Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jikahr]

I recall there was a similar thread regarding the Caldari state and sexuality. Apparently homosexuality is taboo in the Caldari Navy, which caused at least one capsuleer to defect and to turn Pirate.

I am speculating about how much is 'too much' for EVE.

For example, Odelya starred in a pornographic movie and displays intercepted letters about having lesbian affairs. That seems acceptable, content wise.

However, the image of a scantily clad holographic dancer was removed from the in game Gallente (?) pleasure centres. Presumably that was something that had to be done in order to market the game towards 13-18 year olds.

Sandbox yes, 'adult' content no.

I am interested to know about white slavery, aka sexual slavery, and it's place in EVE.

Slavery is an integral part of the Amarrian religion. Presumably this would include sexual slavery as well. True, the religious aspect of the Amarrians might (and most likely would) override and condemn this. However, we still don't have any demonstrable evidence from the Prime fiction that recreational sex was either permitted or scorned by the Amarrian Orthodox Church.

I can understand how Blood Raiders, Angels and other outlaw factions would be involved with something as nasty as this, but what about Orthodox Amarrians, or even Hereto-orthodox sects? We know that slaves can only be owned by Holders, and presumably the Holders are a law unto themselves...at least as we can see in the case of Articio Kor-Azor. Even in this case however, the Speakers of Truth can still hold the mighty holders to account.

What about the instance of an Amarrian traveling military brothel made up of slaves? History provides us with many examples, such as the Korean comfort women. Is it something that is too taboo to even be discussed in the Intergalactic Summit?

[Samira Kernher]

Relations with slaves, and possibly/probably Minmatar in general and other less-respected bloodlines, is considered poor form, according to Khumaak (Chronicle).

"Involuntary, [Idonis Ardishapur's] mind drifted to the little hiding place he had down in the city, to the lithe and winsome creature he whispered words of passion and affection to during lovemaking. His family and friends would be appalled if they knew of his dark-skinned Starkmanir girl, with her almond eyes and her smile that was coy and bold at the same time."

I'd expect it to be something that is seen as publically improper and morally wrong, but that is done quite frequently by nobility across the Empire regardless and simply swept under the rug. Probably an open secret within less conservative families and especially in the Kingdom.

It can be said that legally it would depend on the Holder of the territory. The Holder would probably not care unless exposure risked the Family's position in Holder politics. I don't see there being any Empire-wide ruling on the matter (though we do know from the Government of the Amarr Empire article however that 'egregious mistreatment of slaves' is a religious crime, I don't think relations with slaves would considered falling under that, as the existence of the HEP programs and breeding colonies would be much, much worse and as I understand it those are not illegal).

Regarding recreational sex, Aritcio did quite a lot of it in his various hedonist ventures and was viewed poorly. However there was no legal action and one would expect the biggest issue was how public his activities were. Karsoth was additionally very hedonistic, which probably contributed to his disciplining and execution being done in private as it would have been shameful for the Empire to reveal that things like that were going on by members of its administration. We know, from the Exotic Dancers item, that public indecency is a very big issue for the Empire.

Additional note on this topic: x-rated holoreels are banned in the Empire and Kingdom, according to the in-game item. So pornography is not approved of. Probably a lot of bootlegging and under-the-table stuff going on though.

Regarding comfort women, I don't think this would be an official thing but probably existing in some level of unofficial capacity in some cases.


Basically, as with many things in the Empire, there's probably a common tendency towards deviancy and indecency behind closed doors due to heavy represession in public. The moment those activities become public is the moment they become a major issue.

[Gaven Lok ri]

I think that the Khumaak chronicle likely speaks primarily to Ardishapur views.

And it seems entirely possible to me that the problem is more that Idonis seems to be in love rather than the sex.

But I agree that the "public" aspect is key. Recreational sex isn't bad, publicly known of recreational sex is bad. But I think that applies to publicly known recreation... period.

We also only have evidence for upper holders, which means it is hard to talk lower classes. It could equally be that someone like Ardishapur is so powerful that there is an idea that he shouldn't *need* to have sex with slaves.

I see Amarrians, both holders and overseer types, as likely to be having rather gross rapey relations with their slaves on a quite common basis. But I would also say that they are unlikely to ever talk about those relationships.

And I don't think that the white slavery discussion is particularly useful. It is too modern a paradigm. Roman slave practices always strike me as the closest clear model for Amarrian ones.

