Print

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

[Ulphus]

I don't find much support for the idea that Holders sexually abuse their slaves, myself. (I don't doubt that it happens, but we lack evidence that it happens a lot.)

TEA, (I know, I know) fairly explicitly (no pun intended) indicates that Chamberlain Karsoth was sexually abusing his slaves.

That's not to say it was hugely common or anything, but one might make assumptions based on one of the most powerful people in the Empire behaving that way fairly obviously to his underlings. You might make further assumptions based on Him being executed by Jamyl, and that "things might have changed" unless you think he got whacked for making a big political play and failing, rather than his treatment of slaves.

Of course, it was probably just TonyG finding an easy way to target designate the bad guy in the scene, so take it with a grain of salt.

[Casiella]

Ulphus: I was thinking about those scenes when I wrote that, but I decided a long time ago to assume that Karsoth was both an aberration and an abomination, which is why he kept it so secret. If it were more culturally acceptable, then he wouldn't have had to keep it under wraps.

Lallara: Some of us live in parts of the world where slavery has a recent past and it's partly (though not entirely) tied to religion. So I don't doubt that it colors our perception of the RP around it, whether because of cultural guilt or something else. Saving souls is certainly part of the history of slavery in the New World.

I'd also hypothesize that the Amarrian economic system does in fact benefit tremendously from slavery, but that's a different angle altogether.

[Ava Starfire]

OTT: I rolled my eyes so hard at self-admitted non Amarr/Minmatar RPers pointing and screaming "You're doin it wrong!" I saw my own brain.

Back to beating your usually scheduled horse.

[Matariki Rain]

There's a pretty basic disjunction between those who consider that slavery is, by its very nature, a fundamental abuse of human rights, and those who consider that slavery is an effective and desirable way of bringing the souls of the benighted to God, which is one of the highest human callings. For the former, it doesn't matter how "nicely" it may be implemented. For the latter, it's either worth some cost in suffering (Lallara uses the word "penance") to achieve such an elevated goal, or the "discipline" shaped by that suffering is part of the goal.

OOC, it's worth remembering that these are our agreed IC starting positions, and we're playing a game from there. The Amarrian starting point is going to be attacked IC by most characters who don't share its religious framework, and OOC by most players as essentially unsympathetic to modern sensibilities. Accept those game conditions and run with it: Amarrian player OOC victory conditions seem essentially about getting support and respect for taking a tricky starting point and playing it well, not to have people sympathising with the content of what you're playing.

[ArtOfLight]

I must apologize to those in this thread as I responded very poorly to the topic. I find myself frustrated with a number of things that I've had to contend with and I've been emotionally unstable the past couple of days as the events of my father passing are finally catching up to me. Apparently I'm what's known as a "late griever" in that things don't hit me until after most people have already started to recover.

Regardless, I apologize for being dismissive and unfair in my responses, mainly to Logan.

I would say that I disagree on a few things still but most of it is of minor importance in the grand scale.

A very good post Matariki and I will try and heed the advice contained within it. My interest wasn't really in making people like the PF about the Amarr or even like the Amarr but rather to try and point out that there's a lot of misconceptions about it all at least form my own perception. My responses were unwarranted in light of the disagreement.

Thank you all for understanding.

[Matariki Rain]

ArtOfLight, no problem. Grieving takes time, comes in waves, and keeps its own schedule.

[ArtOfLight]

I have been informed of what might have caused the initial misunderstanding and the subsequent frustration on my part for being misunderstood.

I wish to make it known that my intention is not at all to try and state that slave mistreatment and abuse does not happen in the Empire, it most certainly does. Nor am I trying to say that slavery is excusable because of how or why the Amarr employ it. My only intention in this discussion was to illustrate that not all slaves are treated as poorly as some PF suggests as there is also some PF that points out social, governmental and even religious expectations on the treatment of slaves in the Empire.

I personally get the impression from the PF that the extreme cases of abuse (sexual or otherwise) are isolated events and not commonplace. This is not to say that it doesn't happen or even that it doesn't happen often (the Empire is a HUGE place after all and even if it only happened to 10% of the slaves, you're talking about millions, maybe even billions of people).

My point is simply that from a grand scale look, I think the Empire's sins get played up a lot more than necessary and this causes some difficulty in trying to RP an Amarr, especially if you're trying to RP a decently humane one that isn't an abolitionist. It's a complex starting point as Matariki suggested and certainly opens itself up for constant debate and criticism. My hope was simply to shed a little bit of light on the situation from a PF perspective and point out that the Amarr are not quite as inhumane as they are often portrayed.

