste, repressed medieval period is nothing more than a myth created by the Victorians to justify their insane dogmatic practices, which in itself is simply a reflection of the Puritans crusade against well everything that didn't fit into their small world. Also the Sheikah as modern, really? Like they are in BOTW, they're taken from ancient Japan.
It goes without saying, that when you introduce Hyrule and its fantastical nature into this mix, and the fact they've been conquered by a slaving empire I rather blatantly based off the Romans, Hungarians and Athenian Greeks that the Victorian idea of what the medieval period is like would not apply in the slightest.
So please, do not claim an even more fantastical myth of history invented by a bunch of Victorians to justify Link somehow acting weird about doing laundry. Especially in a manner that would have characters acting like caricatures that as I've repeatedly said I am not comfortable with writing.
Yo.
Wow. Just wow. I just saw this today and I can't believe that I actually ahve to explain something so simple but okay here we go: Uhh, we were talking about Zelda, a princess, not a commoner. Or did you forget that little tidbit of her description? So yes, I was obviously talking about the rich princesses and not commoners in my points, and as you said, privacy being the domain of the rich? Very much suits her upbringing because even in Kakariko, she and everyone else was very aware of who she was. She grew up being raised with the full expectations of taking on the mantle of leadership, which would include things like "privacy" and other things that you yourself admitted that the rich did. Well well...
I was not talking about common poor people. Most common poor people didn't travel in the first place. They couldn't afford to. They tended to live and die in their hometowns, unless they were barely successful merchants or worked on a ship or some other such job that required travel and thus paid their fare. So yes actually, I did know what I was talking about. If this was some random girl from the slums, that would be altogether different, and you would be totally correct. But this isn't. If it was Mipha, raised all her life in a war camp, where privacy is a luxury soon lost, you would make sense. But this isn't either case.
This is Zelda, raised in a town with expectations of royalty thrust upon her (and thus the upbringing that this entails) and in a secluded area where everyone knows everyone and as royalty such things would not have been acceptable, just like her lesbian feelings for her friend were unacceptable. Something else that in middle ages was the domain of the wealthy. The poor cared not a jot, because they had too much other shit to worry about like survival. You are picking and choosing when you want Zelda to have a wealthy upbringing based on some random criteria.
But again, your fic write how you will. We can keep debating and I can go ahead and pull up actual refrences since the he said she said is getting boring, or you can just write. But if you want to debate historical princesses not having uptight upbringings, that's just too easy to win. You know, considering it is quite common knowledge how nobility had to worry about things like inheritance that commoners didn't so much have to worry about, as kingdom's weren't depending on their meager inheritance if they even had any. Princesses, were frequently not chaste, but were expected to be. Chastity belts became a thing just for this reason. So yes, again, middle ages princesses, (which is comparable to Zelda) were raised quite uptight. Unless you want to say you don't think chastity belts were extreme measures at all? Measures taken when the upbringing alone didn't work? (Used as early as the 16th century, though not commonly until much later when it became obvious that other measures were not working.)
Tl;Dr - Commoners /= Zelda. Because Zelda is a princess. Therefore, you cannot use how commoners act to define how a princess acts. That should be fairly obvious. Although as stated before, yes the Sheikah seem somewhat modern, (somewhat does not translate to completely, being based on old school Japan is not the same as actually being old school Japan, obviously.) so that could be negated. If you want her to be that way, it is as simple as saying "I am the author, I decide." But if you want to try and claim historic proof? Then you need to actually show it, rather than pretending to be all against argument while providing one of your own right back while pretending to be against debating in the thread, especially when I already said her persona is up to you as QM multiple times.
PS: Bringing up wise women has nothing to do with anything. They were the medical professionals available at the time, and then, just like now, doctors are exceptions to almost any rules about anything. Privacy always takes a backseat to health. So if you want to try and make me seem the fool, actually use a viable fact, (as in one that is actually relevant to the discussion) let alone the fact that for someone who calls actual scientific knowledge pseudoscience (When did I ever use that? I don't even think you know what it means since this is not a scientific discussion. Way to try and poison the well instead of actually addressing the point. Edit: Actually, my bad- there was some science here. But if you mean men and women having different tendencies, maybe you should pick up a college level psychology book. It's not pseudoscience when it is in the freaking textbooks. Contrary to popular opinion, we have different tendencies. These aren't inviolable rules that can be used to predict all men or all women, nor as I made sure to say then, do they mean that men are logical and women are emotional, but generalities that do exist in how men and women differently interpret information. Don't like it, too bad. Go argue that with the psychs who actually study this for a living. Or maybe become an expert and then prove them wrong instead of simply calling it pseudoscience because you don't like the sound of it. Humans are mammals. Every single mamallian species on the planet has tendencies that are different in the sexes. Humans just are smart enough to notice them and try to fight against them, but also stupid enough to think that denying differences makes them disappear.) you seem to think that a YouTube video with no listed source material is a viable source... Hilariously unbelieveable. And then try and use it as evidence, as if the lives of "women" in general in the middle ages even had anything to do with the lives of "princesses" in the specific in the middle ages. As if class differences didn't exist. Sad how bad that example is. Like comparing the life of a normal girl to Brittney Spears, or more modernly, Miley Cyrus. Hardly the same at all. You can't even make proper comparisons.
