Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => CCP Public Library => Topic started by: Zag on 10 Aug 2010, 01:02
-
Just stumbled across a snippet mission brief from a Caldari COSMOS:
Note the mission and agent is:
The Lai Dai Research Project - Rogue Drone Risk - (3 of 3)
Matani Jitainen - A female Civire
From their hives in Okkelen they launch their attacks against any human presence they can find. It's one of the reason's my wife didn't want me to take this job … maybe I should have listened to her after all. …
So what I'm wondering in regards to attitudes towards sexuality in the State is in regards to same-sex affairs. Would there be cultural bias against it but the Megacorps. could legally care less about the whole thing so long as the partners remain productive members of the corporation? Or people in the State could honestly care less? Can they just put their genetic material on a petrie dish and have tube children?
Thoughts?
-
Never underestimate the CCPs capability to overlook the fine details.
The mission text is probably not connected to the sex of the agent.
-
Never underestimate the CCPs capability to overlook the fine details.
The mission text is probably not connected to the sex of the agent.
Oh no doubt, but I still find it an interesting point of discussion in regards to the intersection of the personal and professional lives of State citizens and general attitudes towards sexuality in the State.
Would it be frowned upon because they're not adding to the citizenry of the Megacorps?
-
Zag, have you not read this?
http://www.eveonline.com/background/potw/default.asp?cid=04-06-07 (http://www.eveonline.com/background/potw/default.asp?cid=04-06-07)
Says it all really, but I don't imagine that, if your homosexual in the State, you want it to be known. Ties in with the whole "Trillions of Federals, billions of State citizens" thing - if population count is a cause for worry to the point where artificial re-creation is used, NOT doing your re-creational duties for the State would likely be frowned on.
As a start.
Also, this; "CCP's agent-mission generator can't separate from the sexes of the agents" +1.
-
IIRC there is a Guristas officer who was kicked out of the Caldari Navy for being the gay.
I kind of like the whole "shut the fuck up about it or go pirate" theme.
-
Kaikka Peunato
Peunato, an extremely competent pilot, was forced out of the Caldari Navy when he revealed he was gay. Since joining the Guristas, Peunato has been instrumental in expanding their power and influence. Threat level: Deadly
-
Well, I'll put it down to the State having a, "Don't ask, don't tell" policy in effect and try not to point out the rather amusing fact made by failed mission generation that the State only appears to take issue with relationships between two men and not two women. :lol:
-
Also, this; "CCP's agent-mission generator can't separate from the sexes of the agents" +1.
Can't blame the agent-mission generator for this one. This is a COSMOS mission. It's the only one that agent offers.
-
Also, this; "CCP's agent-mission generator can't separate from the sexes of the agents" +1.
Can't blame the agent-mission generator for this one. This is a COSMOS mission. It's the only one that agent offers.
In other words, this was either a fuck-up from whomsoever wrote the mission, a subtle and intended line of PF reffering text and Zag is right, or...
Actually, just those two options exist then, unless I've missed something.
-
A topic similar to this was brought up at one time, so I am hopefully going to repeat some comments.
Zag, have you not read this?
http://www.eveonline.com/background/potw/default.asp?cid=04-06-07 (http://www.eveonline.com/background/potw/default.asp?cid=04-06-07)
Says it all really, but I don't imagine that, if your homosexual in the State, you want it to be known.
I think the sexual orientation of the executives is what pops out at the reader initially, since it is a modern issue. What people read over is the two executives mentioned are from different corporations; two very powerful, competing, corporations - KK & SuVee. The second is the source of the conflict and why the two executives are charged with corruption. It could have been a heterosexual relationship with the same result.
Ties in with the whole "Trillions of Federals, billions of State citizens" thing - if population count is a cause for worry to the point where artificial [conception] is used, NOT doing your recreational duties for the State would likely be frowned on.
This is predicated on traditional conception being the most effective means of producing children, which it is not. I do not think the TubeChild program was the beginning of artificial pregnancy, I think it add the creation of parent-less children.
For example, in the Federation, I can see children being grown in artificial wombs in order to free the mother to do whatever it is she wants to do. In the State, it frees the mother to continue being a productive member of society.
I think it is fair to detach the act of romantic/pleasurable/recreational sex from the conception of children in both Federal and State societies.
Well, I'll put it down to the State having a, "Don't ask, don't tell" policy in effect and try not to point out the rather amusing fact made by failed mission generation that the State only appears to take issue with relationships between two men and not two women. LOL
I do not think it does. It is more about your relationships (regardless of who with) impacting your corporate duties and the perception of your effectiveness and loyalty to the corporation.
In other words, this was either a fuck-up from whomsoever wrote the mission, a subtle and intended line of PF reffering text and Zag is right, or...
Actually, just those two options exist then, unless I've missed something.
You missed something. The chronicle is not about Caldari cultural not embracing diverse sexuality, but rather corporate culture not embracing cross-corporate romantic relationships.
Caldari culture does not care about your romantic relationship, unless it creates a risk to a larger group.
In the Chronicle, a KK and a SuVee executive were sleeping together and possibly sharing corporate secrets. Even the simple - "How was your day?" - could put proprietary corporate information at risk. The CFO saying "it was a bad day" potentially indicates the corporation is in a tough position financial for example. Their relationship put more than themselves at risk, it put their corporations at risk without their knowledge.
-
Also, this; "CCP's agent-mission generator can't separate from the sexes of the agents" +1.
Can't blame the agent-mission generator for this one. This is a COSMOS mission. It's the only one that agent offers.
In other words, this was either a fuck-up from whomsoever wrote the mission, a subtle and intended line of PF reffering text and Zag is right, or...
Actually, just those two options exist then, unless I've missed something.
It's also possible the agent's gender changed over the course of the game since the COSMOS mission existed.
Stranger things have happened.
-
What I tend to think is that while there may be a degree of cultural bias in the State it does not necessarily translate into corporate bias against same-sex, or indeed any form of non-traditional relationship or expression of sexuality. There might be expectations, at least publicly, to maintain the pretense of adhering to public expectations and cultural norms. Prejudices probably exist, but so long as the participants remain productive and valuable members then corporate interference would be dependent on the exact nature of the relationship and it impact on the greater whole. There might be snickers around the water coolers but so long as personal relationships don't affect working relationships then there should not be an issue.
Also, corporate attitudes to non-traditional relationships and sexuality might vary from Mega to Mega. Lai Dai corporate culture might be less inclined to intercede in the marriage of two women (I've always thought of Lai Dai culture being something akin to progressive traditionalists) but Kaalakiota , Wiyrkomi and Hyasyoda might frown upon such a relationship as their corporate cultures appear to be more conservative with a greater expectation to adhere to cultural and traditional norms.
-
For starters, I'm going to approach this from an EVE context, not a RL one, where there is a consensus regarding the morality of homosexuality.
I quite imagine the Practical faction not permitting it. Why would they? It's not practical at all, and what would be the point of it? EVE isn't exactly politically correct, or meant to be (mass slave-lynching on Sarum Prime for example), and I can imagine that some factions and sub-factions do not like homosexuality at all. I mean, just because homosexuality is morally permissible IRL, doesn't mean EVE has it as so. Considering Jin-Mei women were unequal to men before the Gallente came along, anything is possible to be prejudiced against.
As for the State, the Caldari Navy at least maintains an anti-homosexuality policy. If the Liberals want to be cohesive with other nations, like the Federation, I can imagine them being more lenient, as it sounds Gallente to be all like "your status of homosexual people is poor!".
It's a curious subject which I think CCP hasn't touched on due to OOG sensitivities. As if the white-race-enslaving-the-black-race wasn't enough lol :roll:
-
These discussions make me cringe.
If you're looking for a meaning, you'll find one even when there wasn't meant to be one. Trying to classify and narrow everything down without explicit cannon clarifying the issue is a matter of perspective at the end and doesn't make it any more TRUTH than if x community agrees with you or not. Unless you're role-playing a homosexual Deteis man exiled from the State because he couldn't do his 'duty' to have children (or maybe he did, and he just doesn't like it), I'm not sure how this makes a lick of difference one way or another.
I mean, it's one thing to speculate about it, and might even be an interesting topic for debate, but you aren't going to find the answer...
-
I'm going to talk about this mostly in broad terms, rather than focusing on homosexuality so much, because as Kaleigh says it isn't like we are going to get an answer, and also
[admin]You should tread carefully, in this kind of discussion for, I think, obvious reasons.[/admin]
There is a fairly important point to be made, though, about this kind of issue, in the State. I think Zag touched on it: Essentially, the difference between the idea of 'State' culture and corporate culture.
Different cultural norms and taboos will probably be most evident along corporate lines, rather than State or political 'faction' lines. The 'political' factions seem to be largely just that - political and economic. They may or may not have anything to do with how a corporation deals with its citizens, and while there is no doubt an impact, the corporations are themselves before they are Practical, Liberal, or Patriot.
For example: Ishukone and Hyasyoda are both 'liberal' corporations, however Hyasyoda is extremely 'traditional' in much of its internal culture. It probably has more in common with KK, in that area, than with Ishukone.
Another example: NOH and Suvee are 'practical' - but all that means is that they put business first on a corporate scale. They are in different businesses and very likely have entirely different cultures internally. I would suggest incidentally, Seriphyn, that it isn't particularly practical to interfere in the lives of their employees where it doesn't impact those employee's productivity (and indeed, happy employees are probably more productive employees.) That being said, we've no idea what the actual situation is, because we simply have very few clues as to what the internal cultures are like.
Ultimately, I think that homosexuality being to some degree or another a taboo in the Caldari Navy is indicative of just that - homosexuality being a taboo to some extent or another in the Caldari Navy.
-
As for the State, the Caldari Navy at least maintains an anti-homosexuality policy.
"Peunato, an extremely competent pilot, was forced out of the Caldari Navy when he revealed he was gay. Since joining the Guristas, Peunato has been instrumental in expanding their power and influence. Threat level: Deadly"
(Link (http://eveinfo.com/npcship/13589/eve-online-kaikka-peunato.html))
Reading the text, it may not be an anti-homosexual policy. Being forced out is different than being discharged.
It gets back to interpreting the language used, realizing just how big the entities we are discussing are, and moving beyond our day-to-day cultural references and bias.
