Active Users:283 Time:02/05/2024 08:08:55 AM
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 2147 Views
Or we can choose to assume Elayne is incorrect - 11/01/2016 03:50:14 PM 1010 Views
Uhhh... - 12/01/2016 12:07:42 AM 1135 Views
Yet there are problems with either - 15/01/2016 08:52:04 PM 824 Views
Re: Yet there are problems with either - 16/01/2016 05:29:11 AM 1086 Views
Would you consider... - 17/01/2016 09:06:59 AM 948 Views
random thought on Shielding - 19/01/2016 07:34:20 PM 1007 Views
You're forgetting the other side, though. - 19/01/2016 08:19:59 PM 1069 Views
yes but it doesn't proactively do this - 19/01/2016 10:06:25 PM 932 Views
Responding to a shield doesn't require proactiveness - 20/01/2016 05:53:24 AM 826 Views
it's a visualization thing really - 20/01/2016 04:39:08 PM 883 Views
Not the crux of the debate... - 21/01/2016 03:37:40 AM 970 Views
Not really though - 21/01/2016 05:00:34 PM 738 Views
I always explained it as - 21/01/2016 09:26:35 PM 977 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 843 Views
That's precisely my point - 21/01/2016 10:09:02 PM 986 Views
now you are speculating based on a lack of evidence - 21/01/2016 10:39:13 PM 807 Views
There's actual evidence: - 22/01/2016 06:25:25 AM 1000 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 1119 Views
Whoa.. - 22/01/2016 04:24:19 PM 1068 Views
Not at all - 22/01/2016 05:03:50 PM 1012 Views
Wonderful - 22/01/2016 06:30:35 PM 987 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 806 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 1105 Views
Petty much *NM* - 24/01/2016 02:50:32 PM 446 Views
Hmmm.... - 23/01/2016 03:06:15 PM 1055 Views
Let me clear this up - 25/01/2016 04:19:51 PM 1192 Views
Some more quotes - 25/01/2016 05:10:51 PM 956 Views
none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 25/01/2016 07:19:48 PM 1245 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 03:45:52 AM 1017 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 09:00:55 AM 1164 Views
Re: none of which I've denied or tried to prove otherwise - 26/01/2016 10:39:49 AM 950 Views
Oh well then I agree with you - 26/01/2016 08:50:55 AM 1065 Views
thanks - 26/01/2016 04:26:46 PM 1221 Views
Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 16/01/2016 08:56:15 AM 789 Views
But additive doesn't explain buffers and being able to overdraw - 16/01/2016 03:02:33 PM 820 Views
Don't those two facts explain each other? - 16/01/2016 03:24:44 PM 860 Views
It actually seems counterintuitive to me - 19/01/2016 07:15:37 PM 803 Views
Simple - 19/01/2016 08:21:11 PM 926 Views
Not at all - 19/01/2016 10:17:39 PM 713 Views
Huh? - 20/01/2016 06:01:04 AM 926 Views
agree to disagree I suppose ... I don't see it this way *NM* - 20/01/2016 04:41:16 PM 501 Views
I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. *NM* - 21/01/2016 12:01:16 AM 480 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 02:07:21 AM 829 Views
Re: I didn't sense disagreement so much as confusion over my position. - 21/01/2016 03:32:59 AM 848 Views
I don't necessarily think that's true - 21/01/2016 05:07:40 PM 921 Views
I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:01:17 PM 908 Views
Re: I don't see how magnifiers solve this - 21/01/2016 10:16:16 PM 848 Views
Uhhh... - 22/01/2016 06:51:11 AM 996 Views
Funny, I just saw this post - 17/09/2016 11:13:09 PM 715 Views
The very first chapter (the Prologue) disproves this - 03/10/2016 06:56:28 AM 790 Views
No it doesn't - 05/10/2016 12:47:03 AM 685 Views
Re: Don't those two facts explain each other? - 08/10/2016 05:06:53 AM 585 Views
Re: Yes, but that's not what I'm arguing... - 08/10/2016 04:52:06 AM 802 Views

Reply to Message