Active Users:1169 Time:02/05/2026 08:01:08 PM
it's a visualization thing really darius_sedai Send a noteboard - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM

View original post
View original post
point being the way a woman embraces saidar is inherently passive while men must seize saidin in an aggressive manner. Males must fight to maintain the connection whereas females float within the embrace of saidar. The more I think about it the more it makes sense that it would take more raw power to cut a man off from saidin than it would cutting a woman off from saidar.

I don't see how one follows the other. How you need to use the Source shouldn't affect how much of the OP is needed to shield you. In fact, since males must fight to maintain the connection, wouldn't it make more sense that shielding them is easier?

I think men are forced to hold tight to the Power, keeping the connection active at all times. Women on the other hand are forced to allow saidar to maintain the connection. Think of the way even releasing the power is described. For Rand it's like letting go of a bucking horse he has to almost force the power away from himself. Women on the other hand describe releasing the power, seems almost gentle like pouring water out of a bottle or shutting the faucet off.

It's like comparing boxing to judo ... one is proactive with the aggressor generating the force behind a punch and the other is reactive, using the power of the attack against its user. Easier isn't the issue, it's just different. Shielding a man obviously requires large quantities of power (assuming he's holding the power anyway) because you have to cut off a raging flood through the connection. Shielding a woman requires less power because you are doing something more akin to pulling her out of water (you'd still need a powerful enough "fishing line", but the leverage is more important than anything else).

The way I imagine this is that men are holding onto a firehose that is on full blast and must be wrestled into position. Women on the other hand are more like a submersion into a bath tub.

Essentially it seems like you'd need more power to block the rushing aggressive flow of power from saidin to a man who is holding tight because that's the nature of the relationship between men and saidin, ultimately requiring more raw power to shield. Meanwhile saidar has a more passive connection to a woman and thus it's easier to block it and would take more power to break a shield.

I'd say it's trying to stop a hail of bullets with a shield v. trying to filling a balloon with water. Eventually the weight/depth of saidar will break through any balloon, but the speed/force of the connection to saidin would be harder to control without a significant shield in the first place.

Note how Berowyn's shield was rather effective because it bent and moved rather than being a rigid surface akin to glass. Obviously her shield had little to do with raw power and much to do with the skill with which she wove the web. She was able to contain a vastly powerful channeler of saidar because she could create a shield that expanded. Compare to what Rand faced when being held by multiple women and you can see why a man's connection being cut off is harder.

Domani Drag Queen in the White Tower ... Aran'gar watch out!
Reply to message
Angreal, Sa'angreal and Moiraine at 66 - 11/01/2016 08:53:23 AM 3330 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 1521 Views
Uhhh... - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 1642 Views
Yet there are problems with either - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 1373 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 1765 Views
Would you consider... - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 1438 Views
random thought on Shielding - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 1499 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 1590 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 1434 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 1367 Views
it's a visualization thing really - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 1395 Views
Not the crux of the debate... - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 1473 Views
Not really though - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 1242 Views
I always explained it as - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 1496 Views
There's not much to go on since all the shields except Berowyn's are the same - 21/01/2016 09:55:14 PM 1363 Views
That's precisely my point - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 1457 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 1311 Views
There's actual evidence: - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 1460 Views
what's dense here is that you keep putting in quotes that don't support your position - 22/01/2016 03:28:16 PM 1662 Views
Whoa.. - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 1513 Views
Not at all - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 1488 Views
Wonderful - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 1518 Views
yup that's my argument. that and you're a dick so I'm done with this - 22/01/2016 06:46:23 PM 1301 Views
Re: yup that's my argument. that and you're a dick so I'm done with this - 23/01/2016 02:35:33 PM 1706 Views
Petty much *NM* - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 764 Views
Hmmm.... - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 1719 Views
Let me clear this up - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1745 Views
Some more quotes - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 1497 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1834 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 1466 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 1778 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 1466 Views
from the very beginning of this conversation I've been saying I'm theorizing - 26/01/2016 04:09:19 PM 1373 Views
Oh well then I agree with you - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 1713 Views
thanks - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1728 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 1304 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 1364 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 1366 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 1289 Views
Simple - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 1423 Views
Not at all - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 1221 Views
Huh? - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 1489 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 783 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 733 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 1303 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 1360 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 1425 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 1386 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 1366 Views
Uhhh... - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 1489 Views
Funny, I just saw this post - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 1223 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 1240 Views
No it doesn't - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 1140 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 1154 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 1298 Views

Reply to Message