True Love

[Anonymous kank with wings]

Do families (other than nobles and their offspring templars) even concern themselves with lineages? Seems like nearly all PCs go around with only a forename. That would suggest to me that if clarification is needed, your character would say "I'm Amos, son of Amos, of Red Storm".

[Marauder Moe]

I think family names for commoners are optional.  Some of my characters had them, some didn't (and just called themselves Son of <father>).

I'd actually consider mentioning a surname for a commoner introduction would be kind of silly/snooty.  Unless your family has repute, don't invoke their name as though it did.

Also, among PCs at least, there's a huge variety of names and people don't often run into another with the same name.  If they did, then it would make more sense to use surnames.

[Gimfalisette]

Do families (other than nobles and their offspring templars) even concern themselves with lineages? Seems like nearly all PCs go around with only a forename. That would suggest to me that if clarification is needed, your character would say "I'm Amos, son of Amos, of Red Storm".

Bards who are born into the Poet's Circle in Tuluk have the surnames of the Circle they are born into. So, the master bard NPCs are mostly Joe Konviwedu, Amos Driamusek, etc., because they were born into those names.

Merchant houses, of course, their family members have the last name of Kadius, Kurac, etc. And they are commoners.

Tribals may have last names, I dunno.

Other than that, I can't think of other commoner groups with last names.

[Barzalene]

I think the idea of jealousy in a polygamist society raises interesting questions. I would guess that how much the object of one's affections seems to like other people would be of more import than where their private bits have been. Being one of four husbands is probably much nicer when you know you are the favorite husband.

[Gimfalisette]

I was actually thinking about the issue of jealousy today in an RP sense. I believe that behaviorally speaking, it's motivated by a fear of resource scarcity, said resource being the romantic partner.

A little bit of marital relationship theory. My favorite marriage theorist says that Person A falls in love with Person B because Person B meets Person A's most important emotional needs. And vice versa. However, everyone has their own priority of most important emotional needs, and those will be any three to five of these:

-- Admiration (saying nice things to boost the ego)
-- Affection (holding hands, gentle touches, kissing, hugging)
-- Attractiveness (specifically their physical attractiveness as defined by society)
-- Conversation (enjoying talking together)
-- Domestic Support (taking care of me through housework, cooking)
-- Family Support (spending time with the kids, making family a priority)
-- Financial Support (will this person take care of me financially)
-- Honesty and Openness (willingness to reveal true information about self history, current thoughts and activities, future plans)
-- Recreational Companionship (doing fun things together)
-- Sex (not just having it, but wanting it, and keeping it lively)

So, there are a number of things on this list which, if Person A has been getting their emotional needs fulfilled by Person B, and then Person C enters the picture and by hogging Person B's attention reduces the supply of fulfillment to Person A...Person A is going to get jealous.

For a real-world example, very often in a married couple when a wife begins an extramarital affair, she stops having sex with her husband. If one of the husband's most important emotional needs is having sex with his wife, well, now his supply has been cut off.

So what I'm saying is, jealousy isn't -just- a product of our Judeo-Christian ethos. I think it's actually about resource scarcity even more than that.

And I don't think it's enough to say, "Well, it's OK in Zalanthas to be polygamous." Yes, it is. However, Person B is still a finite resource. And if Person A really, really liked what they were getting from Person B, the best answer to the situation might be to get rid of Person C rather than just go out and find themselves a Person D. If you can eat all the vanilla ice cream you want, but you really want that one scoop of chocolate ice cream and it's the only scoop in the whole world, then you're going to fight over that resource with whoever is trying to take it from you.

Jealousy is a rational and logical product of resource scarcity, is my argument here.

[Barzalene]

I don't think we're saying completely different things. I think that Zalanthans are as prone to jealousy as Terrans, but I think the jealously would not be triggered the by the same circumstances or rationalized with the same arguments IE:
Earth: I'm jealous because Bob is sleeping with Sue.
Zalanthas: I'm jealous because since Bob started sleeping with Sue he's sleeping with me less often.

[Gimfalisette]

Yeah, I understood you, Barzalene. I was elaborating on what you said. And I actually think the reasons for jealousy are exactly the same on Earth and on Zalanthas: Resource scarcity. Except on Earth, we rationalize jealousy and say, "It's because it is morally wrong," or "It's because I'm afraid Bob doesn't love me anymore," or "What will the neighbors think?" or whatever other reason that's not actually the root of things. It's a pretty lie to cover up the harsh practicality of why we really feel the way we do. "I don't want Bob screwing around because when he does he spends a lot of money on gifts and it messes with my financial security." "I don't want Betty screwing around because I depend on her to do the dishes and cook my dinner, and when she's having sex with other men she's not home to do those things." See? Just not romantic, so we make up pretty lies.

