Feminism changes

[king of nowhere]

28 minutes ago, Morani said:

That is the case in the US, maybe. Here in Scandinavia both of the parents get 195 days off each (roughly 150 of those are with 80% of your salary and the other 40 you get like 9 dollars/day, but you can take the time off whenever you want and your employer has nothing to say about it). And, alas, still, women do more of the unpaid work at home. I agree that parental leave as it stands in the US is horrible, for both parents and their kids. But that is an differently question entirely ?

 

However, I find it interesting when in WoTTV when women hold more offices than men (from what we have seen so far) many viewers are frothing at mouth from the horrible feminism that she show is showing, while when we live in a world where it is the other way around, it should not be held as evidence that men are still, in fact, in power. 

I am italian, actually, and in italy a recent law gave 1 or 2 weeks of paternity leave. Until a couple years ago, we didn't even have that.

I have no idea about the US, but scandinavian countries are very progressive. They are the exception, even in the western world.

 

As for people complaining about the show gender division, they seem to be cherry picking, seeing only what they want to see, and reading the motivations they want to read. Bran talks once, marin talks twice, but they take that as a sign of an henpecked husband. Tam makes a mediocre showing with the sword, and they think it's because of sex (and not to avoid Rand  standing out).

Unfortunately, if one reads with a political agenda, one can always find confirmation for everything.I'd link to Popper and falsificability if i wasn't on mobile

[DojoToad]

21 hours ago, Daenelia said:

 No. Which is why I am going to look at it both ways. I needed to go through the first book again anyway.

Okay.  It was very obvious to me, but we all key on different things.

[henfen]

I haven't really perceived any new kind of feminism on the show that wasn't already in the books.  It's a nice touch to see the Women's Circle destroy a trolloc - but we already know how badass the women of Two Rivers are.  I love WOT because of the inherent feminism in the series, and because it isn't over-simplified and shows the complexities of women or men having too much power in the extreme. 

 

The books mostly avoid concepts of domestic violence, and we don't witness a whole lot of state-sanctioned patriarchy (or familial for that matter), aside from hatred of Aes Sedai (which is the glaring exception).  Sexual violence is a hammer of male-domination, and it only comes in here and there in the series, its scarcity unrealistic.  The brutal regularity of it in books like GOT is sadly much more true to reality.

 

I daresay, if anything, I think the show so far has gone in a slightly less feminist direction.  Dana the darkfriend could easily have killed Rand before he broke out of the room, but instead she got a ludicrous running scene.  Moiraine practically dies in the first few episodes, removing the serious sense of control we get from her in the books.  The intimidating sense of queenly respect she has at the beginning of the books is less clear in the show.  We see a live Aes Sedai being burned at the stakes - again, very unlikely.  The tests to become Aes Sedai include channeling through extreme pain.  Almost certainly, they would have had to kill her to capture her.  IMO, saying the Dragon could be a woman isn't feminism - it's missing the point and strays way too far from canon.  Perrin is given a "wife" who gets a few lines before being accidentally murdered - basically turning her into an object for his plot advancement.  And Nynaeve's speech about her Wisdom being turned away from the White Tower is playing into some elitist trope and is the antithesis of what we know about Aes Sedai in the books.  There may be prejudice against wilders, and some Aes Sedai may be ashamed of their impoverished childhoods, but there's not much indication that poverty affects anyone's ability to train. 

 

Briefly touching on the fact that Ila addresses Perrin and Egwene first - the Way of the Leaf could be called "feminine".  It's very yin - passive and accepting.  The way we first perceive the Tinkers in the show - as a possible threat (are they zombies?!) - does a disservice to their happy and free nature, which is the crux of who they are.  So this scene actually loses another point on the feminism scale for me, if we're counting.  My examples here are all for the sake of discussion - I don't think anything here is meaningfully averse to feminism, but it makes for an interesting topic.

 

For the brosephs/"meninists" here, if you really think you know everything about feminism, it just shows how much more you have to learn.  Step back, be humble, and look at where your defensiveness comes from.  Listen to people whose lives are directly impacted by it.  And, feminism is for men too.  Patriarchy affects all of us. 

Edited November 22, 2021 by henfen

[henfen]

On 11/21/2021 at 6:14 AM, Maximillion said:

 

Rare.  Men are physically stronger than women, by a lot. 

Take two distributions of mens and womens strength and the overlap of weakest men and strongest women would be quite small.

It's just the way it is.