[Louella Dougans]

However, the image of a scantily clad holographic dancer was removed from the in game Gallente (?) pleasure centres. Presumably that was something that had to be done in order to market the game towards 13-18 year olds.

There's a number of fake images claiming that.

It was only ever a hologram of the Quafe girl.

[Louella Dougans]

Also, sexual slavery exists. IN the Gallente federation, it's mentioned on the Evelopedia.

[Jikahr]

And I don't think that the white slavery discussion is particularly useful. It is too modern a paradigm. Roman slave practices always strike me as the closest clear model for Amarrian ones.

I think that Roman slave practices are a better model for Amarrian ones as well.

With that said, the Romans had pimps that owned slaves that acted as streetwalkers. I suppose that's not too much different than what we have today.

There is a controversial story in the Bible about Jesus giving his blessing to a Roman soldier and his slave boy. Obviously, this is a homosexual non-consensual relationship between Master and slave. (However, it is clear that the owner loves and cares for his slave boy.) It seems that in the Roman Army, wives were forbidden, but slaves were allowed. The slaves did everything a wife would do, such as cooking, cleaning, mending. A homosexual relationship seems practical in this instance, since newborn infants don't belong on a military campaign.

Which brings us to the problem of Masters making slaves pregnant.

[Samira Kernher]

I would expect that slave children with noble parentage would almost always be left as slaves. While there are likely exceptions, I see these exceptions as something that would be fuddled in the paperwork to avoid public revelation. Some might be given preferential treatment and possibly released, but probably not considered part of the family in most cases.

As seen with those of Udorian heritage, having non-True Amarr heritage (or Khanid heritage, where it is viewed in similar loftiness) would be seen, at least by conservatives, as a stain on the family's lineage. By leaving the child as a slave, and thus part of the slave's lineage, the family avoids that messy affair getting added to the family line.

[Jikahr]

Here is a separate, yet related question.

I am toying with the idea of making one of my female characters into a Nun affiliated with the Sisters of EVE, who is also clandestinely running a brothel. Pictures of Nuns wearing sexy clothes, and the idea of slutty Nuns are pretty amusing to me.

Corporate titles and characters would be tongue in cheek puns and play on words. For example, the Monk in charge of making french fried foods would be the 'Chip Monk'. His obese but philosophical assistant would be the 'Deep fat fryer'.

I understand that EVE is a big enough sandbox that some people veer off in completely different roleplay directions, such as playing a Vulcan or a Jedi or whatever. However, I personally don't want to be in a position where I am in a logical conflict with the Prime Fiction.

Is it even possible to have an SOE affiliated corporation that is secretly (yet openly) a brothel, as portrayed in stories such as 'Juliette' by the Marquis de Sade?

If my character already has a billion ISK bounty, is that something that would escape the notice of the Mother Superior of the SOE?

[Louella Dougans]

that genre is apparently called "nunsploitation".

depending on who you ask, some characters would just say "I knew it!", given that there's no clothing evident on the individual in this picture: https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/File:Sisters.jpg

lol.

[Gwen Ikiryo]

And I don't think that the white slavery discussion is particularly useful. It is too modern a paradigm. Roman slave practices always strike me as the closest clear model for Amarrian ones.

The PF seems to dither back and fourth on whether slavery in the Empire more closely resembles Roman stuff or 1800s chattel slavery, in my experience. While it's more styled that way in the surface (Slavery as a form of criminal punishment, annexing new territories for stock, etc) Roman slaves, especially post-republic, had a surprising amount of rights - They were protected under the law from murder and serious assault, had the right to their own wealth (to an extent) and to to eventually buy their freedom, and even to go to court to protest against their masters if they felt they were being mistreated. Later on, their owners were not even permitted to imprison them privately, and many punishments were completely banned.

Amarrian slavery doesn't really have any of that - Most of the PF describes Holders as functionally being able to do whatever they want, and control every aspect of their slaves lives. And of course there's a very strong racial overtone to it all as well as a cultural one concerning the "it is their rightful place" justification, something that the romans never had at all.

[Louella Dougans]

some slaves are also very highly educated. Hedion University has indentured professors, for example.

[Samira Kernher]

Here is a separate, yet related question.

I am toying with the idea of making one of my female characters into a Nun affiliated with the Sisters of EVE, who is also clandestinely running a brothel. Pictures of Nuns wearing sexy clothes, and the idea of slutty Nuns are pretty amusing to me.