[Gimfalisette]

Forgot one thing: I do think jealousy would be triggered by exactly the same circumstances on Zalanthas as they are on Earth, since I'm contending that jealousy is about resource scarcity. In fact, jealousy might even potentially be a lot more scary on Zalanthas, and more easily triggered, if there is not a prior agreement between the partners as to how and where and when the shared resources of the couple are to be spent. (Shared resources being bodies, coin, food, time, energy, effort, etc.)

[Barzalene]

Yes. Complete agreement.

BUT...

We have to be missing something, because it's a society where polygamy not only happens, it apparently works and is common. So, there jealosy threshold must be higher, somehow, for some reason.

[InsertCleverNameHere]

Don't forget, if the person (or persons) you kank most regularly are also kanking around without much discression, there's the possibility they're going to pick up something nasty, and pass it on. Sadly, not codedly, but the fear of virtual STD's ought to still be present in some.  :wink:  Which isn't necessarily a jealousy thing, but still a good reason not to want the people you're kanking kanking around a whole lot.

[Gimfalisette]

Polygamy is not an issue if there is no claim on each other between sex partners. If there is no "ownership," then there is no resource that you're able to claim anyways. No ownership means no value to you, so you don't care what the other person does with their body or time.

Polygamy is also not an issue if partners (mates) who are claiming an "ownership" in each other have a prior agreement as to how their shared resources are spent. (You can have sex with that person, but no buying them gifts or food, and you still need to have sex with me.) Value is not being lost in this case.

Jealousy will/can/should enter when someone is encroaching on your territory and threatening to steal something valuable to you.

[Gimfalisette]

Don't forget, if the person (or persons) you kank most regularly are also kanking around without much discression, there's the possibility they're going to pick up something nasty, and pass it on. Sadly, not codedly, but the fear of virtual STD's ought to still be present in some.  :wink:  Which isn't necessarily a jealousy thing, but still a good reason not to want the people you're kanking kanking around a whole lot.

I agree with this, but I'll present it as a resource issue too. If you give me a disease because you slept around, then you are potentially devaluing my property (my body) and maybe even threatening a total property loss (death). Not getting a disease is a valuable thing.

[spawnloser]

My theory, going with this 'resource scarcity' arguement, is that Zalanthans are more likely to simply go find more resources than quibble over the resource already being shared.

[Gimfalisette]

My theory, going with this 'resource scarcity' arguement, is that Zalanthans are more likely to simply go find more resources than quibble over the resource already being shared.

Depends on whether there's anything out there that's better than what you've already got.

-- If your top emotional need is that your partner be physically attractive, and in your opinion you're already with the hottest guy/gal in town, then you'll have to downgrade if you find someone else and be less satisfied.
-- If your top emotional need is financial security and you're already partnered to someone at the top of the economic food chain, then you'll have to downgrade and be less satisfied.
-- If your top emotional need is admiration, and your partner is the one person in the world you've ever met that can say exactly the right things and make you feel like king/queen, then anyone else will be a downgrade and less satisfying.
-- If your top emotional need is conversation, and you've never met anyone you clicked with better than your partner, and there's no one else you'd want to spend entire nights talking to, then anyone else will be a downgrade.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that romantic relationships are just about sex, because they are far more complex than that. This thread was titled "true love," and so I've been talking about the emotional feelings of romantic love all along, not just sex. Sex is an important part, but it's not the only part of getting one's emotional needs met through a romantic relationship.

[InsertCleverNameHere]

I agree with this, but I'll present it as a resource issue too. If you give me a disease because you slept around, then you are potentially devaluing my property (my body) and maybe even threatening a total property loss (death). Not getting a disease is a valuable thing.

Agreed.

My theory, going with this 'resource scarcity' arguement, is that Zalanthans are more likely to simply go find more resources than quibble over the resource already being shared.

And that's true, if you know the person you were kanking caught something it's time to move on, but it doesn't always mean it's apparent. If you don't actually know they've got something, and they pass it on to you, some of the diseases may be hard, expensive, or impossible to cure. So if you really happen to be fond of whatever a certain person is doing for you, don't think they're diseased (yet), it makes sense you don't want to trade them off just yet, if you can simply be sure that they, and also you, are safe from a nasty case of crotchrot simply by knowing they aren't kanking around a lot. So if you look at the other people as the resource yeah you can move on. If you're counting your own health as the resource, that's a little more tricky.

[Barzalene]

I would assume that in Zalanthas that "true love" and more than one mate are not mutually exclusive, and not just about sex.

[Pantoufle]

There is absolutely nothing unrealistic about a Zalanthan being jealous/outraged that their "partner" is sleeping with another person.  Even if this is for no other reason than that they are simply sleeping with another person.  This whole "resources" argument sounds like a fantastic farce, if you ask me.

