Why don't the women feel bad about killing women?

[Blackhoof]

thats a silly generalisation- but often true

[FarShainMael]

All generalisations are silly (including this one )

[Entreri]

Anyway, it is almost exclusively the men who are violent/killers/serial killers/soldiers in the real world and lesser extent in Randland.

 

As an aside, Elizabeth Bathory is in the Guiness Book of World Records as the most prolific serial killer of all time, the most prolific female serial killer, the most prolific in Europe, etc., with ~150 confirmed and up to 400 rumored kills.

 

In Randland, Lanfear, Sermi, and Graendal were expert torturers and killers. The BA have hundreds of murders in the books. The best normal human assassin for the DF's is female (appears in Tanchico with Jachim Carridin,) and Mat/Rand encounter several female assassins in the early books. Mat himself has killed at least 2 (in the barn with the smoking dagger and his Aiel girlfriend.)

 

It seems like whenever the BA appear, there's dead females all over the place, usually because they are rescuing another BA who is shielded by female AS/Kin. In another example, Egwene only refuses to kill an unconscious BA because she is unconscious, not because she is female, in the TAR battle at Tar Valon, and she also kills at least 40 damane/sul'dam along with unknown AS captives at the Battle of TV 2.

 

Sure, you have outliers, but it is almost all men, like I said before.

 

Now this is not considering people like Khan,Stalin, Hilter, Mao, Lenin...etc.

[jsbrads]

Perrin also seems to have trouble while fighting Aiel maidens at the Wells

 

Mat did not kill the girl with the smoking dagger in book 1, he locked her in the tack room and returned to series more recently as Shaine and he definitely has a problem with killing women, e.g. the fight outside the "hell".

 

I completely disagree with this sentiment, people like Lanfear, who kill others, should be terminated with extreame prejudice. Most "good guys" have this flaw in modern society and it is a serious moral and ethical flaw (note: I am not saying police should execute criminals on the street, they do a good job following guidelines, but when dealing with truly evil people in stories, who would get away and kill again if you let them walk out the door, cock the gun before you walk in and leave the safety off.

[EpitomyofShyness]

To answer the original question, I'd say that hind-sight is 20/20, and we as the readers are more aware of just how truly horrible many of these women are.

 

Also, the fact that men have a hard time killing women isn't terribly unrealistic, after all I imagine many policemen, while having no qualms about shooting a male criminal who is fleeing, might not shoot a woman. I'm sure I could be wrong, its just a thought.

 

Anyways it may not make sense to are modern sensibilities but really back then women were essential, cause as others have said they were the child-bearers. Add in all the social stigma against men, and the fact that our main characters come from the Two Rivers, a place where women are deeply respected, and I'll bet if someone was suspected of committing physical abuse they'd be kicked out, and you have the perfect recipe for *angstangstangst*

[dexterryu]

In the general sense, men are larger and typically much stronger than your average woman. It's that simple. That's why it's considered dishonorable to kill a woman.

 

Women killing Women are typically equal, so no issue with dishonor there.

 

Women killing Men - The man is probably stronger, so it's not an issue there either.

[Superhal]

In the general sense, men are larger and typically much stronger than your average woman. It's that simple. That's why it's considered dishonorable to kill a woman.

 

Women killing Women are typically equal, so no issue with dishonor there.

 

Women killing Men - The man is probably stronger, so it's not an issue there either.

 

The same protection extends to Maidens of the Spear, Aes Sedai, Forsaken, etc. where the woman is clearly stronger than men...actually, stronger than many men put together, and the only way to kill them is to take them by surprise with an arrow from the shadows. Women in the story also have no compunctions about killing women who are weaker than they are either. The only exception I can think of is in the OP.

[Guest Emu on the Loose]

Also, the fact that men have a hard time killing women isn't terribly unrealistic, after all I imagine many policemen, while having no qualms about shooting a male criminal who is fleeing, might not shoot a woman. I'm sure I could be wrong, its just a thought.

I think that's a bit misleading, as it implies a universal, almost genetically ingrained regard for women by men. When you look at the rates of rape, battery, emotional abuse, and the repression of people's individual rights and freedoms (in the commonplace case of relationships where the man controls the affairs of the woman), you will find instead that far too many men have no regard for women. I work with this stuff by day; I've seen enough horror stories that I have to remind myself that many men, perhaps even the majority, are more well-behaved. But as for actual regard? I think that's uncommon in both sexes. Most people are too petty and self-absorbed.

 

The reason that people put women up on pedestals in Abrahamic societies has to do with the honor currency. It furthers a man's interests and status to possess women, to treat women well (or appear to treat them well), and in particular to "protect" them, as though women were like children and would not survive in the wild or in civilization without male champions. The pedestal is more properly reserved for the idea of women, this fictitious female subset of humanity that can't do anything for itself except make babies, the protection of and provision for whom supposedly makes men look strong and capable. Actual women rarely benefit from their gender being extolled like this.

 

I shouldn't say "benefit." Women can get ahead (and, in small ways, many do get ahead) in a chauvinist society because of the double standard. Rather, I should say that women are rarely given a fair shake and equitable treatment by being "elevated" to that double standard.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

i hope nobody feels good shooting someone who is fleeing. in the back like. . . i hope nobody feels OK shooting anybody. you got to do what you got to do, but it's a thing to feel bad about.

 

abrahamic? honor currency?

 

ok, i'm starting to understand some of the interaction stuff a little better now.

 

but i'm not looking for a fight, so i won't read all those words again, cause. . . seriously. . . looking at the world through a narrow viewpoint there.

 

ah, skip it. you own your mind. you can change it any time you want. it don't make me no nevermind.

 

edited for unnecessary obnoxiousness and judgmentalism, sorry

[Morsker]

WoT is just being paradoxical with gender here, like always. WoT tries to be interesting, by offering a setting where men and women are considered equal, but where there's also tons of sexism and gender-role conformity, even more than in modern society. So we have a world with more equality, and more sexism, than modern society. That's WoT.

 

Specifically about killing women, it's the same uncivilized attitude in our own society: a lot of people think violence is just a game, especially when men commit it against other men. Violence against women is worse, because it's not just a game. The taboo against harming women is necessary to draw the line between honorable male violence and criminal violence, and women don't need this taboo because they aren't being violent for fun in the first place. But from a civilized perspective where violence and threats of violence aren't funny at all, this makes absolutely no sense.

[Gabby]

Coz men dont think bout killing men, so women dont think bout killing women.