Corporate titles and characters would be tongue in cheek puns and play on words. For example, the Monk in charge of making french fried foods would be the 'Chip Monk'. His obese but philosophical assistant would be the 'Deep fat fryer'.

I understand that EVE is a big enough sandbox that some people veer off in completely different roleplay directions, such as playing a Vulcan or a Jedi or whatever. However, I personally don't want to be in a position where I am in a logical conflict with the Prime Fiction.

Is it even possible to have an SOE affiliated corporation that is secretly (yet openly) a brothel, as portrayed in stories such as 'Juliette' by the Marquis de Sade?

If my character already has a billion ISK bounty, is that something that would escape the notice of the Mother Superior of the SOE?

Considering how dirty the Sisters actually are, I wouldn't put it past them at all tbh. They have their hands in a lot of very clandestine and outright illegal stuff. It's just all painted over with the legitimate and respected humanitarian front.

I think the key thing to make it work would be an ultimate, noble goal. The Sisters do dirty things, but it's usually always in pursuit of something grander. If they were to have a clandestine brothel that brothel would be about something much, much more important, rather than simply being a money-making scheme.

[Samira Kernher]

And I don't think that the white slavery discussion is particularly useful. It is too modern a paradigm. Roman slave practices always strike me as the closest clear model for Amarrian ones.

The PF seems to dither back and fourth on whether slavery in the Empire more closely resembles Roman stuff or 1800s chattel slavery, in my experience. While it's more styled that way in the surface (Slavery as a form of criminal punishment, annexing new territories for stock, etc) Roman slaves, especially post-republic, had a surprising amount of rights - They were protected under the law from murder and serious assault, had the right to their own wealth (to an extent) and to to eventually buy their freedom, and even to go to court to protest against their masters if they felt they were being mistreated. Later on, their owners were not even permitted to imprison them privately, and many punishments were completely banned.

Amarrian slavery doesn't really have any of that - Most of the PF describes Holders as functionally being able to do whatever they want, and control every aspect of their slaves lives. And of course there's a very strong racial overtone to it all as well as a cultural one concerning the "it is their rightful place" justification, something that the romans never had at all.

Slaves are described as having some freedoms, the right to request positions and education provided that request fits into the Holder's needs. They have the opportunity for getting high education, and are given breaks, good healthcare, and even vacation time with some level of freedom of movement (in Source, the Minmatar story describes mine slaves being given extra vitoc supplies during vacation periods so that they could travel to town). They also have some monetary freedoms. In Chained to the Sky, the slaves were freely capable of ordering for themselves food and beverages from a local bar. I see it likely that while slaves might not make 'real' money, they are given some form of stipend that they can use on common supplies and goods. Slaves do afterall make up about 50% of the Empire population, and ergo would need some capacity for self-sufficiency, with strict boundaries of course. Slave families likely shop at the same stores as commoners, with restrictions on what can be purchased based on their permissions. This has the side benefit of making the taking away of those permissions and benefits a method of slave control. We do know that they have their own homes within the slave districts, they are not kept in slave pens or anything. Though obviously there are always outliers. Slave colonies, breeding colonies, these things give slaves a lot less freedoms, of course.

Really though, the class of slave is vastly important to determining what level of freedoms and rights they possess. There's no one catchall definition of slave life.

Additionally, as I said above, Government of the Amarr Empire does describe that damaging someone else's property (which slaves are considered as) and egregious mistreatment of slaves are straight up religious law (IE, they're forbidden by Scripture). So slaves do have some rights that they can appeal to their owners or the Theology Council, though by merit of their upbringing they probably rarely make any attempt at appealing to these rights, if they are even aware of them in the first place.

[Jikahr]

And I don't think that the white slavery discussion is particularly useful. It is too modern a paradigm. Roman slave practices always strike me as the closest clear model for Amarrian ones.

The PF seems to dither back and fourth on whether slavery in the Empire more closely resembles Roman stuff or 1800s chattel slavery, in my experience. While it's more styled that way in the surface (Slavery as a form of criminal punishment, annexing new territories for stock, etc) Roman slaves, especially post-republic, had a surprising amount of rights - They were protected under the law from murder and serious assault, had the right to their own wealth (to an extent) and to to eventually buy their freedom, and even to go to court to protest against their masters if they felt they were being mistreated. Later on, their owners were not even permitted to imprison them privately, and many punishments were completely banned.

Amarrian slavery doesn't really have any of that - Most of the PF describes Holders as functionally being able to do whatever they want, and control every aspect of their slaves lives. And of course there's a very strong racial overtone to it all as well as a cultural one concerning the "it is their rightful place" justification, something that the romans never had at all.

Well, I think like much of EVE, it's quite open to interpretation. I tend to think of Roman slavery as 'institutionalized', progressing over a long period of time. It would also be essential to award the slaves with some rights, since the danger of slave revolts was very real and ever present. This was what happened in the Star Trek episode where they had a 20th century Roman empire. Slaves had labor unions, health care, dental plans and so forth.

There were periods in the Roman empire when slaves were so cheap that their owners simply didn't feed them. It was more 'cost effective' to simply work them and starve them to death. Slaves that worked in the mines, or on the farmer's fields were still treated quite harshly.

I think a lot of people also associate EVE slavery with Antediluvian slavery in the United States as well. The game developers certainly did a lot to contribute to that, by making all of the Minmatar dark skinned, and all the Amarrians as pale skinned. Apparently the idea behind the Amarr and Minmatar enslavement (as well as the religious angle) came from Columbus and his enslavement and extermination of the Arawak people.

Antediluvian was most certainly harsh and brutal, with Africans being kidnapped (as the Minmatar were) and forced into mainly agrarian labor. Like Rome, slave revolt was also a constant concern, which meant that the Americans had to maintain a Spartan like society with well armed men to quickly suppress any slave revolts.

I should mention though, that Africans weren't the only slaves in Georgian America. Irish were transported as indentured servants, debt slaves that were considered as property until they were too old to be useful anymore. The Irish were easier to control, since they had a debt to pay off. The Africans would always be slaves in the southern states merely because of their skin color.

In EVE terms, the Irish might be comparable to the Ni-Kunni. They were slaves that became fully integrated with the dominant culture.

The Amarrian empire spans thousands of planets, and is divided between holders (the only legal slave owners) with 'patchwork' territories under their control. A slave in the Kor-Azor region may have a very different life than a slave in the Ardishapur holdings, based largely upon the whims of the holders.

Also, I think that urban slaves would be treated better than rural slaves, skilled slaves would have negotiating power, 'pet' slaves would be treated as well as a domestic dog or cat, unruly and rebellious slaves would be consigned to miserable, hazardous work, and so on.

[Esna Pitoojee]

However, the image of a scantily clad holographic dancer was removed from the in game Gallente (?) pleasure centres. Presumably that was something that had to be done in order to market the game towards 13-18 year olds.

Sandbox yes, 'adult' content no.

I'll just step in and address this real fast: To my knowledge, the removal of the Gallente Pleasure Hub station interior had absolutely zero to do with the quafe girl, and in fact was simply due to something in the shaders not agreeing at all with the Trinity graphics engine.

That said, several somewhat raunchier items have had their descriptions altered somewhat (for instance, the "Pillaging 101" item, which used to read "Contains detailed instructions on what to pillage and what to rape; mixups are so awkward").



Getting on to the main topic, one of the interesting things that gets overlooked a lot is that the first Amarr Emperor, Amash-Akura, outright forbid the rape of captured enemies. While it's not clear if this is directly transmitted as solid law up the current day, I think it is a safe bet that - especially in a society such as Amarr where figures such as Amash-Akura are revered religiously - the principles of such a ruling would not have been forgotten. I suspect it's likely that rape of prisoners and slaves, including coercion from a higher authority, is viewed very, very dimly in the Empire.

Amarrian slavery doesn't really have any of that - Most of the PF describes Holders as functionally being able to do whatever they want, and control every aspect of their slaves lives.

This brings me to my next point: While, by law, there may be little in the way of absolute protection  for slaves in the Empire, there is another (perhaps even stronger) force that steps in instead: Social pressure.

Amarr slavery has the additional dynamic of slavery being intended as a tool to teach and convert; none of the examples mentioned here in the thread include any similar mandate or drive to use slavery to produce a productive, loyal subject.

While many Holders view their slaves solely as a source of free labor, a Holder who never frees his slaves and mistreats them will be viewed negatively by his fellows and the religious authorities.

Neither did 1800s antebellum or Roman slavery had to contend with the possibility of recording devices, long-range communications, etc. Especially considering the way Amarr politics are often described as a cutthroat mess of commoners and Holders alike competing to find any means to climb over their opponents, using slaves for sexual pleasure would be a very risky business indeed.

That's not to say it doesn't happen, of course - I'm quite sure it does. However, I disagree with the presumption that it is something every slave will experience and every slaveholder or overseer will engage in.