Sex, sexuality, committment, & virtual reality.

[Nothing on under cloak.]

I'll post this thread here in General as well, for the sake of everyone having a chance to chime in.  Please answer as objectively as possible, and please, no anti-gay or anti-bi comments.  No off-topic or derailing threads either, use the derailment thread in the OOC forum for that:


The identical post is in Ask the Staff, click here to see if any of them have responded:
http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=60206#60206

I've searched through the forums trying to find answers to sex in Arm, haven't found much to answer my questions, so here they are.


Question number one:

What is the average sexuality of the average Zalanthan? Hetero? Bisexual? Gay and/or Lesbian?

Two:

Is there a homosexual population in Zalanthas and, if so, approximately what do you think is the % breakdown?

Three:

The predominant attitude towards sex and committment in Arm. Specifically, do Zalanthans committ to one person and have girlfriend/boyfriend relationships, or do they have sex however they can get it?

Four:

Very much related to three, love and lifelong committment. How common is marriage amongst the commoners of Zalanthas? How common, excluding marriage, are long-term relationships presuming the people in question don't die, or move away over the course of a number of years?

Five:

Virtual mudsex. If you want to play a "swinger" character who will invite every potential mate into his/her bed, can we be justified in claiming our characters have sex with virtual mates?

I ask because, while it seems to me we players have that freedom, some characters seem to be played as swingers, but don't seem to ever get caught having sex with other PCs, so if he/she isn't "getting any" from other PCs is it justified for you to have your PC claim she/he is having sex with virtual characters?

And, if the last question is a yes, is it something you would expect to see played out, or do we as players have the same discretion to fade or play out however we choose?


Thanks in advance for taking your time to read this post, and answering to it if you do.

Anonymous with nothing on under cloak.  :twisted:

[Gorobei]

For your first two questions, homosexuality does exist on Zalanthas, and true homosexuals are most likely about as common there as the real world.  However, Zalanthas is closer to ancient Greece than today's society.  Homosexuals are seen as something ordinary and definitely not discriminated against.  In addition, most heterosexuals wouldn't be entirely repulsed by performing a homosexual act.  Zalanthas differs from ancient Greece in the fact that heterosexuals in homosexual relationships wouldn't be the norm.

For three and four, this is entirely up to you and your character.  Marriage is a thing for the merchant and noble houses, and is generally based solely on business.  However, while marriage doesn't exist for the common person, human emotion does.  If your character falls in love with another, that may be the only relationship that your character feels a need for.  On the other hand, your character could be a Zalanthan Ron Jeremy, pumping out babies east and west.  These are the ends of the spectrum, obviously, and relationships can fall anywhere in between.

For you last question, this is again up to you.  Just because all those prissy PCs resist your suave seductions doesn't mean you can't go Gajing and pick up a hunter for a couple of days while (s)he's in town (this goes double if your character is willing to pay).

To answer question 5 b, here's 'help consent':

Consent  (Rules)  


There are few restrictions on roleplay in Armageddon. If you choose to roleplay adult situations, that is fine. However, before instigating such an act with another player, please OOC to make sure that the role play is consented to. If someone is instigating roleplay that makes you uncomfortable, please OOC that they should stop. If they continue despite being told to stop, please wish up. This rule is not meant to be abused in order to allow characters to escape death/torture/etcetera. Perhaps a good analogy is the movie ratings system: some people may wish to see the details acted out in a way which would deserve an R rating while another, younger player might prefer that the details be commun- cated in an OOC fashion and left offstage.


Specifically in the case of roleplaying through a rape, the instigator takes on added responsibility. In this case, the instigator absolutely must OOC'ly ask for and must obtain explicit consent from the victim's player prior to involving their character in any emote specifically indicative of the act of rape, no matter how non-graphical you believe it to be.


If you act out a graphic sequence without first obtaining the other player's consent, and the player then complains within a reasonable amount of time (so that the runlogs can be checked and the complaint verified), you will be banned. In such cases, therefore, please use common sense and have respect for other people's sensibilities.

See also:


rules

[UnderSeven]

I agree pretty much with the previous post.  Homosexuality exists on arm and I'd say the breakdown is the same as the real world BUT because it's more accepted in Arm, the people who have homosexual or bisexual tendancies are more likely to express them because they don't have much to fear for doing it.

Commoner marriage is very rare.  In Arm marriage is more or less a noble/merchant thing and it's basically done for power.  Some commonres might do something like that, but it lacks any legal or social meaning really.  

As far as how many parteners, this one I bet many will disagree with.  There are many cultures on arm and CONTRARY TO SOME BELIEF, there ARE monogamous groups in arm.  People whose history and tradition calls for sticking to a single mate.  Therefore it not only exists but is seen fairly everyday.  However, I'd like to say I think poligomy is the generally accepted norm.  Especially in the city states.

[flurry]

My opinions..


Question 1:   I'd say predominantly heterosexual.   Probably it would seem that there are more homosexual and bi people, because there is less sexual repression.