I realize there is a large populace of gamers here who seem inexorably fixated on playing Arm as one gigantic bisexual orgy festival where nobody has partners at all and anything goes, but the reality is that even in Neanderthal societies, men and women both might be jealous if their partner were with another person.  This has nothing to do with resources or whatever other smoke screen you care to suspend before yourself and others.  Human(oid)s generally don't like sharing because they want to pass on their own genes.  This is why, in the animal kingdom, male lions might kill the offending offspring of a mother lioness: so that the lioness will mate with him and his progeny will continue.

So what I don't agree with are statements like:

Earth: I'm jealous because Bob is sleeping with Sue.
Zalanthas: I'm jealous because since Bob started sleeping with Sue he's sleeping with me less often.

I see nothing wrong with someone on Zalanthas being jealous because their partner is simply sleeping with another person and that's that.  You roleplay jealousy how you see fit with your character and I'll do the same with mine.  Zalanthas is not this massive polygomist realm where everyone is wantonly sleeping with everyone else and there are no "couples" whatsoever.  Love, along with the entire spectrum of real world human emotions, can unquestionably exist in Zalanthas, harsh world or not.

[Barzalene]

I'm not trying to argue with you. I just want to make a distinction. I don't think that polygamy and promiscurity are synonyomous. So, just because people are in theory (I've yet to see it in game) grouped up, rather than paired up, doesn't mean that the bond isn't as tight or exclusive as a marriage.

But I just don't think the interesting question is does it happen? I think the more interesting discussion is, how does it work?

[InsertCleverNameHere]

((a lot of stuff))

I'm not really arguing that.. But.. Maybe I misread it, but that seems like an almost overly angry response to a conversation based mostly on casual theories.

Personally? I've had characters fall in love, truly madly deeply, and all that. I've had characters using sex as more of a source for snaring attention of someone for reasons other than affection, and be jealous when the person was sleeping with someone else. Reason being, the other person my PC's lover was sleeping with them, was the same reason mine was. I've had PC's not understand the true concept of love at all, they couldn't understand such a wierd phenomenon. The resources arguement is just one reason, to my mind, as to why you may not want someone kanking the entire city. Not the only one.

edited to add: Oh yeah.. and these giant bisexual orgies? How come I wasn't invited?  :wink:

[Gimfalisette]

There is absolutely nothing unrealistic about a Zalanthan being jealous/outraged that their "partner" is sleeping with another person.  Even if this is for no other reason than that they are simply sleeping with another person.  This whole "resources" argument sounds like a fantastic farce, if you ask me.

Think it's a crazy idea if you'd like. However, it's not something I just dreamed up. I've got a degree from the University of California at Berkeley in Anthropology, plus I studied psychology, history, and other relevant subjects extensively in college. For the last four years I've been studying marriage in an academic sense. Also I've been married for 13 years (cumulative, two marriages) of my adult life. Jealousy, "cheating," love, emotional attachment, marriage, cultural meaning of social forms, all of this is subject area in which I'm an active student and have a lot of life experience.

Romantic love and jealousy are not just about gooey feelings, period. They are far more complex than that, and they deserve more explanation than just "no other reason than that they are simply sleeping with another person." And in fact, if you read my arguments carefully, you will see that they are not anti-monogamy or anti-love in any way at all. They just provide a rational, logical basis for human emotions, which is the purview of the social sciences.

[LauraMars]

Pantoufle does not strike me as angry, rather aggressively eloquent.

[amoeba]

edited to add: Oh yeah.. and these giant bisexual orgies? How come I wasn't invited?  :wink:

Giant bisexual orgies actually sound a little painful.

[Gimfalisette]

Pantoufle does not strike me as angry, rather aggressively eloquent.

I think the part where he said "This has nothing to do with resources or whatever other smoke screen you care to suspend before yourself and others" was actually a fairly ad hominem attack. So yeah, angry.

[LauraMars]

Pantoufle does not strike me as angry, rather aggressively eloquent.

I think the part where he said "This has nothing to do with resources or whatever other smoke screen you care to suspend before yourself and others" was actually a fairly ad hominem attack. So yeah, angry.

Only if you're bothered by that kind of thing on the internet, I suppose.

Back on topic, I'm not advocating worldwide jealousy, just as I'm not advocating worldwide puritanical sex or worldwide bisexual orgies. Each character is an individual, with individual reactions, and should be played as such.  I think Pantoufle's post was meant to point out that jealousy exists, can exist, and has logical reason to - which I agree with, even if my characters normally aren't the jealous type (also a viable option).

[Pantoufle]

I'm not angry at all, that's just the tone I usually use when debating.  However, I've long had the impression from many a poster when the discussion of 'sex' arises that they believe Zalanthas is this world where everyone is sleeping with the next person and to get jealous over one partner sleeping with someone else is a foreign concept.  I don't see that as a Zalanthan "standard".  If that's how your character views jealousy, knock yourself out.  But my characters are certainly not abnormal for being jealous (over anything, not just sex) or having any other perfectly normal HUMAN(oid) emotion.