If Peunato's unit consisted largely of personnel from more traditional corporations/backgrounds (Hyasyoda & Wirykomi), then the environment he was in could be very, very hostile. Such an unit might conspire against him in an effort to force him out of the service. It could have nothing to do with policy.
I think Zag touched on it: Essentially, the difference between the idea of 'State' culture and corporate culture.
Agree entirely.
-
Source, p. 113
"The corporate-controlled marriage system segregates members of opposite genders (same-sex marriage is neither recognized nor legal within Caldari borders, a frequent topic of controversy between the Caldari and considerably more liberal Gallente)."
-
One thing for sure, Source seems to remove the ambiguous out of everything.
-
Yes, it does. Thank god. It took the ambiguity out of some of the most annoyingly and repetitiously debated State topics that needed to be put to rest (same-sex marriage in the State, what kind of concept is Cold Wind, etc.).
-
Oh no, I guess us dirty nasty gays will just have to stop roleplaying Caldari, right? Should we swallow a bullet too?
I stopped caring what EVE lore said about homosexuality a long time ago. If you think Katrina should be ostracized for it, don't try to fuckin' roleplay with me.
Real simple isn't it?
You know what, nevermind.
-
Oh no, I guess us dirty nasty gays will just have to stop roleplaying Caldari, right? Should we swallow a bullet too?
I stopped caring what EVE lore said about homosexuality a long time ago. If you think Katrina should be ostracized for it, don't try to fuckin' roleplay with me.
Real simple isn't it?
You know what, nevermind.
I do see your nevermind and your strikethroughs, so I don't expect an engagement here (not that one is really necessary from what I'm about to say), but: Given that Katrina's not a part of the Navy, I don't see where her being a lesbian would be unplausible. It's an everyday thing for people in positions of power to have socially unacceptable private lives, and for it to be ignored because of their social/political status. Everyone just pretends it isn't a thing, lest they suffer repurcussions they'd much rather not suffer.
-
There's also the bit where capsuleers can basically just drop all pretenses anyway. If they want to remain loyal to their ideals/nations but discard the less idealistic bits, who the hell are going to do anything about it? We're eggers, anyone that's going to give a shit won't really be able to use the usual social tools of shunning, denying promotions or even firing people over such things.
The Caldari culture and even legal issues with homosexuality etc doesn't change that they'd have just as many homosexuals as all other nations (it's a rather human thing, not national thing after all), just more repression, denial or hiding of the fact. Caldari capsuleers are probably in the perfect situation to finally go "Fuck it, not going to keep pretending now, what the hell are they going to do or say that affects me?".
-
Yes, it does. Thank god. It took the ambiguity out of some of the most annoyingly and repetitiously debated State topics that needed to be put to rest (same-sex marriage in the State, what kind of concept is Cold Wind, etc.).
Perhaps, perhaps not. I wouldn't complain if it had been done from the beginning.
There you get into situations like what happened after TEA for most older caldari RPers, where the lore got shaken to a point that they all just got disgusted and left.
-
Oh no, I guess us dirty nasty gays will just have to stop roleplaying Caldari, right? Should we swallow a bullet too?
I stopped caring what EVE lore said about homosexuality a long time ago. If you think Katrina should be ostracized for it, don't try to fuckin' roleplay with me.
Real simple isn't it?
You know what, nevermind.
The greatest Caldari sin is to flaunt your differences. You can be different, you just have to bring attention to how you are the same as the others and avoid making a point of your differences from the aggregate. Polite Caldari (and to not be polite is to different) will deliberately not notice.
At least as long as you aren't forcing them to notice, like Kaikka Peunato did. His squad-mates and superiors probably all knew he was gay long before he made his revelation. Having grown up in Caldari culture he'd know what would happen once he came out publicly - and thus mostly like had plans to defect to the Guristas long before hand.
-
It was said not about Caldari, but about the State.
For example, Gurista are Caldari too and are not limited by State laws, morals and traditions. One don't even have to be Gurista. Many Caldari just run from the State because they can't cope with strict State customs with exhausting competitions, and can establish their own societies or work for Nulsec Empires (or who would run all these stations, outposts, planetary colonies, capsuleer ships), where almost anything is possible.
-
Just in case people were responding to me: nowhere did I say nor have I ever said that you can't RP a gay State citizen. It is perfectly doable depending on the context and how it is done. I am merely happy that CCP started solidifying certain aspects of State PF - in my opinion, consistently solidifying them.
-
My bad, guys. I've been working pretty much constant shifts and this morning I was pretty ill because I didn't get much sleep the night before.
-
My bad, guys. I've been working pretty much constant shifts and this morning I was pretty ill because I didn't get much sleep the night before.
Yea...I gave you the peoples eyebrow IRL for that one.
(http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11111/111111327/3144915-7213-raised_eyebrow-the_rock-wwf.png)
I'm out of the loop but AFAIK there are two main bubbles of Caldari RPers and both have homosexual characters at the center. (Hint one of them is Kat) I doubt she's being ostracized.
-
I do recall reading an IRL article about the Gay pride parade in Toronto. The article was called 'the end of Gay', or something. The author was saying that being gay was more fun when it was frowned upon, a sort of secret society. It was forbidden fruit, like underaged drinking. Once gay became more acceptable, more mainstream, more NORMAL, it somehow became a lot less fun.
I can certainly see an aspect of this in EVE. In a game where we all undock in spaceships looking for reasons to kill one another, why should we get our feelings hurt if our war targets turn out to be homophobic?
Institutional homosexuality is pretty common in military societies such as the Army and Navy. Is it tolerated in the Navy despite the fact that gay marriages aren't recognized in Caldari society as a whole? The Greek Spartans for example, believed that homosexual soldiers would fight harder to protect the man next to him.
I would think that if ships had crews, homosexual pod pilots would be more 'logical' than heterosexual ones, since combat vessels don't make great nurseries. If everyone is sterile and children are born in test tubes, then why the prohibition on gay marriage?
-
I think instead of discussing whether it is good or bad, who are doing right or wrong, how to follow or bypass it, or just going ":psyccp: :psyccp: :psyccp:", it would bring much more profit (obligatory Caldari behavior in Caldari thread :P), if we better discuss what it will bring, and how to actually use it, how to generate content with it.
Look at this situation in the State more carefully, it is whole military society with strict morals, and such homophobic approach has roots in their lack of sexuality. Or, simply speaking, they are so busy, so they don't have time to be erotic. When I think about it, I imagine USSR society with its joke formula (from last days of USSR), that "There is no sex in USSR". Well, it doesn't mean all people are born in tubes, but rather that no one talks about sex, there is completely nothing about sex in media, TV, advertisements, etc. What peoples do in their bedrooms doesn't leave door of said bedrooms. And as consequence, they don't know how to be erotic. Of course there are whores, public houses, some strip bars maybe in prohibited areas. But on everyday sense people can't be erotic.
And here comes another interesting consequence: when people actually try to be erotic without knowing about it, it becomes simply repulsive. (As an example, I remember again late USSR, when they started to allow erotic and even were going about it in local TV channel, even in prime time, even when children were allowed to watch. And it was really ugly, dirty and repulsive.)
Why people would do it? That's quite simple. First, being a rebel. And second, if they saw really arousing gallente-produced (err... foreign, in case of USSR) erotic. But on other hand, those, who weren't so rebel, when were looking at domestic erotic, were disgusted even more, and were bringing it as examples, why such behavior should not be allowed.
And there is one interesting point to RP about: how do peoples of completely different cultures and morals interact, on one hand, there will be interest and curiosity from both sides, and on other hand, misunderstanding and repulsion: "-You are what, sexually repressed?!" - "You are what, filthy, dirty and disgusting?"
But it is just the start. CCP gave us rather strong, and I would say, incredibly strong boiling point for conflict: it is illegality of homosexual relations. For Caldari, it should be rather normal, and nothing is wrong: everything, that is not a "vanilla sex" is probably a disgusting perversion. For Gallente?... especially gallente activists for freedom and LGBT communities, it is like a red flag in bullfighting. Now take into account that it is even prohibited by law and shunned by communities, it should make Gallente people very mad at Caldari, creating incredibly strong conflict topics.
-
Take it for what it is but I don't think it's a good way to react negatively to that just because it's contentious IRL and seen negatively by our little internet postmodern world. If we start to cry out loud that it's CCP being stupid for implementing something like that in the lore, then let's take a look at everything similar that colours negatively every faction. Slavery, etc, among others.
As others have said above it is what generates interesting drama and conflict or morality. Don't let it get the better of you, it's IC, not OOC.
-
Take it for what it is but I don't think it's a good way to react negatively to that just because it's contentious IRL and seen negatively by our little internet postmodern world. If we start to cry out loud that it's CCP being stupid for implementing something like that in the lore, then let's take a look at everything similar that colours negatively every faction. Slavery, etc, among others.
As others have said above it is what generates interesting drama and conflict or morality. Don't let it get the better of you, it's IC, not OOC.
Ding ding ding. We have a winner.
-
Isn't that what half of us have been saying for, well, years now? Even before Source.
-
Some have been saying that for TEA, for which I disagree. I don't feel that homophobic culture in the lore is uninteresting, to the contrary. But TEA was cheesy.
-
I'm not talking about a specific piece of pre-Source lore, here.
I just do not understand the pre-defensive posture that has reared its head around this issue. Why are people trying to justify accepting Source confirming what many of us gleaned from the lore in the first place? It doesn't need justification or footnotes. It was widely accepted that some form of sexual traditionalism existed in the State prior to Source; we just didn't have clarification on what form it took. Now we do - in the simple form of same-sex marriage not being legal. It is merely an addition to the past mentions we've had surrounding Kaikka Peunato and so forth.
Nobody has asked for long-time Caldari roleplayers to suddenly change their characters. The community accepted a long time ago that they were going to interpret State PF a specific way and that is not going to suddenly change. There is no need to walk on eggshells about discussing the PF, because nobody is promoting the notion that everyone somehow change what they have been doing for years.
-
I just do not understand the pre-defensive posture that has reared its head around this issue. Why are people trying to justify accepting Source confirming what many of us gleaned from the lore in the first place? It doesn't need justification or footnotes. It was widely accepted that some form of sexual traditionalism existed in the State prior to Source; we just didn't have clarification on what form it took. Now we do - in the simple form of same-sex marriage not being legal. It is merely an addition to the past mentions we've had surrounding Kaikka Peunato and so forth.