Question 2:   % is tough.  I don't know.  Maybe 80% hetero, 10% bi, 10% homosexual.  

Question 3:    Overall I think homosexuality would not be viewed as any more unusual or controversial than being left-handed.   I don't know about monogamy.  I'd say less cultural value placed on monogamy, but still plenty of monogamous relationships.  

Question 4:   I think of marriage as being something for nobles and merchant house familiy members etc.    Lifelong commitments, I definitely think would be pretty normal.   I think in a harsh world people would stick close with people they trust.

Question 5:   I think it's perfectly fine to have a PC with a wild sex life, that is never played out, and never involves other PCs.   As long as it fits the character and is realistic, I don't think it matters whether it happens virtually or not.

[Delirium]

re: question five - I've played characters that were supposedly sexually wild, but due to a dislike of mudsex, most of their adventures were virtual. I saw nothing wrong with that. I did get some reactions from PCs like 'you can't have slept with so and so the other night, I've never heard of them' which annoyed me a bit, but other than that, it worked swimmingly.

re: homosexuality and multiple partners - no big deal. Deciding to stick with one person because you enjoy their company enough to not need another - no big deal. In fact, whatever your character likes, is no big deal. The only thing that might be seen as odd is being extremely possessive, as a matter of fact. That seems like a hard concept for some people to wrap their minds around, but I like it, as it further splits the game from reality. Have a partner at home but bored with her? Go bang a chick in the Gaj for a few obsidian. Doesn't mean the partner is not allowed to feel a twinge of jealousy, but it wouldn't be this horrendously big deal either. About the same level of annoyance as, "damn it Jimbob, you went out drinking again, didn't you?" "Jest a wee nip, Marge!"

[Bestatte]

To add to Delirium_the_Wise's post...

I've experienced situations where my character was brought up in a polygamous/polyganous (many females/many males) household, and was a little confused as to why players of other characters RPed that their characters couldn't possibly comprehend that notion.

Your characters -can- understand the notion, because they are surrounded by it. Perhaps your character has found one person they want to be with and feels no need to stray, and that's -FINE-. My character might not quite undersand it, but she won't take issue with it, because she is just as surrounded by monogamous family units as your character is with non-monagmous family units.

It's an interesting dynamic, having characters born of different backgrounds get together like this. But it really irks me when I have a character who isn't sure which male of the house is her father, and someone tries to make an issue of it.

Please remember that in Zalanthas, it isn't an issue.

[Nothing on under cloak]

Thanks for the answers so far.  In making this post, I was trying to get at your opinions, and not the terse "do whatever you like" answers, good to see plenty of people chiming in.

How about dealing with players who seem to play their characters in our North American / much more restrictive ideas of sexuality - how do you handle people who start playing their characters as thinking less of your own PC because she/he has sex with a lot of people?

What would the polygamous population of Zalanthas say to someone who was taking the attitude that sex with multiple people means you are less honorable than someone who is monogamous?  i.e. The PC's comments hint that you are a male or female "slut".  What do you say to them? (Please, no "whatever you want" responses)

And how do you deal with these attitudes over time when the PC doesn't change opinions because the player doesn't know sexuality Armageddon-style? (granted, many people do change how they play this)

(Aside, I did a search on a couple dictionaries on the usage of "polyganous" and could find no such word)

[Bestatte]

Edited to add: See flurry's post below this one. She/he summed up the poly"thing" up nicely.

I probably spelled it wrong. Polygamy is a male with several wives. The other is a female with several husbands. Polyginy maybe? Ask My 2 Sids, she's the one who found it

To answer the other question, it's a toughie. I generally use a common rule of thumb: the ones who are *blatant* and *obvious* about their sexuality in public places, are those my more dignified characters would consider "sluts" or "loose" or "lacking any social decorum." Such as the F-Me PCs whose public behaviors match their descriptions, who shimmy and shake their bootay when they walk, make a concerted effort to let everyone know that they're exposing their naked thigh when they cross their mini-skirt-covered legs, who giggle incessantly and flirt loudly...

Those are the ones most my characters (and I as the player) would consider the loose ones with no pride, who most of my characters (and I as the player) would assume exist for the express purpose of getting laid.

I have had characters who aren't into the monogamy thing at all, but they *tend* to be less in-your-face about it. With very few exceptions, you won't find them swivelling their hips suggestively or purring when they talk or reaching forward to pick something up off the floor just so they can show off their perfectly formed perky tits to the entire room. To each their own, obviously - however I as a player have no desire to RP the slattern, and whether appropriate or not, my characters will see such behavior as slatternly and *usually* disapprove of such behavior.

Afterall, even a decently played whore has a little class and understands the word "discretion."

[flurry]

I probably spelled it wrong. Polygamy is a male with several wives. The other is a female with several husbands. Polyginy maybe? Ask My 2 Sids, she's the one who found it

I think you're thinking of polyandry (for multiple husbands) and polygyny (for multiple wives).  I think polygamy covers both.