I apologize for any misgiving I've presented otherwise.

[Victoria Stecker]

I think one of the major problems with the Slavery discussion in EVE is that the PF itself is contradictory. For example, we have quotes that indicate that Vitoc is primarily only used on otherwise incorrigible slaves and in places where disobedience cannot be risked, such as in the navy. Then we have sources saying that Vitoc is the new, latest and greatest thing and is the most common way of keeping slaves in line. This leads to an all-too-common situation: people disagreeing with each other and thinking that they are right. It is unique in this way: In real life, two people with opposing views can't actually both be correct. In EVE, thanks to our self-contradictory PF, they can. It just depends on which bit of PF they consider accurate and which bit they think is bullshit.

Personally, I'm more inclined to take the view which is sympathetic (sort of) to the Empire, specifically that:
Abuse, defined as unnecessary physical or psychological harm, is not a widespread thing. Corporal punishment isn't classified as abuse. Sexual abuse of slaves might be slightly more common than other forms of sexual abuse (familial, anywhere a person is in a position of authority, etc), but I wouldn't expect that to be widespread either.
Vitoc use is limited to cases where it is necessary, because other methods have failed or you're on a warship, etc. Cost is never mentioned but I can't imagine that infecting people and then feeding them a steady supply of vitoc is particularly economical.

The argument here is not whether slavery is good or bad. The argument is whether, within the framework of a society which condones slavery, abuse of the slaves is common. I don't think it would be, much moreso than abuse of women or children.

[Casiella]

OffTopic: Bro, take all the time you need. Leave EVE if you need to, or come back here for escapism if that helps. Our disagreements about RP are all within the spirit of a friendly discussion about Internet spaceship stories.

[Matariki Rain]

Some comments for Victoria.

I decided to take the PF about whether the Vitoxin Method was uncommon (old sources) or common (middle-time sources) as an indication of changing practices over time. I assume that for whatever reason the technique became more widely used. I have no idea what's going on since the application of Insorum.

Sex in slavery is, for me, one of the issues that demonstrates how the same objectively-observed events can have very different interpretations depending on your position, experience and framework.

We have a thread here which presents the discreet Amarrian attitude to occasional servicing by slaves which seems accepted in the mainstream of EVE Amarrian RP (to the extent that such a mainstream exists, etc). I search for it as the "Mercedes" thread. The Mercedes approach is something I consider a likely common model, although it's not by any means necessary in any given Amarrian household. For the person required to service their owner, the experience could be many different things. Yes, those might include awe and reverence. They might also very much not.

There's another post here which is relevant, which I search for as the "clammy" post. It talks about breeder slaves in breeder colonies. I think the nicest gloss you could put on it is a claim that "Our breeder colonies provide medical care consistent with SPCS codes, within a framework of economic viability, and there's no brutality involved", but... I expect that many of the people on the receiving end would have different takes on it, and to outsiders like Gallenteans and free Matari it's abhorrent.

And yet there are still "good people" in this society, trying to get along, look after their families and positions, and manage their obligations, including to their livestock.

I tend to think of Amarrians as all the different kinds of meat-eaters, running into other cultures of ethical and pragmatic vegetarians and still trying to work out how to think about their yummy bacon and the horrified look on the face of the person opposite them as they chow down.

[ArtOfLight]

Once again you've articulated what I think might have contributed to part of my original attempt at approaching this topic.

The Mercedes thread pretty much touches upon what I expect would happen in the Empire but the pointed difference between that and what people consider "sexual slavery" is what I was trying to point out as well. No doubt there are examples of sexual slavery and sexual abuse in the Empire but I imagine it's to a far lesser extent than some might suspect. The concept of having sex with slaves on the other hand is probably pretty common but kept quiet and casual and I doubt it's often forced rape as we think of it today. (Though it is technically rape as the slave-holder technically controls the slave).

[lallara zhuul]

TEA, (I know, I know) fairly explicitly (no pun intended) indicates that Chamberlain Karsoth was sexually abusing his slaves.

Chamberlain Karsoth was not part of the Amarrian mainstream religion.

He was a blood raider and his decadence and perversion as a human being had been taken to its limits by portraying him as sex maniac with penchant for orgies full of slave children.

That does not qualify as portrayal of the Amarrian culture when it comes to treating slaves.

It does portray well how the mighty can do whatever they want, which they have in the past, Kor-Azor heir for example.

There is also PF that states that they cannot do whatever they want, without any repercussions.

Kor-Azor heir chopped to slivers while he was alive.

Two things.

The first.

The same thing applies to slaves for a Holder as it applies to a Heir for his subjects.

There is no immunity for status as the previously mentioned bits of PF state.

It may mean that a Holder has to cause permanent damage on millions of unrepentant slaves to get a punishment (and their enemy to alert the religious authorities) but he will be punished.
It may mean that a Holder has to sexually abuse a dozen slaves on the brink of freedom to get any kind of punishment (and their enemy to alert the religious authorities) but he will receive punishment.
It may mean that a Holder sticks his tiddlywink into the arsehole of his favourite bed slave (and someone tells everybody about it) which means that he will not get married to the family that would improve the status of his whole bloodline.

A culture as old as the Amarrian one does have its failsafes to keep the whole slavery thing turning into a boinkfest for religion nerds.

The second thing.

The purity aspect of the Amarrian religion is quite well stated in PF.
The True Amarr are the Chosen because they never turned away from God.
They've spent the past milennia serving the Empire so they've done so much penance that they can be almost certain that they (and their whole bloodline since the day they were created) can reach the pearly gates.

Slaves (and all non-True Amarr) turned away from God and were lost for... lets say quite a long time.
Hence most of them (and their bloodlines to the way back when) have a long way to go, until they can even be given the choice of Free Will (meaning that when they are free, they are so indoctrinated that they will make the right choice as dictated by the Amarrian culture.)
Without Free Will someone is paramount to an animal.

Therefore Amarrians can have slave breeding programs without any kind of moral pangs.
Therefore diddling a slave or being diddled by a slave is paramount to bestiality or paedophilia.

To the mainstream culture of the Empire those that are fucking slaves are perverts.
If they do it in the public, they get trouble out of it.
If they do it in the public so that a heathen can find out about it, they are stupid and perverts.
If they are capsuleers, mehhhh, they're pretty much going to burn in hell anyways so who gives a shit.

Just a clarification on a thing or two.

The bloodline bit.
The sins of the father are visited upon his children.
It's a pretty old religious chiche but it seems to be constantly working in the Amarrian religion to a greater degree.
It has not really been addressed directly in PF so its mechanics are not clear.
It does seem like your immediate family is affected by your actions, in their social position in the Empire and in the state that their souls are in the eyes of the God (Empire was created to purify the spirit of Man).
In cloning this link is severed (until the zombiepsychicbitchqueen.)
In slaves (and heathens) it goes back further, all the way to the time when they turned away from God.
(When they have freedom and they have truly embraced God they get to start the tally over.)

This would be another reason for having the slaves in Hell on Earth-conditions for quite some time.

Why this card house of assumptions about the Amarrian religion and culture?

Mainly because it seems like a good way of dealing with all the psychological trauma that the slaver, not the slave, suffers.
De-humanization used as a protective tool on a societal level that enables the society itself to declare war on the unknown with wild abandon and a tool for protecting the integrity of the societys culture.

But I ramble, I'm off for brekkies.

[Matariki Rain]

Therefore diddling a slave or being diddled by a slave is paramount to bestiality or paedophilia.

To the mainstream culture of the Empire those that are fucking slaves are perverts.

Idonis Ardishapur had a Starkmanir lover: Chronicle: "Khumaak". While "[h]is family and friends would be appalled if they knew of his dark-skinned Starkmanir girl", the impression left is not that this would be seen as a perversion, but as a dreadful mis-match.

King Khanid II has a "personal slave" who I've generally seen assumed to be a sex partner, alhough we might all be reading too much into it. Chronicle: The Khanid Kingdom. "Khanid himself has a Gallentean - a former pop-star - as his personal slave, something he finds highly amusing but makes the Gallenteans frothing at their mouths."

[Lyn Farel]

Lallara's post is great. It is a question of different cultures. Take any other culture on earth with its own codes of conduct and morality and you will end up with a very new kind of honor, morality, and ethics. Take the japanese middle age eras, where the social castes were treated and expected to behave very differently than in our RL christian society. To the noble caste (samurais and daimyos), peasants, craftsmen, commoners, were treated like shit because they were considered inferior, much like it was the case between aristocracy and commoners in medieval Europe. But I take the middle age japanese example because there are a LOT of similarities with the Amarr Empire society.

I am not an expert of japanese cultural history, of course, but their rigid social order constructed around 3 levels of castes (samurais, commoners, and parias, similar to the indian untouchable harijan caste) directly comes from divine essence. Since it was a divine order, it was accepted by everyone as such, and so the society had to work that way and not another. In a very Holder fashion, samurais were considered to be the purest and noblest caste for the very reason that what was expected of them was 100 times higher in terms of moral standards than from any commoner. For example, it was not expected from a commoner to be polite and measured at all times, except ofc when adressing a superior. For a samurai, behaving like that was like losing face and was considered as quite a grave sin and a lack of etiquette. I often consider that the superiority complex of the Amarr looks at least a little like the samurai one, where they consider themselves superior for the simple reason that their etiquette and moral standards are higher. Because, eventually, they are closer to an evolved human being than the lower castes, from which we expect less. The only major difference with the Amarr is that they actually consider that they allow the lower castes to redeem and bring them to a superior state of being, where the japanese thought it was just part of a life cycle and they would eventually be reborn in the role of something else in their next life.

There is also the usual place of women in the samurai society. Their society was a lot less sexist/misogynist than our own middle age society. Female nobles were basically charged of the whole household, which not only means breeding children and educating them, but also managing the whole house, finances, relations, etiquette, etc. Their role in the society was not seen lesser than the one of their husbands. I often think that it is also often the case with true Amarrian ladies, which reminds me the racial description of the bloodline iirc.

You can claim how old and reactionary it is, and you probably will be right to a certain extent, so this is also why I wonder what our society would be like if we all evolved from a Zen/Buddhist/Bushido culture rather than a christian one, for example. A lot of things have changed since the spanish inquisition in our christian western society, and I bet a lot would have changed and evolved in the japanese one too if it had remained a perfectly insular one. This is also what makes me believe that saying that the Amarr Empire is a society of the past and comparing it to middle age is merely an IC propaganda tool for the gallente. The Amarr Empire may have been long and slow to evolve through stability and reactionary politics, it still has lasted something like 4 or 5 times longer than any other faction, which gives it a shitload of time to experiment with its own culture and evolve. They are still human, and do not work 10 times slower than any other human.

Since the Amarr Empire remained very insular in its nature until very recently in the history of New Eden, it is to be expected for it to have its own culture not tainted too much (yet) by foreign cultures. And it happens that I strongly believe that technological progress often, if not always, mean at least a bit of social progress when science starts to explain things better and more rationaly than religion does. We know that the Amarr are masters of technology and science in several domains like implants, lasers and energy, and a lot other fields, and probably cosmological science (since it is quite center to their religion and goals in the universe).

I don't find much support for the idea that Holders sexually abuse their slaves, myself. (I don't doubt that it happens, but we lack evidence that it happens a lot.)

TEA, (I know, I know) fairly explicitly (no pun intended) indicates that Chamberlain Karsoth was sexually abusing his slaves.

That's not to say it was hugely common or anything, but one might make assumptions based on one of the most powerful people in the Empire behaving that way fairly obviously to his underlings. You might make further assumptions based on Him being executed by Jamyl, and that "things might have changed" unless you think he got whacked for making a big political play and failing, rather than his treatment of slaves.

Of course, it was probably just TonyG finding an easy way to target designate the bad guy in the scene, so take it with a grain of salt.

Following that reasoning then psychopaths like Anders Brevik are now common criminals in Norway. Actually, most folks in Norway are mini Anders Brevik (sorry for the harsh analogy).

An example hardly makes a generality, whatever the example is.

[Logan Fyreite]

I must apologize to those in this thread as I responded very poorly to the topic. I find myself frustrated with a number of things that I've had to contend with and I've been emotionally unstable the past couple of days as the events of my father passing are finally catching up to me. Apparently I'm what's known as a "late griever" in that things don't hit me until after most people have already started to recover.

Regardless, I apologize for being dismissive and unfair in my responses, mainly to Logan.

I would say that I disagree on a few things still but most of it is of minor importance in the grand scale.

A very good post Matariki and I will try and heed the advice contained within it. My interest wasn't really in making people like the PF about the Amarr or even like the Amarr but rather to try and point out that there's a lot of misconceptions about it all at least form my own perception. My responses were unwarranted in light of the disagreement.

Thank you all for understanding.

In any case since it took me a while to respond to this, the conversation has moved on, but just wanted to say that I didn't feel like your comments were in any way begrudging or dismissive of mine. I don't think an apology is needed but that could just be from hanging around on the Rote forums for too long, hardly civilized in comparison.

I am sorry for the loss of your Father, and wish you and your family the best in healing from such a loss. The grieving process is a long one no matter when you start it. Take care of yourself.