Some of us did not interpret it as a form of sexual traditionalism. To some of us, a Caldari flaunting their embrace of the a particular religion or philosophy outside the norm is on the same caliber of breaking with tradition as choosing a same-sex mate. For that matter, a Caldari flaunting that she is married to a particularly attractive Deteis in comparison to her workmates might be considered outside of Caldari norms.
The greatest Caldari sin is to flaunt your differences. You can be different, you just have to bring attention to how you are the same as the others and avoid making a point of your differences from the aggregate. Polite Caldari (and to not be polite is to different) will deliberately not notice.
At least as long as you aren't forcing them to notice, like Kaikka Peunato did. His squad-mates and superiors probably all knew he was gay long before he made his revelation. Having grown up in Caldari culture he'd know what would happen once he came out publicly - and thus mostly like had plans to defect to the Guristas long before hand.
-
I'll just have to agree to disagree on the issue. That last paragraph you quoted seems completely off base to me, but that's fine - people interpret things in different ways.
-
The greatest Caldari sin is to flaunt your differences. You can be different, you just have to bring attention to how you are the same as the others and avoid making a point of your differences from the aggregate. Polite Caldari (and to not be polite is to different) will deliberately not notice.
At least as long as you aren't forcing them to notice, like Kaikka Peunato did. His squad-mates and superiors probably all knew he was gay long before he made his revelation. Having grown up in Caldari culture he'd know what would happen once he came out publicly - and thus mostly like had plans to defect to the Guristas long before hand.
[/quote]
This certainly makes sense in a conformist Fascist society, which is what the Caldari state is.
For example, in the Fascist state of Nazi Germany, there were openly homosexual men such as Ernst Rohm at the highest levels, but in the cut-throat environment of political ladder climbing your opponents will always look for an excuse, any excuse, to get rid of you. The nail that sticks out gets hammered down, so homosexuality became another one of the convenient excuses the Nazis had to get rid of someone.
Interestingly, during the age of exploration on Earth, most Pirates such as Jack Sparrow would have probably been gay, at least according to one theory. If you can't practice your lifestyle in the Royal British Navy, simply kill your officers and become an independent entity as a Pirate crew. After all, why pledge your allegiance to a state that condemns your sexuality?
This does make me wonder about homosexuality and the Amarr society. I would imagine the attitude is similar to the Caldari. Homosexuality is taboo, but it certainly still exists.
-
This does make me wonder about homosexuality and the Amarr society. I would imagine the attitude is similar to the Caldari. Homosexuality is taboo, but it certainly still exists.
"Pray away the gay" or "Ya'll motherfuckers need Jesus!" I wonder?
-
The greatest Caldari sin is to flaunt your differences. You can be different, you just have to bring attention to how you are the same as the others and avoid making a point of your differences from the aggregate. Polite Caldari (and to not be polite is to different) will deliberately not notice.
At least as long as you aren't forcing them to notice, like Kaikka Peunato did. His squad-mates and superiors probably all knew he was gay long before he made his revelation. Having grown up in Caldari culture he'd know what would happen once he came out publicly - and thus mostly like had plans to defect to the Guristas long before hand.
This certainly makes sense in a conformist Fascist society, which is what the Caldari state is.
For example, in the Fascist state of Nazi Germany, there were openly homosexual men such as Ernst Rohm at the highest levels, but in the cut-throat environment of political ladder climbing your opponents will always look for an excuse, any excuse, to get rid of you. The nail that sticks out gets hammered down, so homosexuality became another one of the convenient excuses the Nazis had to get rid of someone.
Interestingly, during the age of exploration on Earth, most Pirates such as Jack Sparrow would have probably been gay, at least according to one theory. If you can't practice your lifestyle in the Royal British Navy, simply kill your officers and become an independent entity as a Pirate crew. After all, why pledge your allegiance to a state that condemns your sexuality?
This does make me wonder about homosexuality and the Amarr society. I would imagine the attitude is similar to the Caldari. Homosexuality is taboo, but it certainly still exists.
[/quote]
You missed my point by a mile.
-
You missed my point by a mile.
Could you elaborate then?
-
This does make me wonder about homosexuality and the Amarr society. I would imagine the attitude is similar to the Caldari. Homosexuality is taboo, but it certainly still exists.
"Pray away the gay" or "Ya'll motherfuckers need Jesus!" I wonder?
This is Amarr. It's 'put you in the slave mine and beat the gay out of you while preaching about Jesus'.
-
This does make me wonder about homosexuality and the Amarr society. I would imagine the attitude is similar to the Caldari. Homosexuality is taboo, but it certainly still exists.
"Pray away the gay" or "Ya'll motherfuckers need Jesus!" I wonder?
This is Amarr. It's 'put you in the slave mine and beat the gay out of you while preaching about Jesus'.
Yes, except of course there is no 'Jesus' in the Amarr religion.
Also, what if you are a heterosexual male slave that gets purchased by a (secretly) gay Holder?
I don't mean to conflate homosexuality with pedophilia, but I think there was an instance from the PF about an Amarrian that molested slave boys.
-
That was Karsoth, the usurper Chamberlain. Not really a good example, since pretty much everything he did was just yet another excuse from :tonyg: for him to be twirling a moustache, or for the reader to not like him. It was designed to make people mad, and the parallel between that and the ongoing scandals within the Church irl that aided in that design was pretty blatant.
There is only one other mention of homosexuality in Amarr PF (ignoring the drug-fuelled spacelesbian orgies of Jamyl in T1, also a :tonyg: thing) was in a chronicle, and while it was confirmed by the author that a character in the chronicle happened to be gay, it was never, ever made clear whether it was that he was gay that made his interest an issue, or whether it was simply that he was a priest and the object of his intended affections was a slave.
To date, the Caldari State is the only entity where any sort of taboo is explicitly stated as being present. Since it's a pretty big issue, the lack of mention implies to me that it isn't taboo in the Empire, Kingdom or Mandate. What I would imagine to be taboo, or at least considered inappropriate, is (excessive) public displays of affection regardless of who's involved or their genders. You want to hold hands in public while out on a date, probably not an issue. Just don't start making out in the town square.
-
Amarr attitude would be far more related to the social positions of the persons involved.
Holder & Holder involved in a homosexual relationship? Shrug, as long as there's no politics involved, and there is a proper heir in place for the Holding.
Holder & Commoner ? Don't you think you should concentrate on producing an heir, master ?
Holder & Slave ? Unthinkable ! The Family will seek to replace that Holder as soon as possible.
Commoner & Commoner ? Someone's not getting invited to the next church ice cream social.
Commoner & Slave ? Excuse me, but what do you think you are doing with the Holder's property ?
Slave & Slave ?
[spoiler]Proximo: Those giraffes you sold me, they won't mate. They just walk around, eating, and not mating. You sold me... queer giraffes. I want my money back.
[/spoiler]
-
My take on it was always "Look, I don't care about what you get up to in your private time. I don't care if you are gay. But you had better damn well get married and pop out the children anyways, even if you don't enjoy the whole process"
-
I'll just have to agree to disagree on the issue. That last paragraph you quoted seems completely off base to me, but that's fine - people interpret things in different ways.
Except you don't have to even do that. Source explicitly states that our previous arguments for why homosexuality in the State is not at issue (flaunting differences is) is false.
My perspective on the topic in 2010 (page 1 & page 2 of the thread) have been retconned as entirely inaccurate.
And it is not "fine" in an community roleplay setting for people to interpret things differently. In your interpretation, characters like Katrina are breaking laws (and regulations). In my interpretation, if those characters keep their personal lives personal, no one gives a fuck.
Clearly articulating that same-sex marriage is illegal within corporate borders (without explanation mind you) establishes that a nominal Caldari patriot (small patriot) like Katrina would have to go to the Federation to be officially married.
My take on it was always "Look, I don't care about what you get up to in your private time. I don't care if you are gay. But you had better damn well get married and pop out the children anyways, even if you don't enjoy the whole process"
Ties in with the whole "Trillions of Federals, billions of State citizens" thing - if population count is a cause for worry to the point where artificial [conception] is used, NOT doing your recreational duties for the State would likely be frowned on.
This is predicated on traditional conception being the most effective means of producing children, which it is not. I do not think the TubeChild program was the beginning of artificial pregnancy, I think it add the creation of parent-less children.
For example, in the Federation, I can see children being grown in artificial wombs in order to free the mother to do whatever it is she wants to do. In the State, it frees the mother to continue being a productive member of society.
I think it is fair to detach the act of romantic/pleasurable/recreational sex from the conception of children in both Federal and State societies.
-
You missed my point by a mile.
Could you elaborate then?
The old interpretation most of us had before was just that small deviances are fine, as long as they are not flaunted in public. It means that the State society is not against homosexuality per se (though you will probably find as many homophobes as in the Amarr Empire, or even other factions I believe), but that it doesn't fit any standard in said society : it holds no existence, and adds nothing of value.
You can take or not the japanese analogy here, which is that flaunting your sexual experiments in public is not a decent nor a polite thing to do in a civilized society. As long as you keep it in privare, people will faint not to have heard of it, and that out of pure politeness too. In feudal times, it guests were sometimes recieved in very poor houses, where the guest could hear all about a couple (husband + wife) arguments all over the place for exemple, and he would faint not to hear it even if it takes place 5m away from him. It's the polite thing to do.
In State mentality, flaunting about your own difference here is the real issue. Completely opposed to the gallente society where parading in public and showing how different and special snowflaky you are, in Caldari society it's viewed as individualist, selfish, and self centered. And you can bet that most Caldari will frown drastically at any show of any individual thinking of the individual before the community.
Homosexuality in that regard was not even a problem, the same way you were not supposed to flaunt about your heterosexuality where it doesn't belong. It's self centered too after all. Especially with programs like tube children, where heterosexuality loses most meaning since children are produced outside families and raised in crèches.
-
I was specifically referring to the Amarr, Orange, whom I think would find the idea of creating people out of whole cloth to be actually abhorrent.
-
I would also expect that in Amarr its about power relationships. Fully expect that they see a lot of casual sexual abuse of slaves/servants/lower classes with little regard to gender binaries.
As for the "have kids anyways" argument, it seems likely to me that it would vary massively depending on societal rank and position in family. I expect that norms would vary massively depending on exactly what class you are in.
-
You missed my point by a mile.
Could you elaborate then?
The old interpretation most of us had before was just that small deviances are fine, as long as they are not flaunted in public. It means that the State society is not against homosexuality per se (though you will probably find as many homophobes as in the Amarr Empire, or even other factions I believe), but that it doesn't fit any standard in said society : it holds no existence, and adds nothing of value.
You can take or not the japanese analogy here, which is that flaunting your sexual experiments in public is not a decent nor a polite thing to do in a civilized society. As long as you keep it in privare, people will faint not to have heard of it, and that out of pure politeness too. In feudal times, it guests were sometimes recieved in very poor houses, where the guest could hear all about a couple (husband + wife) arguments all over the place for exemple, and he would faint not to hear it even if it takes place 5m away from him. It's the polite thing to do.
In State mentality, flaunting about your own difference here is the real issue. Completely opposed to the gallente society where parading in public and showing how different and special snowflaky you are, in Caldari society it's viewed as individualist, selfish, and self centered. And you can bet that most Caldari will frown drastically at any show of any individual thinking of the individual before the community.
Homosexuality in that regard was not even a problem, the same way you were not supposed to flaunt about your heterosexuality where it doesn't belong. It's self centered too after all. Especially with programs like tube children, where heterosexuality loses most meaning since children are produced outside families and raised in crèches.
Okay, thanks for the explanation Lyn.
I still contend that the Caldari State is a Fascist government. ("Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the fusion of state and corporate powers" -Mussolini.) However as you and Purple pointed out, it's not the homosexuality, but the flaunting of individuality that is the main issue here.
The Spartans of Ancient Greece were an authoritarian government that not only accepted homosexuality, but encouraged it. They thought that if you were in love with the man beside you, then you would fight harder to protect him in battle.
As far as Fascism and homosexuality is concerned, the word 'Fascism' originally comes from a bundle of sticks. The lesson taught to children was that one stick (or 'faggot') by itself was weak, and could be easily broken. However many sticks together could not be broken if they were tightly bound (Bundle of sticks = 'Fasces'. Tying them in a bundle = 'Fascinating' the sticks).
Senior students in British boarding schools once had a tradition of initiating first year students by bullying them into becoming de facto slaves. Since the new students were not yet accepted as part of the group, they were still the loose and fragile sticks, 'faggots'.
"Comply or be broken, small stick."
The word in North America somehow degenerated from it's original meaning of 'wimp', to mean 'homosexual'. In Britain, the word 'faggot' still applies to a small stick, or as slang for a cigarette.
Oh, and I should point out that when you say 'faint' you probably meant to say 'feign'. To faint is to lose consciousness, to feign is to fake an emotion or physical condition. When spoken, they do sound almost identical in pronunciation.
-
You're not wrong about the Caldari being corporatist. I think you've got idea down, but most people see the word and assume it's means the same thing as Corporatocracy or being pro-corporatization when it doesn't.
I'm not really sure it can be argued that the State isn't fascist (since that's such a hard to define thing) but many see corporatism and mistake it for corporatocracy and erroneously jump to the conclusion that a tenet of fascism is corporatocracy, the Caldari are ruled by corporations and are therefore fascist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_group_%28sociology%29
A corporate group is a general term that describes two or more individuals, usually in the form of a family, clan, organization, or company. A major distinction between different political cultures is whether they believe the individual is the basic unit of their society, in which case they are individualistic, or whether corporate groups are the basic unit of their society, in which case they are corporatist.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism
Corporatism (also known as corporativism[1]) is the socio-political organization of a society by major interest groups, or corporate groups, such as agricultural, business, ethnic, labour, military, patronage, or scientific affiliations, on the basis of common interests.[2]
From the 1850s onward progressive corporatism developed in response to classical liberalism and Marxism.[5] These corporatists supported providing group rights to members of the middle classes and working classes in order to secure cooperation among the classes.[5] This was in opposition to the Marxist conception of class conflict.[5] By the 1870s and 1880s, corporatism experienced a revival in Europe with the creation of workers' unions that were committed to negotiations with employers.[5]
Kinship-based corporatism emphasizing clan, ethnic, and family identification has been a common phenomenon in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.[7] Confucian societies based upon families and clans in East Asia and Southeast Asia have been considered types of corporatism.[7] China has strong elements of clan corporatism in its society involving legal norms concerning family relations.[12] Islamic societies often have strong clan that forms the basis for a community-based corporatist society
Christian corporatism is traced to the New Testament of the Bible in I Corinthians 12:12-31 where Paul of Tarsus discusses an organic form of politics and society where all people and components are united functionally, like the human body.[13]
In social psychology and biology, researchers have found the presence of corporate group social organization amongst animal species.[8] Research has shown that penguins are known to reside in densely populated corporate breeding colonies.[8]
-
Clearly articulating that same-sex marriage is illegal within corporate borders (without explanation mind you) establishes that a nominal Caldari patriot (small patriot) like Katrina would have to go to the Federation to be officially married.
She did. She holds a Federation marriage licence to Erys Charantes. She is registered as unmarried and single in the Caldari State, because if you're not dating or married to the opposite sex, you're single. End of story. The State won't recognize her relationship with Erys, and neither party feels the need to pressure the other about it.
In my viewpoint, she lives in a comfortable political and legal safety-bubble by way of being a capsuleer. The State can't go after her, and would be much better served working with her in the traditional contractor relationship they usually utilize with Capsuleers. Who she fucks isn't a big deal as long as she plays ball, which she does as much as a capsuleer can be expected to, but only BECAUSE she is a capsuleer.
She similarly has no activist need or desire to get legal recognition for same-sex relationships. It's not a big deal to her, and she knows her place well enough not to make waves about it.
-
You're not wrong about the Caldari being corporatist. I think you've got idea down, but most people see the word and assume it's means the same thing as Corporatocracy or being pro-corporatization when it doesn't.
I'm not really sure it can be argued that the State isn't fascist (since that's such a hard to define thing) but many see corporatism and mistake it for corporatocracy and erroneously jump to the conclusion that a tenet of fascism is corporatocracy, the Caldari are ruled by corporations and are therefore fascist.
It does seem that we disagree on the semantics here.
When I refer to 'Corporate', I don't mean to parse terms such as 'corporatism' and 'corporatocracy'. I don't think of something like an ant hill or a bee hive as being a 'corporation', nor do I think that a corporation is a naturally occurring structure.
When I say 'Corporation', I am referring to the legal entity where a company has the same rights under the law as a person does.
I can see your point about how the word 'Fascism' can be difficult to define. The original meaning has been distorted from being an intellectually respectable political position, and has now become a blanket insult for authority. The fact that Fascist Governments are usually run by charismatic narcissistic psychotics, and are thus inherently a reflection of the minds of their own inconsistent and deranged leader doesn't help much either.
According to this Wikipedia entry, the Caldari state certainly seems to have many of the components of a Fascist state.
"Fascism (/fæʃɪzəm/) is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism[1][2](sic)
Fascists sought to unify their nation through an authoritarian state that promoted the mass mobilization of the national community[6][7]
Characterized by having leadership that initiated a revolutionary political movement aiming to reorganize the nation along principles according to fascist ideology.
[8] Fascist movements shared certain common features, including the veneration of the state, a devotion to a strong leader, and an emphasis on ultranationalism and militarism.
Fascism views political violence, war, and imperialism as a means to achieve national rejuvenation,[6][9][10][11] and it asserts that stronger nations have the right to expand their territory by displacing weaker nations.[12]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
If you don't think the word 'Fascist' is a true descriptor for Caldari State, I suppose I could use the word 'Authoritarian' or 'Totalitarian' instead.
The Corporation (as a legal entity), is in itself a Totalitarian institution. When we belong to a corporation, we do not get to vote for the board of directors, or choose the CEO. We are told when to show up for work, when to leave, what to do, how much we will be paid, etc. It is a rigid hierarchy where the only options are either compliance or punishment/ dismissal.
Considering the history of the PF, why wouldn't the Caldari naturally gravitate towards Authoritarianism? After all, it was their ideological differences that made them break away from the Democracy loving Gallenteans in the first place.
If you wanted to be the opposite of a Gallente in order to distinguish yourself from them, how would you do that? Well, what is the opposite of Democracy?
-
I don't really claim to follow or know tons about Caldari RP stuff, but I'd say that "fascist" worked as a descriptor for the State in the six or so years from the launch of Empyrean Age right up to the point where Tibus Heth and the Provists fell from power, but not a moment longer.
With the CEP back in control, I think another word would be better.
-
I would also expect that in Amarr its about power relationships. Fully expect that they see a lot of casual sexual abuse of slaves/servants/lower classes with little regard to gender binaries.
As for the "have kids anyways" argument, it seems likely to me that it would vary massively depending on societal rank and position in family. I expect that norms would vary massively depending on exactly what class you are in.
This was certainly the case in Ancient Rome, or any other slave owning societies.
I am wondering how the Amarrians would feel about the use of slave brothels for the 'entertainment' of the troops? The use of Korean 'comfort women' by the Japanese, or the female prisoners assigned to the 'Joy Division' by the Nazis for example?
I know many Amarrians (myself included) like to portray the Amarrian religion as a reflection of Paulist Christianity. 'Sex is evil, lust is evil, the flesh is weak', and so on. However, these professed values have seldom prevented Crusaders, soldiers, etc. from raping and enslaving women when they had the chance, even if they had to beg forgiveness (or face a court martial) for doing so.
-
I don't really claim to follow or know tons about Caldari RP stuff, but I'd say that "fascist" worked as a descriptor for the State in the six or so years from the launch of Empyrean Age right up to the point where Tibus Heth and the Provists fell from power, but not a moment longer.
With the CEP back in control, I think another word would be better.
Well, Tibus Heth would have certainly been the charismatic leader that Fascism gravitates around.
If you want a new descriptor, perhaps 'Inverted Totalitarianism' would work better?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
EDIT: Whoops, I missed this one. I suppose Purple was right. The Caldari state is a Corporatocracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy
-
I think that inverted totalitarianism is a fundamental descriptor of the Gallente Federation. I didn't know this term had been coined, that's a rather nice word for gallente society which fits perfectly imo.
I would also expect that in Amarr its about power relationships. Fully expect that they see a lot of casual sexual abuse of slaves/servants/lower classes with little regard to gender binaries.
As for the "have kids anyways" argument, it seems likely to me that it would vary massively depending on societal rank and position in family. I expect that norms would vary massively depending on exactly what class you are in.
This was certainly the case in Ancient Rome, or any other slave owning societies.
I am wondering how the Amarrians would feel about the use of slave brothels for the 'entertainment' of the troops? The use of Korean 'comfort women' by the Japanese, or the female prisoners assigned to the 'Joy Division' by the Nazis for example?
I know many Amarrians (myself included) like to portray the Amarrian religion as a reflection of Paulist Christianity. 'Sex is evil, lust is evil, the flesh is weak', and so on. However, these professed values have seldom prevented Crusaders, soldiers, etc. from raping and enslaving women when they had the chance, even if they had to beg forgiveness (or face a court martial) for doing so.
The thing is, I am not sure that Amarrians reflect Paulist values to begin with. They probably are very prude about sexuality of course, but sex being evil and the flesh being weak ? I have yet to find clues about that in the PF tbh.
-
I think that inverted totalitarianism is a fundamental descriptor of the Gallente Federation. I didn't know this term had been coined, that's a rather nice word for gallente society which fits perfectly imo.
Why Gallente and not Caldari? I tend to think of Gallente society as being somewhat utopian. Androids instead of slaves, women in skimpy costumes, George Jetson and so on. Mind you, I would only be hearing about Gallente society through Amarrian Empire propaganda, so I wouldn't have an accurate picture.
Even utopia has a dark side though. Dostoyevsky had a science fiction story (if you want to call it that) about a glittering tower where humans had solved every problem, except for boredom of course. With nothing to do and nothing to fear or anticipate, the residents of the glittering tower deliberately dismantled their own civilization. Without strife of some sort, life serves no purpose.
Gallente society as being a totalitarian democracy? Tyranny of the masses perhaps? Rule of the average (hu)man, where exceptional people are kept down and bled dry so the parasites and the freeloaders can have it easy?
I do think that life in any of the four major empires is designed to be intolerable, to encourage you to leave high sec.
I would also expect that in Amarr its about power relationships. Fully expect that they see a lot of casual sexual abuse of slaves/servants/lower classes with little regard to gender binaries.
As for the "have kids anyways" argument, it seems likely to me that it would vary massively depending on societal rank and position in family. I expect that norms would vary massively depending on exactly what class you are in.
This was certainly the case in Ancient Rome, or any other slave owning societies.
I am wondering how the Amarrians would feel about the use of slave brothels for the 'entertainment' of the troops? The use of Korean 'comfort women' by the Japanese, or the female prisoners assigned to the 'Joy Division' by the Nazis for example?
I know many Amarrians (myself included) like to portray the Amarrian religion as a reflection of Paulist Christianity. 'Sex is evil, lust is evil, the flesh is weak', and so on. However, these professed values have seldom prevented Crusaders, soldiers, etc. from raping and enslaving women when they had the chance, even if they had to beg forgiveness (or face a court martial) for doing so.
The thing is, I am not sure that Amarrians reflect Paulist values to begin with. They probably are very prude about sexuality of course, but sex being evil and the flesh being weak ? I have yet to find clues about that in the PF tbh.
Well, we do know that the Amarr consider flesh to be sacred. I don't think this only applies to Emperors, because in one hauling mission we are told that genetically altered cattle are also considered a sacrilege to the Amarr.
The Amarrians also have a hierarchical society where rank is passed down through the family, so it is important to be 'well bred'. You don't want to dilute your bloodline by sewing your wild oats into a 'lesser being'. Even the slaves are released according to what generation they are. A 12 generation slave that had a child with a sixth generation slave would likely never see their children again.
Sure, the Amarrians would have the technology of birth control, but what would the 'Space Catholics' think about the spiritual implications of using it? We know that the Amarrians don't have a problem with abortion (at least when it comes to breeding Kameria soldiers).
Most capsuleers are probably sterile anyways, considering the radiation hazards they are exposed to in space, as well as missiles, bullets, etc.. Of course, anything which applies to the Empires doesn't apply to the capsuleers, who are a breed apart.
When I say the 'flesh is weak', I mean that as a metaphor. "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak." The mind says 'Do this!' The body says 'But I am lazy/ tired/ horny/ scared/ hungry.' True for me, true for you, true for everybody.
I would argue that this is pretty much a reflection of human, or even biological nature. We need to get up early, but we hit the snooze button one more time. We have to watch what we eat, but we want that delicious fattening pastry. We have to study for the exam, but the Star Trek marathon just came on, and so forth.
Yes, it would be incorrect to say that the Amarrian religion is 'Paulist', since it is not Christian at all. However, that does reflect the stereotype that many Amarrian roleplayers seem to have about the Amarrian religion. Maybe this is because we don't really have anything to compare it with, other than what we are already familiar with (or a grotesque parody of it anyways).
The fire and brimstone bully pulpit just seems to be more fun to roleplay than a Mother Theresa do-gooder figure, especially if your idea of fun in EVE is undocking in a warship and heading into battle eager to kill someone.
Religion in most cases seems to entail exercising some sort of personal restraint. Christians abstain from pre-marital sex, Jews abstain from pork, Muslims abstain from alcohol for example. If a positive aspect could be derived from this, I would have to say it is the development of willpower. The person who can overcome their lust today can conquer their fear tomorrow. The mind is the master of the body, not the other way around.
-
Because it's the antithesis of Caldari State. While it is true that most of their citizens are commodified and exploited to extremes it seems to me that the fact that in Gallente society where corporations are the actual players behind the veil, trumping politics, and where citizens are kept happy by giving them the illusion of individual liberties, bread and circus games, and overall are giving away their rights in exchange of excessive consumerism and sensationalism.
Which fits the Gallente Federation at 200%. The big difference lies in the fact that Caldari citizens are taught to behave collectively without any thought for individuality, are taught to be very industrious people precisely because they believe in it, to support their 'fascist' state to a point of national pride and devotion, while gallente citizen defend opposite values, but ultimately fall under a covertly accepted pact where they just mind their own individualistic business and selfish needs to let the way free to their true groups of interests, namely, corporations and private interests acting as lobbies (lobbies were always described as a fundamental facet of gallente society and politics). Which will then use and manipulate public opinion through indirect means.
Which is the difference between totalitarianism where everything benefits the state, and everyone serves the state (Caldari), sometimes exploited and commodified by the state willingly, and inverted totalitarianism where everything benefits private interests and corporate lobbies, and everyone serves them indirectly without even being aware of it, or just not caring because manipulated into submission through other means than brute ideological force.
In short, commodified citizens considered as cogs (totalitarianism) or commodities (inverted) is common to both systems, that both are totalitarian in a way. It's only the result and the tools they use, but the way they do it are radically opposed. One is direct, the other completely indirect, and more subtle about it.
-
'Space Catholics'
I think that you understood something fundamentally the wrong way, there. Also, I don't know where you get the impression that most Amarr RPers play something akin to 'Pauline Christianity' (or rather the caricature of it you seem to have in mind here) or 'fire and brimstone bully pulpit'-type of characters.
The Amarr community I am part of has those types of fanatics, but they are far, very far from being the majority. Luckily, I think.
-
Why Gallente and not Caldari?
Eve PF was designed in a way that on the surface each of the races appears a certain way if you don't dig too deeply - but once in weeds things are much different than they appear a first brush. From a cursory glance the Caldari appear to be wage slaves to a fascist corporate state while the Federation seems fairly Utopian. This made for a lot of RP conflicts (content) because of players either looking at their enemy faction only in passing - or deliberately having their character accept at face value the picture on the cereal box. (Those guys are the best ones to RP with)
TonyG gave the factions only a brief review before he shat out TEA and the FW arcs and caused much damage to the beautiful subtly of Eve fiction. Falcon et al have done a lot of good work to repair damage but seemed to have still missed much of the original subtleties. Ether that or they've realized that the average eve player is now much more stupid than they used to be and are marketing to their new audience. A lot of key, but seemingly minor things have been retconned away.
Concerning fascism: according to the wiki page, what qualities make a nation fascist is not clearly agreed upon in academic circles so that makes it hard for me to be certain that a fictional entity clearly meets the definition.
However, it is clear that two important criteria are the primacy of the state and imperialism. While they choose to show a solid face to the outside, the State is a confederacy of independent nations: the Megacorps. Authority is not centralized. Another fascist prerequisite , that is an offshoot of a centralized authority is, is a planned economy. The Caldari economy most definitely is not a planned one. It's organic and hyper-capitalistic.
Also, of the four nations the Caldari are the least imperialistic. While it frequently takes aggressive actions with foreign powers the state's military was designed on a strictly defensive doctrine. These aggressive actions are to both test the Caldari's military against potential invaders and to remind those potential conquerors that a siege on the Caldari would be very painful.
It may or may not be true that the Gallente pushed the Caldari to the brink of extinction but it doesn't matter because the Caldari THINK (http://community.eveonline.com/backstory/chronicles/the-science-of-never-again/) they did. This is vital to understanding the Caldari, and the Patriot faction in particular. Priority number one is ensuring they are never in a position where they could be destroyed ever again. The Caldari are terrified that the Gallente, and to a lesser degree the other two empires, are going to try again to murder them (either physically or as a distinct culture) and therefore they MUST be the strongest. The MUST have the most advanced technology, the best trained soldiers and the strongest economy in order to support that. That's why they took the idea of the megacorp from the Gallente - they credit the Megacorp model and hyper-capitalism with the Gallente's initial superiority in military, technological and economic might.
The Strategy though, wasn't to be a super offensive force capable of conquering other empires but of being a super defensive force. They are like the those guys in Starcraft or Age of Empires who turtle up behind walls (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/The_Citadel) and turrets and only expand one they've exhausted all the raw materials within their defensive perimeter (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Perimeter_(System)). They only expanded into Pure Blind and Black Rise because they needed the raw materials and because both areas were un-populated by others at the time. Unlike the Federation and the Amarr they also have no imperialistic drive to force Caldari culture on the rest of humanity - but on rather on limiting the rest of humanities contamination of the Caldari.
The history of the federation (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/History_of_the_Gallente_Federation) is also the history Caldari and in reading it you learn both that it could easily be argued that the Federation is more imperialistic (militant and otherwise) than even the Amarrians and why the Caldari just want to be left alone.
-
EDIT: Whoops, I missed this one. I suppose Purple was right. The Caldari state is a Corporatocracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy
A corporatocracy that is corporatist. (Run by businesses and values the group over the individual)
-
The Corporation (as a legal entity), is in itself a Totalitarian institution. When we belong to a corporation, we do not get to vote for the board of directors, or choose the CEO. We are told when to show up for work, when to leave, what to do, how much we will be paid, etc. It is a rigid hierarchy where the only options are either compliance or punishment/ dismissal.
This is false. You get votes called shares. But instead of just being given an equal vote, that you don't deserve, as people with higher IQs and greater ambition you have to earn it.
Even if you don't contribute much to society and as a result your networth is low, you can pool what you have with others who are like minded and still have a greater influence than you would over the local city council.
You can also vote with your feet and consumer dollar too. If a CEO's choices are so unpopular they can't keep quality employees and have such a bad reputation for how they treat employees that people boycott them - they will be fired.
-
Oh no, I guess us dirty nasty gays will just have to stop roleplaying Caldari, right? Should we swallow a bullet too?
I stopped caring what EVE lore said about homosexuality a long time ago. If you think Katrina should be ostracized for it, don't try to fuckin' roleplay with me.
Real simple isn't it?
You know what, nevermind.
I've not read the whole topic yet, so I may be to late and this is pointed out, but here goes:
If the Caldari states says gays are bad, gays in the State will have to deal, somehow. One of those ways may be to not reveal their gay factor until they become, say, capsuleers.
Kat may or may not have done so, that's rather irrelevant to my point.
In the Federation, being pro-slavery is a MAJOR no-no. Anyone that has some sort of secret slave den or whatever better not share that shit until they can do so without consequence - "I'm a capsuleer now, fuck off with you miss. police-girl, I can't be touched."
Capsuleers are one of the groups exempt from the rules, base-liners can't touch you when you are a capsuleer.
But other capsuleers can. IF any Pro-State RP'ers want to give Kat shit for being lez when the State clearly disagrees with that, that will be on them. It will be the same as Pro-Amarr players giving Sani's shit or Pro-Fed players giving slave runners flak. It's IC consequences for IC stances and choices, and while you are surely in your right to not want to RP with some topics or whatever, you do not get to say what people can and can't RP with in any setting where that topic they want to bring out exists in the setting.
FFS Kat this is RP 101. AFAIK no-one has asked you to stop RP'ing a gay person in the State, that's like asking an Amarrian player to stop RP'ing a freaking atheist non-conformist or whatever. They can't deny you that, but you can't demand that others tailor how they RP to work around you because you declare that Kat's lesbian status is taboo.
IC decisions and stances can get IC responses, everyone has to deal with that, and so do you. Even if that IC response is to blatantly block any contact with the other party, that would be a simple fix.
-
It was said not about Caldari, but about the State.
For example, Gurista are Caldari too and are not limited by State laws, morals and traditions. One don't even have to be Gurista. Many Caldari just run from the State because they can't cope with strict State customs with exhausting competitions, and can establish their own societies or work for Nulsec Empires (or who would run all these stations, outposts, planetary colonies, capsuleer ships), where almost anything is possible.
That, or they leave for the Fed and settle on the Fed-loyal Caldari worlds or on Caldari Prime itself. The funny thing is since the G/C war and up until the Empyrian war IIRC the Fed never denied Caldari people the right to live on CP, they just denied the STATE ownership of the planet. Any Caldari who are unhappy with the State are likely to be welcomed with open arms, and in Fed space they likely don't give two shits if your gay or bi or whatever. Now it's even easier: just move to the Ishukone owned side of CP and then move over the border - assuming ofc that's allowed.
-
My bad, guys. I've been working pretty much constant shifts and this morning I was pretty ill because I didn't get much sleep the night before.
Noted. And now suddenly I feel like a ginormous prick :/
-
lol. It's cool mang.
-
of the four nations the Caldari are the least imperialistic.
Black Rise says hi. So does the State invasion of Federation space in Placid and elsewhere, annexing and assuming control over these areas for long enough to auction off the "development rights" of these areas to the various groups that make up the Caldari "Empire", sometimes this would be described as the Caldari coming in and presenting a "better" way of doing things to the Federal citizens they had now claimed control over. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperialism) for some details and read the biased stain of a chronicle called The Ever Turning Wheels (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/The_Ever-Turning_Wheels_%28Chronicle%29) for your example.
So, gaining a whole new region and enforcing imperialist control over annexed territory. Compare that to the Minmatar Republic, IMHO the least imperialist of the Big-5.
-
'Space Catholics'
I think that you understood something fundamentally the wrong way, there.
I am getting a bit off topic here.
I put the word 'Space Catholics' in the single quotation marks to indicate that this is how the Amarrian religion is stereotypically envisioned by the EVE community as a whole, although not roleplayers in particular. I meant it in an ironic sense, not a descriptive one.
I understand that the Amarrian religion is completely different from any conception that we may have of the Catholic church, both past and present, although there are obvious similarities and comparisons. I thought I explained my position on that in great detail on another thread. I recall that both of us were contributing to that discussion.
Why did you call out that one quote in particular? It seems like it is taken out of context.
Also, I don't know where you get the impression that most Amarr RPers play something akin to 'Pauline Christianity' (or rather the caricature of it you seem to have in mind here) or 'fire and brimstone bully pulpit'-type of characters.
Where did I get that impression?
1st Praetorian Guard.
Odelya? Naupilius? Also 1PG.
As you have pointed out though, it is my impression. My perspective. My crudely rendered sketch of the world of EVE that I perceive. It is based on my own personal real life experiences, preferences, prejudices, and expectations.
I can't say that 'most' Amarrian roleplayers play something akin to (quote) 'Pauline Christianity', since I haven't met 'most' roleplayers. I have only interacted with a small select group. Even in that instance though, the roleplay was limited (often by necessity) to one line emotes about God and slaves and scriptures. Certainly, there were a few Praetorians who roleplayed atypical Amarrians such as closet Atheists and such. We weren't all cookie cutter one dimensional characters.
However, when comparing characters such as the quiet, cerebral priest who is a respected Academic against the foaming at the mouth serpent handling fanatical freak, it tends to be the screamers and jumpers that stand out.
The Amarr community I am part of has those types of fanatics, but they are far, very far from being the majority. Luckily, I think.
I don't know what Amarr community you are part of. 1PG was with CVA in Providence for a while. The CVA claims to be a roleplay community, but I personally didn't see much of it. Again, perhaps this is out of necessity. It's difficult to roleplay if you are in the middle of combat, for example.
It's about preferences and perspectives. You and I seem to be on opposite sides of the spectrum here. I personally prefer over the top fanatics, but apparently you do not. I fail to see your issue with the fanatics, since they give contrast to the more 'vanilla flavoured' moderates who, in my opinion, are more like lazy and/or timid roleplayers than bold, creative ones.
To be honest, I think it is the moderate, liberal Amarrian characters that are contributing the most to the stereotype of the Amarrian religion as being like 'Space Christianity'. Amarrians opposed to slavery, for example. Certainly, we need discordant voices and a spectrum of personalities, but please don't try to make the Amarr into God fearing Gallentians.
Some Amarrian players seem to bring their own perspectives and attitudes from real life and try to implement them in EVE. (e.g. "I am a devout Christian in real life who thinks living in a Theocratic state would be just awesome, and I am glad to have such a community in EVE.")
I have heard such discussions in the newbie chat, as well as the Caldari NPC corp chat.
"Why are there so few Amarrian characters? 'Most players think of Amarr roleplayers as born again Christians, that's why.'"
I have also heard people say that they chose Caldari because they 'love Capitalism'. To them it seems, the existence of something like Jita on a computer server is proof that 'capitalism works'. In reality, I would say that the four factions are like a funhouse mirror. There are four types to choose from, but what you see in the mirror is a distorted reflection of yourself.
When you say 'most' roleplayers, take into consideration that 'most' players of EVE are about 14, of average intelligence, and a superficial understanding of the 'window dressing' prime fiction which for them is really just an excuse to blow up spaceships.
-
Why does nearly every discussions I have here have at least one point in the conversation go something like:
Me: I feel like the common concept that 'X is Y because of fact Z' could be argued as false because facts Q, R,S, and T all prove fact Z is either false or commonly misunderstood and therefore conclusions drawn from it must be reconsidered. Would any of you rational chaps like to have a discussion on the merits Q,R,S,T and Z?
RPGuy : X is Y because of fact Z.
TonyG gave the factions only a brief review before he shat out TEA and the FW arcs and caused much damage to the beautiful subtly of Eve fiction.
They are like the those guys in Starcraft or Age of Empires who turtle up behind walls (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/The_Citadel) and turrets and only expand one they've exhausted all the raw materials within their defensive
perimeter (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Perimeter_(System)). They only expanded into Pure Blind and Black Rise because they needed the raw materials and because both areas were un-populated by others at the time. Unlike the Federation and the Amarr they also have no imperialistic drive to force Caldari culture on the rest of humanity - but on rather on limiting the rest of humanities contamination of the Caldari.
But what about Black Rise and the TEA/FW arcs shat out by TonyG? Hmm? You clearly didn't not consider that!
-
Concerning fascism: according to the wiki page, what qualities make a nation fascist is not clearly agreed upon in academic circles so that makes it hard for me to be certain that a fictional entity clearly meets the definition.
The man who invented the telephone would describe it as an electrical means to convey auditory signals across long distances by wire.
The man who invented Fascism described it as a fusion of state and corporate powers.
Academics are not in clear agreement about the definition of Fascism for a variety of reasons. For one, they get paid by the word, and love arguing with other academics. Secondly, whereas you could proudly wear a Fascist uniform and openly call yourself a Fascist at one time, the word itself has become a pejorative. Thirdly, as I stated before, the demogogues who run the Fascist state often find that their theories don't work out in the real world, and switch their policies and procedures to adjust and maintain power.
However, it is clear that two important criteria are the primacy of the state and imperialism. While they choose to show a solid face to the outside, the State is a confederacy of independent nations: the Megacorps. Authority is not centralized.
Nor is authority centralized in an inverted totalitarian society.
Another fascist prerequisite , that is an offshoot of a centralized authority is, is a planned economy. The Caldari economy most definitely is not a planned one. It's organic and hyper-capitalistic.
I have no idea where you got the 'planned economy' from. The wikipedia site describes it as a mixed economy.
There is a popular misconception that Nazism was socialist, because they had the word 'socialist' in their name. In actual fact, Nazism was actually hyper-Capitalist. The Nazi state was not run by Hitler, but by large corporations such as I.G. Farben, Siemens, and Bayer. The perpetual war was conducted in order to make corporate profits, and concentration camp inmates were used as slave labour to increase corporate profits.
Yes, American corporations also invested money into the Nazi party as well, such as Ford motors, Coca-cola, and IBM. It was Ford trucks that helped the Nazis to mobilize their forces so quickly, and an IBM punch card machine that helped to categorize prisoners in the concentration camps. When the machine at Auschwitz broke down, they had to call in a technician from Texas to fix it.
Are you familiar with General Smedley Butler and the Business plot? In 1933, Wall Street industrialists planned to overthrow the United States government by force and implement a Fascist dictatorship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXGUgFXoRu4
Have you heard of the word 'privatization'? It was originally a German word, and a Nazi invention.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/mark-taliano/privatization-_b_5223528.html
Also, of the four nations the Caldari are the least imperialistic. While it frequently takes aggressive actions with foreign powers the state's military was designed on a strictly defensive doctrine. These aggressive actions are to both test the Caldari's military against potential invaders and to remind those potential conquerors that a siege on the Caldari would be very painful.
I don't see where Imperialism is a defining characteristic of Fascism. It does not say so in any of the definitions of Fascism that I have come across.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fascism
However, using Imperialism as a standard, would you say that Victorian England or the United States are more Fascist than Italy or Germany?
Consider that the United States, and Canada as well, is territory that was conquered or stolen from the Indigenous inhabitants, who were often put into concentration camps that we would call 'Reservations'. The North American continent is a lot of territory conquered. By comparison, the land taken by Nazi Germany is miniscule in comparison.
Also, EVERY Empire in history has used 'self defense' as an excuse to invade their neighbour. The Ancient Romans did it, the Nazis did it, England and the United States do it. As Goering said, nobody really wants a war, so you have to convince the people that they are being attacked.
http://www.rense.com/general21/wara.htm
-
The Corporation (as a legal entity), is in itself a Totalitarian institution. When we belong to a corporation, we do not get to vote for the board of directors, or choose the CEO. We are told when to show up for work, when to leave, what to do, how much we will be paid, etc. It is a rigid hierarchy where the only options are either compliance or punishment/ dismissal.
This is false. You get votes called shares. But instead of just being given an equal vote, that you don't deserve, as people with higher IQs and greater ambition you have to earn it.
Even if you don't contribute much to society and as a result your networth is low, you can pool what you have with others who are like minded and still have a greater influence than you would over the local city council.
You can also vote with your feet and consumer dollar too. If a CEO's choices are so unpopular they can't keep quality employees and have such a bad reputation for how they treat employees that people boycott them - they will be fired.
So you are saying that because shareholders who are fortunate enough to have the money to be able to purchase stock are able to vote, that somehow means the Corporation is not a Totalitarian institution?
I remember the CEO of OPC saying the same thing in Robocop. He was the villain.
The Nazis were elected into power. There were elections in the Soviet Union. The Ancient Spartans used voting in their system. Votes do not equal democracy, or negate the reality of a totalitarian institution.
I am not talking about the larger society which the Corporation resides within. I am referring to the Corporate structure itself. Independently, the corporate structure is a rigid hierarchy. If you are an employee within the corporation, then no you don't have a choice, unless you work in a PARECON structure, where the highest authority is the General Assembly.
Sure, you can vote with your feet and your dollar. You can also vote with a bullet.
Sure CEOs can be fired, but then what happens? They get replaced by a new CEO? Employees can look for a new place of employment, but their new job won't be much different from their old job. The guy on the bottom of the totem pole still doesn't have any say in how the corporation is run, unless he strikes or belongs to a Union...which is resorting to coercion.
It seems we are getting into discussing real world ideologies and differences here, which have little to do with the world of EVE. In the interests of remaining on topic, we will just have to agree to disagree.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy
A mixed economy is a mix of socialism (planned economy) and with privately owned companies. To me, having a planned economy where many of the actors in the economy aren't state owned but allowed to remain private as long as they serve a function of the plan adequately cannot actually be described as mixed socialism and capitalism. Just socialism. Capitalism does not exist without total freedom of choice. Am I really the owner of my company if my company must meet the government's expectations on production using the governments provided plan for reaching those expectations? Especially since if don't comply I'll be jailed and government officials will replace me? Nationalized by any other name is still nationalized.
Also, I've seen plenty of arguments that while the Nazi left the 'ownership' of many companies in the hands of private citizens instead of nationalizing them they were expected to strictly adhere to their part in the planned economy. Just because they had large 'private' (on paper) companies producing mass quantities of war material didn't make them capitalist.
-
So you are saying that because shareholders who are fortunate enough to have the money to be able to purchase stock are able to vote, that somehow means the Corporation is not a Totalitarian institution?
I remember the CEO of OPC saying the same thing in Robocop. He was the villain.
Yes I am saying that. Yes, California has leaned socialist since the 80s and even farther back - and yes many Hollywood directors like to put pro-socialist propaganda into their movies. I'm also saying luck has little to do with your wealth. Most people who inherit great wealth from their parents or grand parents do nothing but squander it away until it's gone. Those that maintain it or enlarge the families wealth do so because they inherited the traits that allowed their parents to earn it in the first place. Outside of people being born into wealth and the lottery money doesn't just come at you because of luck. People give you money because you provide them with something of value. Those who come into wealth via luck, and don't provide value to society tend to disperse (spend) that wealth back among the people who do.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/25/luxury/family-wealth/
http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/family-wealth-heir-children/2014/06/25/id/579236/
Nearly 60% of the time a family's money is exhausted by the children of the person who created the wealth, according to Roy Williams, president of wealth consultancy The Williams Group. In 90% of the cases it's gone by the time the grandchildren die. "The people who created the wealth were often obsessive," said Russ Prince, president of the wealth research and consulting firm Prince and Associates. "But their kids were not hungry."
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy
A mixed economy is a mix of socialism (planned economy) and with privately owned companies. To me, having a planned economy where many of the actors in the economy aren't state owned but allowed to remain private as long as they serve a function of the plan adequately cannot actually be described as mixed socialism and capitalism. Just socialism. Capitalism does not exist without total freedom of choice. Am I really the owner of my company if my company must meet the government's expectations on production using the governments provided plan for reaching those expectations? Especially since if don't comply I'll be jailed and government officials will replace me? Nationalized by any other name is still nationalized.
Also, I've seen plenty of arguments that while the Nazi left the 'ownership' of many companies in the hands of private citizens instead of nationalizing them they were expected to strictly adhere to their part in the planned economy. Just because they had large 'private' (on paper) companies producing mass quantities of war material didn't make them capitalist.
It seems we are getting into discussing real world ideologies and differences here, which have little to do with the world of EVE. In the interests of remaining on topic, we will just have to agree to disagree.
-
So you are saying that because shareholders who are fortunate enough to have the money to be able to purchase stock are able to vote, that somehow means the Corporation is not a Totalitarian institution?
I remember the CEO of OPC saying the same thing in Robocop. He was the villain.
Yes I am saying that. Yes, California has leaned socialist since the 80s and even farther back - and yes many Hollywood directors like to put pro-socialist propaganda into their movies.
It seems we are getting into discussing real world ideologies and differences here, which have little to do with the world of EVE. In the interests of remaining on topic, we will just have to agree to disagree.
-
I edited my post with some links, you might have missed since we are on page 6 :P
-
It makes me smile that you brought up OCP. I believe that the original fiction staff at CCP intentionally created a superficial face for each of the empires and that the Caldari's was strongly inspired by Omni-Consumer Products. I've brought the OCP caricature up several times here, chatsubo and other places.
(http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/damianvila/caldari.jpg)
(http://ih3.redbubble.net/image.5700882.6161/fc,550x550,black.jpg)
-
I edited my post with some links, you might have missed since we are on page 6 :P
I have read your recent posts, and they are off topic.
You and I have a radically different perspective on politics and economics. I don't think that can be reconciled within these forums. I think we have very different definitions of words such as socialism, capitalism, and Fascism.
The four factions are like funhouse mirrors. We can choose which mirror we want to look into, but it is only our own distorted reflection that we see.
If you think Capitalism is wonderful, and a system that works for you, great! If you think the Caldari state is the best representative of those values for you, good choice!
If Jesus Christ is your personal savior, and the Amarrian faction is the best reflection of that for you, that's wonderful!
It's your money, your game, your character, your sandbox. Make whatever shapes you want with that plastic pail and shovel.
-
Milton Friedman is my personal savior. 8) I'll let the topic drop if you have no more interest in the discussion.
However, I think this is all relevant to the discussion because both the OP and your arguments (or so they seem to me) for viewing the State a certain way are based on an unspoken defacto stance that socialism and it's trojan horse the social justice movement are reasonable, ethical and lead to great personal freedom while large corporations and hyper capitalism are inherently oppressive. I feel that the exact opposite is true.
I was a little reluctant to get into the weeds of this with you earlier in the discussion and left it at 'you missed my point by a mile' because I realized it would come down a difference in real life ideology when I picked up on that you viewed the narrative of Kaikka Peunato as a charmingly rouge starship captain breaking away from an oppressive regime and shooting down anyone who tried to tell him who and what he had to be.
The Gurista's are slavers (most likely for purely sexual slavery), drug pushers, thieves and murderers. Kaikka is a sociopathic douche-bag who likes to hurt people for fun and profit and as an irrelevant side note is also gay. He chose to go to the Gurista because he can thrive in that environment as someone who likes to hurt people.
I think its unfair to make an argument that the Caldri State is repressive of it's citizens based on an unspoken assumption that a certain real life ideology is the correct one and then demand a termination of the conversation when someone challenges that assumption. However, being a capitalist I respect your freedom of choice. (See what I did there?! :P )
-
I think its unfair to make an argument that the Caldri State is repressive of it's citizens based on an unspoken assumption that a certain real life ideology is the correct one and then demand a termination of the conversation when someone challenges that assumption. However, being a capitalist I respect your freedom of choice. (See what I did there?! :P )
Well, as I have said it has nothing to do with the original topic.
As I have said, everyone has their own perspectives and opinions which they see reflected in the computer game environment.
If the Caldari state is a wonderful place to live, then there is no conflict and no reason to leave. If it is a Hyper-Capitalist system, then that system is already inherently unfair IMHO. If everything was 'fair', then why would there be inequalities?
However, just like the Capitalist system, or Communism, or Socialism, or anything, there are always going to be people that are in conflict with it and will struggle against it. Perhaps they are psychopaths or scumbags, but without conflict or struggle of some sort, there's not much point in playing a computer game full of spaceships that shoot each other.
It has nothing to do with your strawman argument that claims I am making an unspoken assumption that a certain real life ideology is the correct one. If it is an unspoken assumption, then how do you know?
It has everything to do with character motivation through conflict. Bilbo Baggins would have never left his house if not for Sauron, Luke Skywalker would still be a moisture farmer if it wasn't for Darth Vader. If everything is right with the world, then there is no story.
If you are a high sec carebear in Caldari space, that's fine. You are the one who pays for the subscription. It's your character, your sandbox. Do as you please.
However, the real life time you are spending making the pretend currency ISK in EVE by mining, or missioning or arguing with me, or whatever is actual time that could be more profitably spent making actual money in the real world.
So, how much real world money are you missing out on by playing EVE? Have you considered the opportunity cost? Why not play the stock market instead of station trading?
The topic is 'The state and sexuality'.
-
It's about preferences and perspectives. You and I seem to be on opposite sides of the spectrum here. I personally prefer over the top fanatics, but apparently you do not. I fail to see your issue with the fanatics, since they give contrast to the more 'vanilla flavoured' moderates who, in my opinion, are more like lazy and/or timid roleplayers than bold, creative ones.
Whoa, that's harsh. Though I think I see what you seem to refer to (a lot of RPers tend to go the moderate route by default, and react pretty sluggishly to anything politically oriented, or just say politically correct things, if that's what you meant ?)... Playing an Amarr moderate is damn hard, almost a nightmare. Because as you say, it's all the serpents frothing at the mouth and hardcore slavery/reclaiming that stands out in PF usually, at least at first. You seriously have to scratch the surface to find clues and hints about moderation in the Amarr Empire, and it's not easy to find those nuances.
The same way it's easy to play a spineless moderate that is somehow against slavery because it's evil and all, it's easy to play a mustache twirling vilain that eats baby slaves at lunch. What is harder to play are actually fleshed out characters that are either moderate in a reclaiming heavy atmosphere, especially since TEA, and hardcore hardliners that do not look cheesy in the process and break your suspension of disbelief.
-
Why does nearly every discussions I have here have at least one point in the conversation go something like:
Me: I feel like the common concept that 'X is Y because of fact Z' could be argued as false because facts Q, R,S, and T all prove fact Z is either false or commonly misunderstood and therefore conclusions drawn from it must be reconsidered. Would any of you rational chaps like to have a discussion on the merits Q,R,S,T and Z?
RPGuy : X is Y because of fact Z.
TonyG gave the factions only a brief review before he shat out TEA and the FW arcs and caused much damage to the beautiful subtly of Eve fiction.
They are like the those guys in Starcraft or Age of Empires who turtle up behind walls (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/The_Citadel) and turrets and only expand one they've exhausted all the raw materials within their defensive
perimeter (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Perimeter_(System)). They only expanded into Pure Blind and Black Rise because they needed the raw materials and because both areas were un-populated by others at the time. Unlike the Federation and the Amarr they also have no imperialistic drive to force Caldari culture on the rest of humanity - but on rather on limiting the rest of humanities contamination of the Caldari.
But what about Black Rise and the TEA/FW arcs shat out by TonyG? Hmm? You clearly didn't not consider that!
Yes I agree.
And at the same time post TEA we suddenly had the emergence of something so alien to the Caldari Culture to me that transformed the turtled up Caldari into militaristic imperialists that started out of nowhere to care about getting back their Homeworld. It leaded to a new brand of Caldari RPers that all suddenly started to RP Caldari knights valuing honour and getting back "Home" and stuff like that, and how they should get their revenge, etc etc. Can't blame them, PF suddenly started to say similar things with TonyG things about getting back what was theirs and all.
However, the way I have always seen it, before TEA, the Caldari couldn't care less about Caldari Prime (Luminaire). They couldn't care less about the planet in itself, and their homeworld, precisely because the newly formed Caldari State has never even been part of the Caldari Prime caldari society to begin with, and also because it's completely antithesis to their beliefs and values to care about a planet. What they actually cared about was their ancestors, their honor in relation to the Federation that humiliated them, what they had sacrificed to be sure that nothing of the sort never happens again... All in all, the Caldari State was something brand new, pragmatic, cold and ruthless, very different from the original Caldari culture that didn't even have any megacorporations.
Eventually, the only ones to care (vaguely) about getting back their homeworld, more like a dream than anything else, were the Patriot hawks. And even for them, the core belief was actually to dominate everyone else in terms of power, military strength and technology to be sure to remain safe and to prevail.
And suddenly, Tibus Heth. :bash:
Yes I am saying that. Yes, California has leaned socialist since the 80s and even farther back - and yes many Hollywood directors like to put pro-socialist propaganda into their movies. I'm also saying luck has little to do with your wealth. Most people who inherit great wealth from their parents or grand parents do nothing but squander it away until it's gone. Those that maintain it or enlarge the families wealth do so because they inherited the traits that allowed their parents to earn it in the first place. Outside of people being born into wealth and the lottery money doesn't just come at you because of luck. People give you money because you provide them with something of value. Those who come into wealth via luck, and don't provide value to society tend to disperse (spend) that wealth back among the people who do.
I think the luck is here, but elsewhere : it's located into the opportunities you will run into. You can try to create them yourself, but most of them just depends on a lot of independent hazards. I mean, I wouldn't be where I am IRL without those lucky opportunities that came at the right time. And for most of them, I didn't had anything to do with them. They were just here, and I could have not gotten them in another life.
Ah ok, Milton Friedman. I see where this part seems to come from. :)
I hate everything that promotes liberalism myself so.. That's also why I believe that the USA are one of the biggest hidden threat to the planet, either environmentally or just "capitalistically" (who spends its time creating world economic crisises due to deregulated systems ?). vOv
-
This thread has become just ridiculous.
-
Errgh.
I don't know where this thread is not going.
Besides, according to lore, it was gallente, who were fascists, not Caldari.
Returning to the question of sexuality in the State. I have read recently a funny story that was, unfortunately, true. It happened in 60-s in USSR. One, excuse me for explicitness, gynecologist checked a girl of about 18 years old, accompanied with her mother, who complained she had problems with cycles. As it turned out, the girl was about 5 months pregnant and they weren't making aborts at that point, so the doctor congratulated them and said, that they have only one option left, to give birth to the baby.
The girl was infuriated and almost attacked the doctor, claiming: "It is impossible, we never slept together!! We did it not at night, but with lights on, and we were STANDING, not laying!!!"
I believe we could expect the same degree of "education" about sexuality in the State.
(Probably there should be proper instructions about "what to do and how", that corporate marriage system would provide to young peoples right before the wedding :oops:)
-
So, how much real world money are you missing out on by playing EVE? Have you considered the opportunity cost? Why not play the stock market instead of station trading?
I have actually and it's why I don't really play anymore. I did learn a lot from the game though, and it turns out that making dollars is just as easy as ISK.
-
This thread has become just ridiculous.
I respectfully put forth that it started ridiculous and become progressively less so.
-
This has gone way too far, in my opinion. I've attempted to summon a mod to have a look-see and determine if the thread should stay open. I think we've gotten as far on the topic as we'll get, without getting needlessly offensive. The derail into real life political stances does not belong in this particular subforum either, and is cautioned against even in the relevant subs.
-
Pretty typical of social justice warriors to try to silence someone using the Socratic method to point out the truth. Despite the fact that no one has been attacked or insulted, all parties have remained friendly and amicable and I've made a logical argument for why my points are relevant to the original topic.
-
Errgh.
I believe we could expect the same degree of "education" about sexuality in the State.
(Probably there should be proper instructions about "what to do and how", that corporate marriage system would provide to young peoples right before the wedding :oops:)
I think hard science is too important in the State for this sort of thing. Manual labor by a human is inefficient, and that's what robots are for. A human's value is his or her mind. State citizens are expected bring value to the nation as engineers, scientist etc. I think it would be hard for that sort of ignorance to thrive when a working knowledge of differential calculus is the standard.
Even the soldiers are probably relatively savvy in a technical field.
-
I'll admit to great amusement at being named an SJW. If they had a church, I'd likely catch fire entering it. Either way, no one is trying to silence anyone. All I want is for a mod to look this thread over to see if it's still within the bounds of this place, no more no less.
-
I'll admit to great amusement at being named an SJW. If they had a church, I'd likely catch fire entering it.
I beg your pardon then. I still believe the discussion of RL politics is valid here. Jikahr's funhouse mirror analogy is a good one and especially true with the topic at hand. Two people maturely discussing how different personal beliefs affect our views on same bit of information is a far cry from 'going to far.'
-
Well it sure has derailed. Maybe a thread split could be requested.
All I want is for a mod to look this thread over to see if it's still within the bounds of this place, no more no less.
Uh-huh.
-
It has nothing to do with your strawman argument that claims I am making an unspoken assumption that a certain real life ideology is the correct one. If it is an unspoken assumption, then how do you know?
It's something I felt I picked up from the 'tone' and context. Was I incorrect?
-
Well it sure has derailed.
Intellectual discussions don't belong on rails.
-
Pretty typical of social justice warriors to try to silence someone using the Socratic method to point out the truth. Despite the fact that no one has been attacked or insulted, all parties have remained friendly and amicable and I've made a logical argument for why my points are relevant to the original topic.
It does seem to have gone hilariously off the thread topic however.
-
I hate everything that promotes liberalism myself so.. That's also why I believe that the USA are one of the biggest hidden threat to the planet, either environmentally or just "capitalistically" (who spends its time creating world economic crisises due to deregulated systems ?). vOv
I'm not sure I follow. In the USA liberalism is associated with heavy regulation.
-
How so?
-
[admin]Original topic seems to have been exhausted. Topic locked until someone has time to either separate Off-topic posts or determine that it should in fact simply remain locked.[/admin]