Now the video did actually have some historifally true info, but none that helps your point. I did not ever make Zelda out to be Victorian ideal. Not a simpering fool, (plenty of women who are not at all blushing virgins are touchy about their underthings, one does not equate the other) nor unsexual. But there were worries for noble ladies about men before marriage, because bastardry was a thing. The noble people in the middle ages were not lying to themselves about women being sexual, unlike the Victorians, but they still did attempt to ensure that their unmarried daughters did not have premarital sex, or sex with men not their husbands after marriage, unless there was an arrangement, usually if the husband was gay or had another woman he wanted to be with himself... And as such kept them in separate tents from men while traveling, or in separate rooms. Those people who were commoners couldn't afford rooms in the inns Link has frequented.
As readers will recall, in Hyrile Link went to the nice inn, not the cheap one, and it was there that you had the lady tell him that despite being married, they needed to keep their love to the bedroom and not the baths. Such a thing wouldn't be said in the cheaper inn. Because as you say, privacy is the domain of the rich. In the end, Zelda is a princess, not a commoner, and thus has the more uptight upbringing, although not as uptight as the Victorian ideal. You are the one who wrongly assumed what I was imagining, and also seem to quite wrongly assume that a girl who is not as uptight as the victorian ideal is automatically fine with anyone who traveled with her for a short time handling her panties. Rather foolish really. These things vary by the girl. And frankly, until that point and even after it, you have seemingly given Zelda more of a Victorin upbringing background than a historical one, just with a dash of nonja, so even if I had assumed the Victorian style, it wouldn't have been OOC of me to do so. Again, see how her village spoke to her about her lesbian tendencies. You wrote that, not me. So don't blame me for her having a contradictory nature. I called it out yes, but you created it. Because apparently Zelda is only Not!Victorian when it comes to being able to fight (needed for Sheik and thus the setting and thus explained away) and sex, except when she's mysteriously Victorian as fuck. For reasons.
Which is strangely odd considering that Zelda is always (except that one, Wind Waker maybe?) the typical Victorian princess with a ninja side when Shiek exists. Which you were the one who said this was an homage to the series. Again, your words, not mine. An homage to the series as it is would have her as such anyway in all honesty. She doesn't have to be, but again, you built that expectation.
And again, the whole Victorian female angle doesn't matter anyway because that wasn't what I was going for and even modern real world women today will have the same qualms depending on the personality of the woman. Only you seem to think that women are all one singular hive mind that don't possibly have different ways of reacting to their underwear. As if all women are carbon copies or something, and so none of them could possibly travel with someone for a few days or even weeks and still keep their underthings private. Which again, I said was up to you as the author.
But when you try and claim that a princess is going to share a tent with a man who is not her betrothed or her husband when there are other options, in a culture that assumes they are married because they share a room, and said princess is somehow raised as a princess but not raised to be even a little chaste, when princesses were often raised so for reasons of lineage, (and also for reasons of seduction, because appearing chaste then having moments of boldness was a strategy often used to seduce potential husbands - old school version of "hoe in the sheets lady in the streets" since the art of seduction hasn't really changed) all while claiming history as the reason and not author powers or a different culture due to this being a fantasy world... well, that just asks for debate.
Especially when you then specifically try and use ancient Japan as the basis for the Sheikah culture. Well, unless Zelda was their version of a geisha, she isn't gonna just be comfortable with "private" things. Japan like most Asian cultures in the past (and still today, though less every year) is far more "uptight" than we are despite their hentai. I have lived there for five years, and I have personally seen Japanese guys try to teasingly pull their Japanese girlfriends into the curtained adults section of stores and seen them refuse to enter. In the modern era. So if you think you know Japanese culture enough to justify that, you have no idea what you are talking about. At all. I just left Japan last month. I know it personally, not from internet memes and western ideas of what the place is like. A Japanese Zelda? Is not letting Link wash her underclothes. And certainly not a Japanese Paya who is obviously extra shy in addition to how repressive Japanese culture is in comparison to western culture.
Japanese men in general are quite different to the average Japanese woman, most of the sexuality is there for them, though not all. It is a highly contradictory place. They may have porn all over, sell used panties in vending machines for pervs to buy, and have a thriving sex industry... But most women are very sexually repressed. Let alone in their history. They are less repressed now than ever. So that doesn't help at all. If anything it makes Zelda and Paya being okay with this even stranger. But then, most of you people here have no idea what Japan is actually like, never having been there yourselves, making up ideas in your minds based off of anime and hentai. This is a culture that worries about an "indirect kiss" and holding hands is a public display of affection! And you say you are worried about caricatures? It isn't a caricature if it is how they would really react.
So between the "ancient Japanese culture" the higher privacy that you yourself admitted wealthy royals of the middle ages are used to, (especially ancient Japanese royals which is more relevant due to her upbringing) and the way she has been written the entire story, (Victorian half the time minus the helpless bit) Zelda and Paya being so comfortable with Link and their clothes is rather odd. Especially Paya, who is already extremely shy on her own even without the extra culture raising the bar higher.
But hey, what do I know? I believe that there are general (read: usually/commonly not always) differences between men and women that exist, so obviously I'm an idiot who uses pseudoscience because equality means we must all be identical! It couldn't possibly mean different but equally needed, despite every other mammal on the planet being so. Including our closest relatives. Despite actual scientific findings showing so. Nope, it sounds like something you don't agree with so it must be stupidity or misogyny or pseudoscience or something equally ridiculous like urban legends. It couldn't possibly be that the world is as it is rather than as we mere humans wish it was. Nope, not at all. After all, we have always been able to warp reality by wishing! Right?
Last edited:
