Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => EVE OOC Summit => Topic started by: Jakiin on 05 Mar 2012, 17:32
-
If you listen to CCP, which is usually not the worst path to take, the cluster's four great empires are not divided along moral lines: It isn't Good against Evil, it is a conflict of ideology with all sides having their fair share of flaws and virtues.
I call bullshit.
Originally I wanted to go over the four empires in some sort of detail and then compare them, but I started out with the Amarr and then found the whole process to be far too exhausting and depressing to continue. So instead I present a review of the history of the Amarr Empire as CCP has presented to us through PF, with a focus on the morality they present.
Amarr Empire
Ye Olde History: Conquered their entire planet, enslaved anyone that said boo about it. Freed people when they converted to their religion, mostly to justify the enslavement in the first place. Did not enslave the Khanid, on account of them never saying boo and taking to the Faith really well.
Well ok that's... That's pretty evil. I mean the religious angle might make them look more misguided than anything, but that was tacked on as an excuse after the fact which makes it a lot crappier of an excuse. I mean sure they didn't automatically enslave the people who were willing to help them of their own volition, but that's not really "Being good" so much as "Not being the biggest dick".
Ye Less Olde History: Encountered, and enslaved, the Minmatar. Encountered, and considered enslaving, the Gallente. Decided against it due to the Federation actually having a fleet. Encountered, and attempted to enslave, the Jove. Got their asses kicked due to the other Empire actually having a really good fleet. Lost most of their slaves to the Great Rebellion, gave the Minmatar who helped them out a stretch of space between them and the Republic to take the heat off of them. Allied with the Caldari because they both hated the Gallente.
I'm beginning to see a pattern here. They sure do love them their slavery, huh? Cool that they gave the Ammatar some space for helping them out, even if it looks to be entirely so that they could use them as meatshields. OK, no, no that doesn't make it good at all, that makes it an underhanded ploy.
Oh hey also, looking at it, it seems when they got their asses kicked by the Jove they put all the blame on the people they threw into the meatgrinder, then posthumously dishonored them and stripped their families of their titles. That's a special kind of dick.
Ye Recente History: Stopped enslaving anything that moved because CONCORD forced them to, so now they only enslave criminals and POW's. Emperor spent most of his life trying to broker peace agreements, then died. New Emperor came in, did some cool stuff, then got killed. Fat, hypocritically atheist, murderous, pedophile gets put in charge, does some horrible stuff so far as everyone involved is concerned. Get invaded by an Elder Fleet, lose even more slaves, look to be royally (heh) fucked until one of the 'dead' candidates comes back in a sacrilegious clone body and blows up about a third of the fleet away. Atheist Heir claims it was all a miracle, gets elected empress because the other four heirs (Three of which seem to also be entirely atheist) don't want to risk dying. Empress declares all seventh-generation slaves to be freed. Empress catches, then kills the fuck out of, the fat man.
Wow. Wow.
Wow.
When that started, it looked like it was getting better. I mean, sure the Empire were super-dicks in the past, but it seemed they might be getting better. A society that has been evolving from black to gray isn't too bad, but once Baron Harkonen was put in charge things just started going downhill. The pedophilia part was just horribly unnecessary. We get it: He's the bad guy, you didn't need to write scenes of him having prepubescent children licking his bits to make that clearer. What. The. Fuck. I'm actually a little worried that some mod is going to come in and edit the post/ban me just for referencing it, that is how horrible that is. But I'm going to reference it because, honestly, you've killed my will to live a little.
OK, so the Empress, who is now most definitely an atheist. And also the other Heirs, who are also mostly atheist. Because being in charge of a fascist, racist society just isn't evil enough unless you're a hypocrite as well. Obviously. You know, the one saving grace of the Empire, and Amarr in general, was that if they actually believed all of this stuff than at least they're only misguided. But by removing that excuse, they have nothing. They're just a bunch of fascist, racist slavers.
I have an idea: When one of the main factions in your 'grey on gray' world is an entirely religious society, keep writers who hate religion away from it. Maybe that would work? Like, I understand you can't depict them to all be happy, benevolent people who are only ever in it for their poor downtrodden brothers, but maybe making them less obviously evil than Stalin would work. Can we go with Castro? He's pretty controversial, he's a guy that's done some good and some bad in the name of his beliefs, can we go for his level of morality?
Well I ask that question, and then they have the atheist empress in charge of a theocratic society release all of the seventh-gen slaves. Which sounds like the answer is "Yes", until you realise that it is taking these people more than seven lifetimes to convert their slaves, to enough of an extent that we have this massive exodus of people whose great-great-great-great-great-grandparents were enslaved to save their souls, and nowhere along that line was a single slave considered 'saved'. Russian Roulette with a gun that's only missing one bullet has a better success rate! This is clearly more than an issue at the top, it's a level of hypocrisy that's seeped into pretty much the whole of society.
Summary
You know, as an Amarrian RPer, I often forget just how horribly the Amarr have been treated. This is because I, like most others on 'my side', wrap myself in a comforting blanket of half-truths to try and justify what it is 'we' do. I take the PF more as a suggestion than anything, a fixer-upper that just needs some love to be made into something that can support human life.
Jakiin is very interested in the welfare of his slaves, both their bodies and souls. He will point to the not-supported-by-PF-at-all 'fact' that drones would be more profitable as evidence that his intentions are good. He abhors TCMCs, and finds Vitoxin distasteful. He's in it because he wants to help these poor people... And if that means stripping them of every last bit of dignity and freedom they have, then he's not going to hesitate for a second. He is diplomatic and seems relativist, but that's only because he thinks that an alliance with the State is the quickest way for the Amarr Territories to get back up to 'take over the world' strength. At the end of the day, regardless of his intentions, he wants to have every man, woman, and child who won't convert on their own enslaved. All of the smiles and handshakes and oftentimes genuine affection for the nonbelievers would be put aside the second force became the most effective method. That is how I make him 'grey', how I make his psyche interesting to play.
But CCP seems to intend the Amarr as textbook villains, with the majority of Holders lacking any sympathetic qualities to speak of. Is that realistic? Well, yes. Historically speaking when you give people that sort of power they become corrupt, and historically the marrying of politics and religion has in every scenario I can think of sullied the religion and restricted the politics. But it's not interesting, at least not to me. Once again: I'm not saying that the Amarr should all be like Jakiin, as all of anything becomes boring. I'd actually be immensely pleased with an even split between true believers and people who are just in it for the power, with the two sides battling for control. Instead when we see the Heirs, those great representative of what it means to be Amarrian, the pinnacle of Holder society...
One is psychologically comatose because he did all kinds of stupidly evil things, and his aide vouches that above anything else he'd want to live. Doesn't really suggest belief in any sort of soul.
Two are focused entirely on keeping their power, because they're not ready to die yet either. The sacrilegious nature of Sarum's return is immediately apparent to them, and immediately dismissed as insignificant.
One is absolutely frothing with rage over the whole thing, which suggests he might actually believe the things he has used to justify the enslavement of millions or billions under his domain, but there's nothing that really proves it: He might just as easily be a stodgy old man protesting at change in any form. The lack of faith from his comrades makes this as good a bet as him being the only religious person in charge of a theocratic society.
The fifth, Jamyl... I covered the important parts already.
Sigh
OK. This started out well intentioned, but kind of turned into a rant that's been building up for a long time. Let's try to get back on track.
Let's compare this to the other empires.
Caldari
Pros: Dedication to the State is admirable
Cons: Were led by a bunch of corrupt hypocrites before, and are being led by an honest psychopath now as part of a grander scheme.
Gallente
Pros: Love Freedom, Apple Pie, and the Western World Way in a sea of dictatorships and xenophobes.
Cons: Have the same issues as any developed world country, and are also hedonistic. Because hedonism is a bad thing? Oh, also they did some pretty bad stuff three hundred years ago, in what they consider to be their nation's dark age.
Republic
Pros: Former slaves which gives them the underdog appeal, believe in personal liberty, but also respect the importance of tradition (These traditions, by the way, almost never being offensive to us)
Cons: Have a tendency to commit terrorist acts to try and free all of those people the Amarr enslaved, which puts them just above 'Union Forces in the American Civil War' and right below 'Gandhi*' in the descending list of perceived assholery.
*Who was apparently a racist.
I can't think of a good outtro, so let's just go with: Discuss.
-
The reminds me of an old comment of a good friend which meant to the amarr intro (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzJerBTjr-k): "What selfless acts?" :P
But CCP seems to intend the Amarr as textbook villains, with the majority of Holders lacking any sympathetic qualities to speak of. Is that realistic? Well, yes. Historically speaking when you give people that sort of power they become corrupt, and historically the marrying of politics and religion has in every scenario I can think of sullied the religion and restricted the politics. But it's not interesting, at least not to me. Once again: I'm not saying that the Amarr should all be like Jakiin, as all of anything becomes boring. I'd actually be immensely pleased with an even split between true believers and people who are just in it for the power, with the two sides battling for control. Instead when we see the Heirs, those great representative of what it means to be Amarrian, the pinnacle of Holder society...
First I like to agree; but wouldnt say CCP as whole... I had the feeling in the Burning Life (from Abraxes), that he at least try to make a point in this balance direction, where he describe the couple which visits the Fed and the Empire. I think like I said here (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Talk:Overview_of_the_Gallente_Federation), that he trys to show a conflict between the two.
TonyG - and his short stories and novels - on the other hand is different... he trys to get the good vs. evil conflict between the empires.... thats why in TEA are the Amarr so arrg$/*g"fc... I dont even start (I try to be more LA style friendly).... but you can clearly see that he that he goes that road... and a larg part of the RP community likes it.... and belive me... I cannt count how often I had to hold my head about some Gallente Roleplayer which going crazy about stuff what is even just past...
So all in all... TonyG had in T1 just work his line, what he has done before ... meaning.... if Gallente are bad: It is just "past stuff" ... see for example to whole Roden stuff in the book (still ask myself: Why is it in there?). The same counts for Caldari, the choose race... where the new leader ...runs over the field to save the day... and all evil around him isnt him, it is the Broker etc....
I could go on and I think, first: your post deserved actually a better answer... and I will come to it later. But that you go with one point out:
I try to say it is that every writer has his Faction which he likes... and you can really see it: TonyG has his Gallente and his Caldari; and Abraxes has his minmatar (but between the lines you can see he trys at least to get it not in his storys, which gets from me a thumbs up)... and I dont you can do much about it... sun goes up and sun goes down etc...
________________________________
About:
"Republic
Pros: Former slaves which gives them the underdog appeal, believe in personal liberty, but also respect the importance of tradition (These traditions, by the way, almost never being offensive to us)
Cons: Have a tendency to commit terrorist acts to try and free all of those people the Amarr enslaved, which puts them just above 'Union Forces in the American Civil War' and right below 'Gandhi*' in the descending list of perceived assholery.
*Who was apparently a racist."
What you mean, I dont understand?
-
Direct quote from Gandhi:
Interviewer:'What do you think of the Western Civilization?'
Gandhi:'I think it would be a good idea.'
Also the caste system in India...
-
But on the OP at hand...
If you ignore the PF churned out by Abraxas and TonyG you can build a pretty reasonable worldview of all the empires that isn't characterized by paper thin cut-out stereotypes.
My personal experience is with the Amarrian bunch, every single RPer from the 'bloc' was perfectly aware that playing an evil moustache twirling slaver was unsustainable and most of all a dead end, therefore the 'bloc' embraced within itself debate of the Scripture snippets to build a morality of an Amarrian person, because all of them are religious (if you ignore the retcons of the aforementioned folk). Also there was a willingness among the folk that I flew around with to not to be the cliche of being a unique snowflake within the Empire, but just a regular person within the Empire.
Which turned out to be the minority of the Amarrian roleplayers, but it seems like it is the most sustainable.
I think it's more about the communities of the roleplayers being creative in them ignoring the Truth given by CCP and creating more content within the boundaries of their respective cultures that they have adopted.
The Minmatar roleplayers have tons of personal information on their personal clans and extended families, but they have never tried to dictate how the Tribes do things.
Which is the thing.
As an Amarrian roleplayer I was very interested on the 'enemy' and the OOC terms were always good, mutual respect was there, because I think that both sides of the fence knew that the conflict was eternal and it could never end through Great Big Stories, but from small stories of the people doing their best in their respective cultures.
The olde Neuromancer forums were pretty much invaluable in this respect, there was a lot of discussion about different aspects of the polar opposite cultures of the Minmatar/Amarr and you can still see the consensus of some of those views being expressed in the RP culture of each side.
Which is awesome.
Also from those times is the legacy of a single Caldari roleplayer that has pretty much defined the Caldari culture and the RP interactions of generations of Caldari roleplayers.
Herko Kerghans.
All the suffix stuff used by them at the moment was something that he created for his stories by researching the Caldari culture through researching the Finnish and the Japanese culture. His enthusiasm was palpable and infectious, he got people to share their character stories back in the day, and nurtured an atmosphere where those stories were polished through peer review without people feeling judged.
Good times.
To sum this all up.
Amarr/Minmatar/Caldari roleplayers have had communities that have built a foundation for new roleplayers to adopt so that the New Eden has been more than a soap opera, unfortunately in the Federation (because of the nature of it) there has never been one.
Personally I think it is the roleplayers that define New Eden, not CCP.
Therefore roleplayers of their respective communities should strive to build something of their own as a reason to exist in New Eden, while still respecting the setting.
\o/ Brekkies! \o/
-
One is psychologically comatose because he did all kinds of stupidly evil things, and his aide vouches that above anything else he'd want to live. Doesn't really suggest belief in any sort of soul.
This was one of my biggest issues with Templar One, that Aritcio was still portrayed as a simpering idiot instead of the dude who Khuumaked a corrupt Holder to death and brought the wrath of God down on the Refusards.
-
One is psychologically comatose because he did all kinds of stupidly evil things, and his aide vouches that above anything else he'd want to live. Doesn't really suggest belief in any sort of soul.
This was one of my biggest issues with Templar One, that Aritcio was still portrayed as a simpering idiot instead of the dude who Khuumaked a corrupt Holder to death and brought the wrath of God down on the Refusards.
Generally all heirs (and Khanid, which has a seat) are not showing their "game of thrones potential", which they can have. I hope with the new immerson project we get some nice pages, and a deeper view in the characters.
-
Clearly we needed someone like George R. R. Martin to write Eve Fiction. :twisted:
-
George R. R. Martin is known for being very slow in writing new books.
He would fit perfectly.
-
The intro video for the Amarr Empire says their religion has been responsible for "tremendous good" as well as "unspeakable evil". We don't have much information on what that good is, but probably a crapload of charities alongside the Gallente.
Maybe you're approaching it from a RL mindset? I'm inclined to agree, but...for example, there's some people I know who would say homosexuality is OK in the Amarr Empire as long as it's private...I'm not so sure. For a nation that enslaves based on race and considers exposure of bare skin as a sign of serious deviancy, I doubt that would slide with them. Also, sanctity of marriage. The Amarr are strict on their truths. They'll define it in the most black and white sense. I could be wrong, but people forget EVE is a world much more extreme than ours. Even the Federation is FAR more libertarian than the West has ever been. The West has a history in Christendom that adds some moral inhibitors; the Gallente don't have their moral inhibitors from a religion that spanned empires, it varies from group to group.
The primary reason that some people say Amarr are okay with homosexuality is because, if it was widely known the Amarr were homophobic, it would be just another piece of OOC-thru-IC tripe that Minmatar/anti-Amarr RPers will throw at the Empire, because RL morality prevails in game...slavery is bad, homophobia is bad, any Oriental mindset is bad, etc.
So it's more a sort of structural thing rather than any one cause. Because RPers play with their RL morality, Amarr RPers try to say the Empire is cool with homosexuality, because RPers play with their RL morality and would just piss over the Amarr through thinly-veiled IC/OOC stuff (deliberate cyclicalism)
This isn't a nice universe. There is racism, there is sexism...there is going to be homophobia. Arguably the only place it would be accepted is the Federation, and even then, you'll have people there who will disagree with it.
Point of this post is just approaching EVE RP with RL morality. Can't be done. Even using Western Morality with the Federation. The Federation is a LOT more extreme in its freedoms/hedonism, but it's not SEEN as extreme from the perspective of someone within the universe.
-
The intro video for the Amarr Empire says their religion has been responsible for "tremendous good" as well as "unspeakable evil". We don't have much information on what that good is, but probably a crapload of charities alongside the Gallente..
Maybe, maybe not... we cant say... and that is the point...
(P.S. If someone make something up, I can already say, what comes around the coner; I have just make the Chart on the Emperor page and got a shitlot of hate comments from others, I think such emotional topic would mean that for example Morwen Lagann would go crazy again). :P*Publius feel sorry for oneself* :P
Maybe you're approaching it from a RL mindset? I'm inclined to agree, but...for example, there's some people I know who would say homosexuality is OK in the Amarr Empire as long as it's private...I'm not so sure. For a nation that enslaves based on race and considers exposure of bare skin as a sign of serious deviancy, I doubt that would slide with them. Also, sanctity of marriage. The Amarr are strict on their truths. They'll define it in the most black and white sense. I could be wrong, but people forget EVE is a world much more extreme than ours. Even the Federation is FAR more libertarian than the West has ever been. The West has a history in Christendom that adds some moral inhibitors; the Gallente don't have their moral inhibitors from a religion that spanned empires, it varies from group to group.
Abouzt the mindset approach.... ehm me No. I know that the Amarr see slavery as something as good, and I havent any problems with that. And also I have see the other comments, nobody mention it as problem. So it is less about RL and Ingame morality.
Now here is also another problem. You are the only RP I know which goes in this topic from real life out. And even more your argumention-string is a little... ehm how can I say it.... FOX News like.... ... it is not deduktiv it is inductiv...... illogical/ildedutiv.... You can not go from any instutional laws ("hard" and "soft") to homosexuality. I short form, when you use a Wenn-Dann- als auch als Je-Desto-Aussagen (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://eswf.uni-koeln.de/glossar/node85.html&ei=1TBYT4uOB8PRsgbXu_GFDA&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCUQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dwenn%2Bdann%2Bje%2Bdesto%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26biw%3D1680%26bih%3D872%26prmd%3Dimvnsob) and it sound totally grab ouit thin air, than you make something totally wrong. But that happend to alot of use, so dont make yourself a head. I think I have a larger problem it is, that your hypothesis would be also a Macro -> Macro one. It isnt a Weber tub, not a makro -> mikro -> mikro -> makro hypothesis (see down the page (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fde.wikibooks.org%2Fwiki%2FSoziologische_Klassiker%2F_Coleman%2C_James%23The%20work%20in%20themes%20and%20theses)) (something what I see as a critical, also on TonyG, I could write a 22 page Essay what all problems its brings etc... but it is very of topic). Now back to that you go form instutional laws ("hard" and "soft") to homosexuality, why Im interfere here? I dont even start to bring historical examples (Achaea, Tang Dynasty, etc...), but what schocks me more is later your Fed example.... I think you need to rethink large parts of your world view.... I dont say you need to become a fan of the positivism (like me :P); but at least a stoping voice which says.... "Wait, wait, wait do I make here a mistake etc... do I act gallente again? (http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?topic=3036.msg46018#msg46018)."
The primary reason that some people say Amarr are okay with homosexuality is because, if it was widely known the Amarr were homophobic, it would be just another piece of OOC-thru-IC tripe that Minmatar/anti-Amarr RPers will throw at the Empire, because RL morality prevails in game...slavery is bad, homophobia is bad, any Oriental mindset is bad, etc.
Omg... like I said your hypothesis is so.. ehm... I try to explain it on your next paragraph.
So it's more a sort of structural thing rather than any one cause. Because RPers play with their RL morality, Amarr RPers try to say the Empire is cool with homosexuality, because RPers play with their RL morality and would just piss over the Amarr through thinly-veiled IC/OOC stuff (deliberate cyclicalism)
This what you describe; I will try to bring it in one line: The Structural thing. :P It makes easier for me. The Structural thing says: on mikro level: If you are a Amarr-RP [place (2) on webbers tub], than you piss because of RL morality [place (3) on weber tub]. That would be your mikro-level, if you had one. You can see now, what the problem is, or?
Point of this post is just approaching EVE RP with RL morality. Can't be done.
I think on this paragraph/line you are back.... I see it the same way.
_____________________________________
I persoanly thing this whole topic is from Graelyn already summarised:
"We like being bad, but we like balance.
Every piece of new PF, news, novel, and nearly every single post on the IGS (that isn't from one of us) is obsessed over the utter sick putridity of Amarr.
Every single one. (http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?topic=3068.msg45958#msg45958)" (you can add in-character and out of character doesnt makes really a different). The "good" characters in "IC-form" can I count in one hand, and the last one was Abel Jarek etc....
-
George R. R. Martin is known for being very slow in writing new books.
He would fit perfectly.
Slow: Yes.... but I dont mind (even whan the last was just awesome, not super awesome :P).
And yes he would fit nicely, I think he will find some nice POV Characters to work with (most likely not Heth and the others.... because Robert wasnt a POV too.... and Joffrey wasnt also...)
-
The Amarr are more or less homophobic (like the Caldari iirc), it's half written and implied in some chronicles. It is also implied that it happens behind closed doors and that a lot are ok with that. I think personnally that it is more of a taboo than anything else, depending ofc in which House you live, etc etc.
The chronicles are so vague that it is for a purpose either. People always complain that PF is vague and not precise enough on a lot of things. Which is ofc unfortunate for some world and social system descriptions, but it is also good in the sense that it allows us, RPers, more liberty to do as it suits us in a huge world that is definitly very granular and full of special cases.
-
... world that is definitly very granular and full of special cases.
No.
That is where our views differ greatly.
New Eden is not full of special cases and capsuleers are definitely not those.
Capsuleers may be rare, but rarity does not make someone special.
Albinism is rare, it does not make albinoes any more special than anyone else.
-
No ?
Oh well, as much as I smell flamebait, I did not mean by "special" what you seem to imply. :roll:
-
... homophobic (like the Caldari iirc), ...
That is a surface interpretation of a chronicle. The same chronicle can be interpreted as the Caldari discouraging executives from getting into relationships with executives of another corporation (male or female), especially if they flaunt the relationship*. At the end, the young person listening to the story says that the story was nice, but they don't swing that way. The storyteller is offended, the reason is left to the reader.
Generally, it is accepted that the Caldari do not support homosexual relations due to pre-EA PF, Tube Child program manpower shortages and the idea that homosexual relationships do not produce offspring critical to the survival of post-Gate collapse Caldari Prime settlements.
*The nails that stick out get hammered down.
-
Kaikka Peunato (http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=13589)'s officer description would imply it's not as simple as a surface interpretation, Dex ;)
-
Motherfucking CCP. I leave for a measley 6 months and they screw my faction up the bum. Now I just want to hit the unsub button again in protest.
-
Personally I always liked Veron Daerth's approach to Imperial RP.
He came up with a plausible reason why his slaves might be happy with his ownership of them and would resist attempts to free them. That made for a much more interesting range of interactions.
But, yes, the official CCP line does seem to have somewhat wasted the potential offered by the empire and it's history.
-
Why did you have to remind me of Veron? Now I remember how much I miss that guy. :cry:
-
Veron was a sort of pseudo-mentor for Esna's line of thoughts on things, yes. And yes, I horribly miss him too.
-
Comments and idea-spinning...
As pointed out, it's been explicit for a while that--at least in some circles--it's not safe, let alone a wise career move, for a Caldari to be known to be gay. I'm not sure whether I'd expect the resurgent patriotism at the moment to make this more or less the case: I'd expect "traditional Caldari values" to be big, but that those values would be re-cast in ways that suited the current leadership. That depends a lot on gender roles, though, and since Caldari seemed to be originally intended as a non-gendered society I wouldn't expect the sorts of military/paramilitary brother-bonds + breeding programmes that you might see otherwise.
Gallente (but not necessarily other Federalists) generally don't care who or what or how many you have sex with. I'd assume a low-ish, Euro-style age of consent. I'd also assume it'd be a big deal to establish consent, since rape would be seen as a crime against individual sovereignty. You can do pretty much whatever you choose with your own individual sovereignty, but having someone else take that choice away is fundamentally badwrong.
I'm actually a bit surprised at what's felt like fairly vanilla (serial-monogamous?) nuclear family relationships when we've met Gallente. I haven't read everything (yet), though. Gallente customs concerning childcare and child education seem to be important and not currently well described.
I've long seen Amarrians as holding that heterosexual marriage is for duty, and if there's affection there as well that's a nice extra blessing from God. I've never been clear about the official and actual Amarrian views about sex that doesn't happen within marriage; about contraception and abortion, which affect things a lot; and about the effect of relative status when choosing acceptable sexual partners. My own assumptions are based on Roman models, complete with the infamous Mercedes simile (http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?topic=1271.msg15261#msg15261). I could be quite wrong.
I'm too close to Matari views of appropriate and inappropriate and pragmatic expressions of sexuality to talk about that fluently without a long run up and maybe some alcohol. "It varies."
I was involved in an IC discussion recently where a non-Matari reproached a group of Matari for being intolerant. I was trying not to pour accelerant on the flames at the time, so held my tongue, but in my experience tolerance is a Gallente virtue, not a Matari one. There's quite a bit about people's lives that Matari don't much care about (especially if whatever it is seems to work for that person's particular clan), but I don't think Matari make a virtue of putting up with differences in the things they do care about. I think this can be a bit challenging for some players, both those from outside expecting that the "free the slaves" people will be all huggy and understanding, and those from inside whose clans might have quite different and incompatible ideas about what's acceptable behaviour.
-
I'm actually a bit surprised at what's felt like fairly vanilla (serial-monogamous?) nuclear family relationships when we've met Gallente. I haven't read everything (yet), though. Gallente customs concerning childcare and child education seem to be important and not currently well described.
I've played with "quadripartite marriage" within my corner of the Gallentean sandbox, that is: the ideal union is one that satisfies one's emotional, intellectual, physical and social needs, but it's not necessary -- and often impossible -- to have all of those needs met by a single person.
Not that I ever made it easy on the characters of mine who believed in this sort of thing: Celeste's children (Vieve to lesser extent than Sabi) disliked her being emotionally/intellectually/often physically wed to a Lai Dai rep while she was socially/occasionally physically married to their father. Not that they didn't grow up to appreciate their mother's point of view. For example, no doubt to his surprise and alarm if he'd ever realized it, for a time Vieve considered herself intellectually married to Jules Soter while her emotional, physical and social needs were being met elsewhere.
-
I've played with "quadripartite marriage" within my corner of the Gallentean sandbox, that is: the ideal union is one that satisfies one's emotional, intellectual, physical and social needs, but it's not necessary -- and often impossible -- to have all of those needs met by a single person.
So that's what was going on.
I think I like it. It sounds like a more granular approach to self-actualisation in relationships, and that seems an appropriate Gallente concern. Also something that could have all sorts of interesting complications over time-sharing aspects of your partners.
Not that I ever made it easy on the characters of mine who believed in this sort of thing: Celeste's children (Vieve to lesser extent than Sabi) disliked her being emotionally/intellectually/often physically wed to a Lai Dai rep while she was socially/occasionally physically married to their father. Not that they didn't grow up to appreciate their mother's point of view. For example, no doubt to his surprise and alarm if he'd ever realized it, for a time Vieve considered herself intellectually married to Jules Soter while her emotional, physical and social needs were being met elsewhere.
So the selection and mixing can be a personal thing, made and modified quite informally and possibly without the input or knowledge of the people being selected?
I vaguely remember "Vieve's husbands" from three-four years ago.
-
I've played with "quadripartite marriage" within my corner of the Gallentean sandbox, that is: the ideal union is one that satisfies one's emotional, intellectual, physical and social needs, but it's not necessary -- and often impossible -- to have all of those needs met by a single person.
So that's what was going on.
Among a few other things, including the flagrant abuse of quantum physics.
So the selection and mixing can be a personal thing, made and modified quite informally and possibly without the input or knowledge of the people being selected?
Yup.
For yet more evidence that I'm completely insane ... when I hit pause on things, Vieve was still convinced that Celeste was married to Stitcher, though she wasn't entirely sure in what aspect/set of aspects.
(Of course, Celeste downplayed the whole matter to Stitcher. And she's never made a big deal out of Vieve's calling Dex Nederland "Uncle".)
I vaguely remember "Vieve's husbands" from three-four years ago.
In an OOC or IC context? I'm curious. Er ... PM me? I think we're already at risk of derailing the thread.
-
Kaikka Peunato (http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=13589)'s officer description would imply it's not as simple as a surface interpretation, Dex ;)
Gah, I wish I could find my copy of Chrysanthemum and the Sword! It describes the Japanese 'group think' very well.
http://www.thejapanfaq.com/FAQ-Primer.html
3. Honne and Tatemae
There is the way things are and the way we'd like them to be. The reality and the facade. The real reason and the pretext. The substance and the form. Being direct and being diplomatic. And the truth and the white lie. In short, that is honne and tatemae, respectively. Since avoiding conflict and trouble is extremely important in Japan, using diplomatic language is often used rather than the direct approach. It's said that in formal situations a direct "No" is avoided and there are a thousand nicer alternatives -- which can be true, but it depends a lot on the situation and social status of the parties involved. Some westerners unfairly call this deceptive, but this shows more ignorance of how the culture and language are intertwined. Japanese may say things very politely and vaguely, but if the meaning is not clear it's perfectly acceptable to ask for clarification. But while we in the west judge tatemae to be cake icing and hypocrisy, the Japanese have elavated it into an art. Sometimes, anyway. When it comes to creating a reason, in some cases the Japanese seem to have left their reasoning on Pluto. Like blocking European ski equipment from the Japanese market because "Japanese snow is different". In fact, almost every "reason" for not importing foreign goods is crammed full of it. While many so-called Japan "experts" tell the world about how much Japanese stress "harmony", the reality is that they push THE IMAGE OF harmony. What lies beneath may be completely different.
Understanding Japanese Society, Page 114 (http://books.google.com/books?id=9qI76UZdHEsC&pg=PA259&lpg=PA259&dq=Honne+and+Tatemae+homosexuality&source=bl&ots=NTF4tYLIZd&sig=BZrnRFnsGoLBCfqdr9qOVn1vzxs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bJVaT53XKofW2AXL4ujqDg&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=Honne%20and%20Tatemae%20homosexuality&f=false)
...James Valentine discusses the general significance of marginality in Japan. HIs own particular ares of interest have been those marginalised on the basis of their sexuality and witht people who suffer from disabilities...In a society that emphasesis form and clear lines of demarcatiion between Uchi and Soto, people who fall between them are seen as threatening. One strategy is to try and adpot an apporpriate Tatemae for most situations, and many people spend much of their lives doing just that....Sexuality is a characteristic that is not necesarrily revealed widely in Japanese socieity and many homosexuals preferr to compartmentalise their lives to avoid ther parents and workmates knowing about that part of their lives. A general pressure to marry ahs led to discrimination at work and at home against those with a preference for living an openly gay lifestyle. Marrigates of convenience used to be a kind of solution, but the recent increase in the number of people living alone has made it easier to be single and gay. In general, private homosexual relationships have been more acceptable in Japan than in many other contries for centuries, but these sexual practices were neither exclusive, nor did they necessarilty determine a marginal lifestyle in publice.
I remember reading somewhere about how the social concepts of Honne and Tatemae apply to homosexually. As long as a person endeavors to keep up the facade of heterosexuality, their peer group will accept the facade even if they know the truth.
In the case of Kaikka Peunato, I doubt the type of person who leaves mainstream Caldari society to become a a legendary homicidal space pirate is the kind of person who blended into the crowd.
http://blogcritics.org/culture/article/gays-in-japan-stay-in-the/
-
[As long as a person endeavors to keep up the facade of heterosexuality, their peer group will accept the facade even if they know the truth.
Ah, the 'confirmed bachelor'. I don't know, I don't want to poke too hard at other people's cultures, but I think that reading the position 'we don't have a problem with you being gay as long as you pretend to be straight' as 'this culture does not have a problem with homosexuality' is maybe a little problematic. Which is cool, you probably get all sorts of interesting, nuanced interactions by modeling the Caldari off these precepts, and it's certainly more interesting than sneering homophobic slurs IC :)
-
Yes, the ideal and most liberal situation would be that people could be openly gay without repercussions.
When you say "There's a problem with how homosexuality is perceived in Japan" I would agree with you, but stating that the japanese are homophobic would be still wrong. Homophobia consists of an irrational aversion and resentment, often even open hatred when religiously motivated, against homosexuals, which is a few notches more than 'looking the other way'.
-
Luckily, I'm not saying that :D
Of course, there are perception issues in Japan going beyond 'looking the other way', but I wouldn't categorize it as homophobia, because that's really a term with loaded meaning that isn't entirely applicable.
But that is getting far away from the Caldari topic (my fault); I think the thrust of my point was the last sentence, that I think that's a more interesting way of modeling how Caldari handle the topic than just taking a bog-standard homophobia angle.
-
Luckily, I'm not saying that :D
I agree, I just wanted to raise the point to the general audience that there can be something between absolute tolerance and homophobia.
Regarding caldari views I'm always a bit careful in applying japanese culture 1:1 to them, but in that case it sounds rather fitting, since with having caldari population issues in mind it is no big stretch to see that prolific marriages are seen as the necessary ideal.
-
Luckily, I'm not saying that :D
I agree, I just wanted to raise the point to the general audience that there can be something between absolute tolerance and homophobia.
Regarding caldari views I'm always a bit careful in applying japanese culture 1:1 to them, but in that case it sounds rather fitting, since with having caldari population issues in mind it is no big stretch to see that prolific marriages are seen as the necessary ideal.
Your point about degrees of reaction to something seen as "not normal" is taken and appreciated.
I'm not sure that the State would be that bothered about natural reproduction as this is a society that can tube grow more people. That said is there any indication what the social status of tube children is in PF?
-
Actually the tube children program got discontinued and, according to the small snippet, they weren't living under the nicest circumstances but still ended up as extremely loyal to the State and of course independant. Apart from the small bloodline description I'm not aware of more PF regarding them. Maybe someone with a broader knowledge of relevant chronicles can chime in?
-
My impression is that the original setting allowed plenty of latitude for people to find their niche in any of the empires. Of course, these are vast societies - unimaginably large by today's standards - and obviously you're going to find the whole spectrum of human behaviour and morality in all of them. I think most people understood this from the outset.
OK, the Amarrians were always the most decayed apple in the barrel with the slavery aspect, but it was easy to assume that most people were fairly pragmatic and ordinary despite that. Besides, it's quite easy to reconcile the slavery angle with a normal society because in our own history, the absence of slavery is the anomaly. Our modern western democracies were modelled on the Graeco-Roman societies of antiquity: societies that depended upon slave labour. Most European kingdoms had some kind of slavery present after the collapse of the Roman Empire that persisted through the middle ages as serfdom. Slavery still existed in some nations until comparatively recent times. It's what, 150 years since the US abolished slavery?
In short, it isn't hard for us to imagine a monolithic religious society founded upon slavery. We might not think that's a Good Thing, but we can easily accept it as feasible and not suppose that all of its trillions of inhabitants are the moustache-twirling villains that Lallara mentioned.
The trouble is that four empires that are morally grey and ambiguous make it very hard to tell simplistic stories about baddies and goodies. You reduce trillions of people to a single stereotype and look to elaborate conspiracies for your complicated plot devices. A few hundred pages later, you have left the original setting a much poorer place.
-
Actually the tube children program got discontinued and, according to the small snippet, they weren't living under the nicest circumstances but still ended up as extremely loyal to the State and of course independant. Apart from the small bloodline description I'm not aware of more PF regarding them. Maybe someone with a broader knowledge of relevant chronicles can chime in?
There was somewhere an expose or something about a very bad creche program. I think there was the implication that there was a range of conditions etc. in the various creches, though.
Remember, even with the Caldari being the least populous, and the tube-child program only being a relatively small portion of their population, there might still be more tube children than there are people alive on earth today. That's a lot of room for variety, no matter how relatively homogeneous those coming from the program were.
-
There was somewhere an expose or something about a very bad creche program. I think there was the implication that there was a range of conditions etc. in the various creches, though.
Remember, even with the Caldari being the least populous, and the tube-child program only being a relatively small portion of their population, there might still be more tube children than there are people alive on earth today. That's a lot of room for variety, no matter how relatively homogeneous those coming from the program were.
I remember a Scope News article that went about (Heth) sponsored creches to give those at the bottom a chance to prove their worth. But that wasn't about tube children, as far as I can remember.
Variety? Absolutely. The bloodline description is very short, superficial and by no means any indicator about how every tube children has to be. The question about their social status is difficult to tackle, though. Assuming that the caldari hold 'the group' ( and not 'the family' ) in very high regard, tube children should not stick out.
-
I think the one Silver is talking about is before FW. It came a little after the Brothers of Freedom.