You don't need to alter reality to show the empowerment of women.

It can be done in more meaningful and realistic ways.

 

 

Hmm.  How do you explain Maidens of the Spear then?

 

In fact, the Aiel show us just how much gender is socially constructed.  A maiden, and maybe most other Aiel women, could slaughter any given wetlander man.  Why?  Because she was "socialized", trained, brought up to be that way.  Are her muscles as big as a Stone Dog's?  Not likely.  Could she physically overwhelm him?  Quite possibly.

 

Strength comprises so much more than muscles and size.  I get your point that there are physiological differences, basically due to hormones like androgen and testosterone giving the body a huge boost in muscle mass.  I don't think it's fair to say the strongest women are barely stronger than the weakest men.  Women's muscles don't show as superficially (the top layer) as men's - meaning, a man and a woman could bench the same amount of weight, but the man would look stronger.  In North American society, women are also not trained to value things like fighting and being beastly strong (or being the "alpha").  The pecking order doesn't work that way like it does for men.  So I think your point is missing the crucial element of socialization.

[DojoToad]

9 minutes ago, henfen said:

I haven't really perceived any new kind of feminism on the show that wasn't already in the books.  It's a nice touch to see the Women's Circle destroy a trolloc - but we already know how badass the women of Two Rivers are.  I love WOT because of the inherent feminism in the series, and because it isn't over-simplified and shows the complexities of women or men having too much power in the extreme. 

You missed a lot then: Ila taking the lead from Raen, Bran taking back seat to Marin, elimination of town council (and mention of mayor), first major dark friend encounter for Rand/Mat changes from Howal Gode and his two male lackeys to the terminator Dana...

 

9 minutes ago, henfen said:

Briefly touching on the fact that Ila addresses Perrin and Egwene first - the Way of the Leaf could be called "feminine".  It's very yin - passive and accepting.  The way we first perceive the Tinkers in the show - as a possible threat (are they zombies?!) - does a disservice to their happy and free nature, which is the crux of who they are.  So this scene actually loses another point on the feminism scale for me, if we're counting.  My examples here are all for the sake of discussion - I don't think anything here is meaningfully averse to feminism, but it makes for an interesting topic.

I don't think the Way of the Leaf is feminine at all.  I've known very passive men and very aggressive women IRL.  I just thought the scene was poorly set up.  "You'll be a vegetarian or else!"  My problem here was that Raen was the Seeker.  As leader, he should have addressed the strangers.

9 minutes ago, henfen said:

 

For the brosephs/"meninists" here, if you really think you know everything about feminism, it just shows how much more you have to learn.  Step back, be humble, and look at where your defensiveness comes from.  Listen to people whose lives are directly impacted by it.  And, feminism is for men too.  Patriarchy affects all of us. 

My very small family is very matriarchal.  I work full time (about 50 hours a week) plus yard maintenance and dishwashing.  My wife works two days (24 hours) and probably another 20 hours at home because she is better at it than me - she determines where we get our car/life insurance, she looks into vehicles, works with contractors, handles all banking and bills, etc.  Whenever she makes a big change she either solicits feedback or at least lets me know what's going on.  It helps that we're on the same page with most things.  If we're not, we have a discussion (sometimes argument) to figure out what way we go.  But I'd say 90-95% of all things she is calling the shots.  When I disagree - she brings me around her way, or we try it mine.

 

I'm a very blessed man.  I think both patriarchy and matriarchy can be done well or poorly.

[Gothic Flame]

42 minutes ago, henfen said:

I don't think it's fair to say the strongest women are barely stronger than the weakest men.

I don't believe anyone said that.

What was pointed out is the reality that at any given time and place a man will be the physically stronger. (I recall hearing that flight attendants will keep tabs on the more brawny guys in case they need assistance restraining some problem idiot during a flight)

[henfen]

1 hour ago, DojoToad said:

You missed a lot then: Ila taking the lead from Raen, Bran taking back seat to Marin, elimination of town council (and mention of mayor), first major dark friend encounter for Rand/Mat changes from Howal Gode and his two male lackeys to the terminator Dana...

I didn't miss any of that.  I perceived it differently than you did.  In the books, the women of the Two Rivers have as much power as the men - they often use it more subtly.  It's still clear that they are at least as much in charge.  And while more female characters are great (like Dana), it doesn't simply equate to feminism in my book, at least not in the 21st century.  It comes off as superficial, or token feminism.  Not necessarily of meaningful quality.  I'm not criticizing it, but I'm not applauding it either.  The Tinkers scene was a mess and didn't do them justice.

 

For context, masculinity and femininity don't linearly correlate to men and women.  So yes, obviously men have feminine traits and vice versa.  I think one reason the world is so screwed up is because of the false dichotomy between masculine and feminine.  We're all both, and by denying basically half of who we are - men not wanting to be feminine, women not wanting to be perceived as too masculine - we're stunting our growth as a species.  In order to be whole, we have to accept both masculine and feminine.  I think RJ made a case for this in the books.  We have the Whitecloaks on one end, and the Red Ajah on the other, both clearly neurotic in their extremism, both doing real harm to others and the world.

 

That's very cool that you and your wife and family have found a way to be egalitarian!  That's what it's all about - balance and respect.  In a historical context, patriarchy is the subjugation of the feminine, not the idea of simply being led by men.  Women can screw things up as easily as men can.  It has to do with power and who gets a voice and rights.

[DojoToad]

33 minutes ago, Gothic Flame said:

I don't believe anyone said that.

What was pointed out is the reality that at any given time and place a man will be the physically stronger. (I recall hearing that flight attendants will keep tabs on the more brawny guys in case they need assistance restraining some problem idiot during a flight)

Yes, size matters a lot.

 

I actively trained in martial arts for 10 years (male - 49 at the time, about 180 pounds).  While prepping a young woman (16 at the time, about 80 pounds) for her black belt test, we did some sparring.  She was incredible.  She threw a roundhouse kick toward my head  which I blocked easily with both arms - barely felt it, but she used the momentum from the block to pull a 180 and kick me in the head from the other side - never saw it coming.  She set me up good.

 

Point being, even that unblocked kick only registered slightly more than the one I blocked.  She wasn't trying to take my head off, but because of height and weight difference there wasn't much on it.  Had I been fighting someone at least 50 pounds heavier and a bit taller that kick would have put me on my knees if not worse - even if they weren't going for a knockout.

 

Muscle mass, weight, and reach all matter - and that comes even before fighting skill.  Any of these can come into play.  Were some 240 pound guy working his way up to a fight with me, I'd be very careful with him even if I knew he had no fight training.  I can be surprised, I can be overwhelmed by his weight or reach, or maybe he does something unexpected (fights dirty).  10 years of training can go down the drain quickly for me.

[Ryrin]

4 hours ago, king of nowhere said:

On the other hand, women live longer but they get to retire earlier.

Women can take a lot of time off job to stay with their toddlers. Paternity leave amounts to what? One week? As a man, i don't have a right to spend the same amount of time with my children.

And several nations have mandatory military service only for men.

 

Now, all those problems morani stated are real. It is true that women are more often discriminated on their job, more often victims of violence, do more of the household work.

But those are all consequences of unjust actions taken by individuals.

If a woman is not a victim of violence, she has a caring mate that shares the chores evenly, and she has decent people as coworkers... Then she has advantages over men. Advantages that are explicitly, objectively written in the law.

 

I don't want to start a war on who's the most discriminated, because those things are not productive. 

But there are problems with the idea that "women are mistreated by some, so let's give them benefits to compensate".

Women are mistreated... So they should not be mistreated, and the offenders should be censored/punished. Letting a woman retire earlier to compensate for all those household work she does is terribly unfair towards those men who share work equally. They are punished for their good behavior.

 

The feminists are right to denounce pervasive mistreatment in many social context. They have all my support. 

But i ask that they consider, when men complain about discrimination, that they have a point too.

I have no clue where you live but in the US “women don’t get to retire earlier.”

 

When women take off unpaid leave “to care for a toddler” they are not earning anything for retirement and when they return to work they are that further down the career ladder. 

 

Men can take paternity leave as well.

 

As for military service, we have an all volunteer service. In spite of that, women are not treated equitably and are  subject to sexual assault at a much higher percentage than men.

 

 

[Ryrin]

3 hours ago, JenniferL said:

Patriarchal assumptions about gender roles also harm men. The example of parental leave is an excellent example of that. But again, we don’t need to rehash real world examples of sexism when a simple Google search will give you all the information you need. Let’s keep the focus on how the show does or does not live up to its feminist ideals. 

Men can take parental leave. 

[ForsakenPotato]

There's a lot of discussion of women physically overpowering men on this thread, but did I miss something in the show where that happened? When did we see a woman beating a man in a fair physical fight? Liandrin used the power with the aid of multiple other sisters, Nyneave snuck up on trollocs and Lan (those scenes could have been better but they didn't make her seem super swole), and Dana used her brain to put the boys in a vulnerable position where she could grab the sword. As Moiraine makes clear in her discussion with Egwene in the woods, real strength in the WoT comes from having a good head on your shoulders, not from having physical or magical powers. If the show is shortchanging the men, the issue is not that the women are stronger. It's that so far they are smarter.

 

One of the main themes of the books is balance between men and women, but I don't really think their world starts off balanced because only women can channel and the white tower wields massive power. I think Rafe is very intentionally trying to make that clear, and maybe being a little too heavy-handed about it. The boys are going to grow into their own and create the necessary balance over the seasons to come.

[DojoToad]

1 minute ago, ForsakenPotato said:

There's a lot of discussion of women physically overpowering men on this thread, but did I miss something in the show where that happened? When did we see a woman beating a man in a fair physical fight? Liandrin used the power with the aid of multiple other sisters, Nyneave snuck up on trollocs and Lan (those scenes could have been better but they didn't make her seem super swole), and Dana used her brain to put the boys in a vulnerable position where she could grab the sword. As Moiraine makes clear in her discussion with Egwene in the woods, real strength in the WoT comes from having a good head on your shoulders, not from having physical or magical powers. If the show is shortchanging the men, the issue is not that the women are stronger. It's that so far they are smarter.

 

One of the main themes of the books is balance between men and women, but I don't really think their world starts off balanced because only women can channel and the white tower wields massive power. I think Rafe is very intentionally trying to make that clear, and maybe being a little too heavy-handed about it. The boys are going to grow into their own and create the necessary balance over the seasons to come.

No, I don't believe there was an example of a woman physically overpowering a man in the show.  But someone brought up the possibility - thus my long-winded story.

[Ryan al'Thor]

18 hours ago, JenniferL said:

No, there does not. 

Yeahhhh actually it kind of does. Excellent comic relief

[Daenelia]

20 minutes ago, Ryrin said:

Men can take parental leave. 

And they should. It's handled best in some of the scandinavian countries where parental leave is or can be distributed between the partners.

 

Also, these days in The Netherlands men can take one week paid leave and there is the option to extend that to 9 weeks from next year onwards. And... not just dads: the partner of the mother can of course be a woman, and in that case she can also take that partner-leave. Paid. Equal. Of course the mother who gives birth may also have medical issues around birth, but the time needed to bond and adjust to a screaming little sprout in the family is there for both partners.

 

That is feminism, too. It is also about getting rights for men that were only 'awarded' to women for no particular reason.

[JenniferL]

Paternity leave is not standard in the United States. A few companies offer it, but it’s the exception rather than the rule. The reason, of course, is that women are supposed to be the “better” person for taking care of an infant and the man doesn’t need to be home to help. Parental leave isn’t a fun vacation. It’s for parents to focus on bonding with the new baby and dealing with its needs, along with helping the parent who gave birth physically recover. It’s wonderful that so many of you value paternity leave like this and I hope you are advocating for it in your workplace and with your elected officials to become standard. 

[JenniferL]

Getting back to the show, I was reading this fun little review at Ars Technica and they pointed out something that I haven’t seen brought up anywhere else. 
 

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2021/11/two-book-readers-recap-the-first-three-episodes-of-amazons-the-wheel-of-time/

 

Quote

Andrew: If there's one "well actually" moment I will entertain as a book reader, it's the revelation that Egwene or Nynaeve could be the Dragon Reborn. On the one hand, I really appreciate a lot of what the show is doing to add nuance to the books' dated and rigid gender roles. Two Rivers women in the books are intelligent and resilient, but they're also a bunch of arm-crossing, braid-tugging, foot-tapping scolds. Two Rivers women in the show, from the glimpse we see, maintain that same sense of community but also get to drink and party and have sex. Rand and Egwene are doing sex to each other. And explicitly putting Egwene and Nynaeve on even narrative footing with Rand, Mat, and Perrin serves to emphasize how central they will be to the rest of the story moving forward.

 

I think this is a good change. Many of the women are portrayed as humorless scolds and slut shamers. The women in the show seem a lot more fun. In Romantic literature women usually represent civilization and order, so Jordan’s approach was in line with that. But it’s an unfortunate stereotype and it’s nice that the show is discarding it. 

[Gothic Flame]

1 hour ago, DojoToad said:

Yes, size matters a lot. 

Ya... My experiences are more tied to circumstances than deliberate training. But I tend to lean towards Bruce Lee's opinion when it comes to women and self-defense.

Although I certainly believe a well-trained woman can handle her own against a moderately strong guy, I'm more with the idea of common sense being a better tool. (I hate to see bruises on a woman.)

 

A spear would be a good weapon...hmm

[A_Cornered_Wolf]

To the point of the changes to Two Rivers/Edmond's Field I would say they portray the town as matriarchal.  Similarly, changing the role of the Seeker from a male to a female pushes the Tinkers in similar direction, though truthfully its too early to tell.  Is this insertion of the show runner's political philosophy?  Not necessarily, it could easily be about trying to emphasize the role reversal in regards to the in universe male original sin and its potential impact on how societies developed.  Time will tell whether its that or some Game of Thrones 'Women on Top' pandering.

 

As to Dana, the scene felt awkward to me on initial and re-viewing.  

 

Rand is a farm boy with no training in the sword, nor any in close quarters combat.

 

Dana is also just as unlikely to be trained in the sword.

 

Meaning we are making the scene about fighting over said sword and presenting threat with it, despite the fact that neither character is likely to be effective with it beyond 'sticking 'em with the pointy end'.  That doesn't help create tension, and I think part of what makes the scene so awkward.

 

Instead I think the scene should've been set up so Dana could step in between Rand and his sword while drawing a knife/dagger, a weapon she'd likely know how to use and maybe even would've had to to defend herself as a barmaid.  It also would've invoked the image of Nynaeve almost drawing her blade on Lan when he arrived at the inn, and then the natural train of thought for Rand of 'this girl is like Nynaeve, I shouldn't mess with her.'  We could've proceeded with the rest of the scene without all the sword based awkwardness.  It also would've avoided any of the connotations of Rand being symbolically emasculated by Dana by having his sword, his martial power, taken by her from him.

 

While I think the scene with Dana could've been done better, I don't think its anything to do with pushed agenda, just missing on using the simpler and likely better solution in favor of something more flashy.

[TheDreadReader]

1 hour ago, A_Cornered_Wolf said:

To the point of the changes to Two Rivers/Edmond's Field I would say they portray the town as matriarchal.  Similarly, changing the role of the Seeker from a male to a female pushes the Tinkers in similar direction, though truthfully its too early to tell.  Is this insertion of the show runner's political philosophy?  Not necessarily, it could easily be about trying to emphasize the role reversal in regards to the in universe male original sin and its potential impact on how societies developed.  Time will tell whether its that or some Game of Thrones 'Women on Top' pandering.

 

Yes.   All those changes, to me anyway, are logical and consistent on how RJ constructed the world.  They may be slightly different in focus to what RJ himself did but they are not majorly different.   For example, we could always see the village council made up of men later.  They didn't show it but they also didn't make it impossible for it to exist.

 

 

1 hour ago, A_Cornered_Wolf said:

Instead I think the scene should've been set up so Dana could step in between Rand and his sword while drawing a knife/dagger, a weapon she'd likely know how to use and maybe even would've had to to defend herself as a barmaid. 

 

 

I think she actually does have a dagger on her at the beginning.   I think one falls on the floor just as they are both going for the sword.   The editing is confusing for that bit. 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2021 by TheDreadReader

[Ryrin]

In the books, Maidens of the Spear have to give up being a warrior if they choose to have children.

[Deadsy]

2 hours ago, ForsakenPotato said:

There's a lot of discussion of women physically overpowering men on this thread, but did I miss something in the show where that happened? When did we see a woman beating a man in a fair physical fight? Liandrin used the power with the aid of multiple other sisters, Nyneave snuck up on trollocs and Lan (those scenes could have been better but they didn't make her seem super swole), and Dana used her brain to put the boys in a vulnerable position where she could grab the sword. As Moiraine makes clear in her discussion with Egwene in the woods, real strength in the WoT comes from having a good head on your shoulders, not from having physical or magical powers. If the show is shortchanging the men, the issue is not that the women are stronger. It's that so far they are smarter.

 

One of the main themes of the books is balance between men and women, but I don't really think their world starts off balanced because only women can channel and the white tower wields massive power. I think Rafe is very intentionally trying to make that clear, and maybe being a little too heavy-handed about it. The boys are going to grow into their own and create the necessary balance over the seasons to come.

 

 

No, it didn't happen. Someone's illogically upset because Rand and Mat ran from a woman with a sword and making another made up thing about it.

Edited November 22, 2021 by Deadsy

[Deadsy]

1 hour ago, A_Cornered_Wolf said:

Rand is a farm boy with no training in the sword, nor any in close quarters combat.

 

Dana is also just as unlikely to be trained in the sword.

 

Meaning we are making the scene about fighting over said sword and presenting threat with it, despite the fact that neither character is likely to be effective with it beyond 'sticking 'em with the pointy end'.  That doesn't help create tension, and I think part of what makes the scene so awkward.

 

 

But why is any of this relevant? Dana beat Rand to the sword and had it in her hand, and Rand is unarmed. That's the relevant part. Skill with the sword is irrelevant in this scene. The only way it would be relevant is if Dana lacked skill and Rand had already had a lot of combat training at this point in time. If this was Shadow Rising Rand then sure he could take her down without the One Power. But it's not.

Edited November 22, 2021 by Deadsy

[DojoToad]

7 minutes ago, Deadsy said:

 

 

But why is any of this relevant? Dana beat Rand to the sword and had it in her hand, and Rand is unarmed. That's the relevant part. Skill with the sword is irrelevant in this scene. The only way it would be relevant is if Dana lacked skill and Rand had already had a lot of combat training at this point in time. If this was Shadow Rising Rand then sure he could take her down without the One Power. But it's not.

Dana held the sword steady on Rand.  I'm still assuming no training, but with two equally untrained opponents I'm putting my money on the one with the weapon.

[Deadsy]

2 minutes ago, DojoToad said:

Dana held the sword steady on Rand.  I'm still assuming no training, but with two equally untrained opponents I'm putting my money on the one with the weapon.

 

 

IIRC she also managed to knock a knife out of his hand so she's not a total novice. 

[king of nowhere]

2 hours ago, A_Cornered_Wolf said:

As to Dana, the scene felt awkward to me on initial and re-viewing.  

 

Rand is a farm boy with no training in the sword, nor any in close quarters combat.

 

Dana is also just as unlikely to be trained in the sword.

 

Meaning we are making the scene about fighting over said sword and presenting threat with it, despite the fact that neither character is likely to be effective with it beyond 'sticking 'em with the pointy end'.  That doesn't help create tension, and I think part of what makes the scene so awkward.

 

 

I think a lot of people here have bad preconceived notions about swords and training.

A lot of fantasy books have "but he was untrained with the sword, so his attack was easily dodged" kind of stuff. fantasy has this culture of "the master swordsman" who does stuff.

 

I did some practice with a sword, and I swear, it takes 0 training to hit somebody with a sword. it's not difficult at all. the sword is a very easy weapon to use. I mean, do you think you'd have trouble hitting somebody with a stick? A sword is just a stick, with a sharp edge. which also removes the option of parrying the stick with your arm or hand.

 

where training really comes in, is swordplay. You see, hitting your opponent with the sword is trivially easy. the problem is, if you can hit the opponent, then the opponent can also hit you. and the sword is a versatile weapon that can both hit and parry, but if you're hitting, you're not parrying. Mutual kill happens a lot - I saw a video from shadiversity explaining this a while ago, but i am unable to find it again. Real skill is being able to hit your opponent without exposing yourself.

Anyway, reciprocal kill was the most common outcome while i was sparring with the instructor - because i knew i was the underdog, and i'd consider it a good outcome. ok, more often i managed to strike him in the legs or arms while he chopped me on the neck, so i'd be dead and he'd likely survive. but still, what i learned

1) doesn't matter that you've never used a sword in your life. hitting someone is EASY

2) even if your opponent has many years of experience and you're totally new, it's still not a foregone conclusion. I did even manage to win some exchanges cleanly.

2b) corollary: a rookie defeating a master? unlikely, but happens more often that you'd think; wouldn't break my suspension of disbelief.

2c) corollary: even against a weaker opponent, even if you win, there's a good chance of getting wounded. real people would not duel lightly, not even when they were sure they were the strongest

3) disregarding your own safety gives you a massive boost in combat effectiveness. Which can actually explain how a single trolloc defeated tam, a better swordsman.

 

and, regarding the Dana scene: reciprocal kill happens often when both have swords. if your opponent has a sword and you don't, then you don't have a sword to parry his thrust and he... you should get the idea. your best bet is running away.

do notice a sword weight around 1 kg normally, so it won't slow you down. and even a child could kill someone with it.