[spawnloser]

I probably spelled it wrong. Polygamy is a male with several wives. The other is a female with several husbands. Polyginy maybe? Ask My 2 Sids, she's the one who found it

I think you're thinking of polyandry (for multiple husbands) and polygyny (for multiple wives).  I think polygamy covers both.

To paraphrase another...

flurry is correct.

[Anonymous]

Before I progress, I just want to say that I am quite cool with the topic in RL, so please let's keep this a Zalanthas issue and nobody overreact if I brush delicately against someone's RL hot-button issues.  Therefore if y'all would read to the end and take a deep breath before pounding your keyboards, that would be great.  That said:

All the response posts seem to be supporting the notion that Zalanthian society across the board is an absolute eden of sexual tolerance where people can come together sexually in whatever fashion they might desire without fear of reprisal or social stigma.  Let us do a brief RL/Zalanthas comparison, shall we?  I think that I can say in fair confidence that RL-wise, most people if polled would cite The Big D (that's D-scrimination folks) as being the big no-no of all time, specifically in terms of racial discrimination (epitomized through slavery and acts of war/genocide), and gender discrimination (epitomized by sexual stigma).  While I will not be so brass as to suggest that I have a finger on the pulse of the entire globe and all its many peoples and nations, I think that I can be granted enough leeway to discuss my own.

While on the -individual- level people still rate on all points of the spectrum ranging from perfect tolerence to absolute bigotry, I think it is safe to say that on the official or legislative level great strides have been made to curtail the abuses brought about by mankind's 'right' to freedom of thought and belief.  Emancipation, and the end of slavery.  Sufferage and the vote.  Freedom of religion.  Affirmative action and diversity politics.  All of these are indicators of an overall societal shift toward a gentler, more humane approach to the problems of basic human interaction.

In comparison of course, is Zalanthas.  Slavery, religious persecution, species-hatred, class-hatred and abuse, ability-hatred (mind-benders and magickers).  And yet, sexuality is free and unchecked and apparently nobody gives a damn, not only across genders but often apparently across different sub-species as well.  It doesn't quite ring true.

I think that perhaps the reason for this is as follows.  While slavery is certainly an emotionally-charged issue, there is a certain degree of separation that affords a mental margin of safety.  There has been no slavery in my country or even my range of experience in my lifetime or  that of my parents, so I can roleplay in a society where slavery exists without worrying about mixing with current RL struggles or issues.  There is an even farther remove if an emphasis is lent to non-human slavery (muls in particular stand out).  This leads easily into Zalanthian racism, which is again at a remove in that it is effectively a species issue as opposed to one of race, at least as 'race' is defined in RL.  There are no instances in Zalanthas of 'dark-skinned' or 'red-haired', or 'narrow-eyed' or 'blue-eyed' individuals harboring animosities toward each other based on those differences, not when there are 'skinnies', 'baldies' and 'bugs' that can be safely hated and discriminated against through roleplay with out feeling pangs of conscience in RL.

This brings us around to sexuality, which I suggest follows in similar vein.  I have seen a few instances of roleplayed revulsion between 'species' which holds a degree of safety, but I suggest that the roleplay of sexual discrimination between those of the same 'species' strikes too close to the RL issues of the day for people to play comfortably, which I suspect is a very large reason for its absence in-game, from a player and staff perspective.  

In summation, I suggest that the greater struggle for life on Zalanthas as a whole as opposed to ol' planet Earth would indeed cultivate a deeper divisiveness along all issues as people factionalize and marginalize into ever smaller and more manageable groups for the purposes of the feeling of enforced safety and clannishness such bigotry provides, as well as the greater hearts-ease of 'reclaiming resources' from beings that are clearly 'inferior' or 'degenerate', as opposed to just killin' fellow sentient beings just to take their loot.

Well, looks like I've run long again.  I'd love to see some intelligent discussion on this subject.  Please no emotional outbursts, as I have already explained this is not an issue of personal or RL rancor on my part, so such a response would be both inappropriate and un-necessary.  And please no 'The staff say this is the way it is, so that is the way it is, so there!' type of posts.  I already know the official position, I am merely arguing as to whether or not it is intellectually or historically defensible.  Alright, go ahead.  I'm done.

[Stiofan]

Oh, that long-winded thing is mine.  I thought I was logged-in.  Sorry

[Bestatte]

No vitriol here, Stiofan. I'll attempt to address the arguement from my perspective.

Zalanthas is a world of fast and furious life and death. It's not like anywhere else in the RL world, where only isolated areas live for the moment only to die in the next instant. The entire game world revolves around this rather than just one country or region.

As such, the "fight or flight" mentality is almost engrained into the characters' lives and minds. Pleasure comes in fleeting moments, and you grab it where you can, and when you can, because you could just as easily be dead tomorrow and never have experienced it at all.

The characters, being diverse, will have preferences. Some will prefer the "symbol of wealth and luxury" - that being the round, pudgy body caused by never having to lift a finger to get what they want. Some will prefer to stick with their own general "type" because it's familiar. Some will prefer same sex for the usual RL reasons, but also because hedonism is not a foreign or taboo concept, and perhaps pleasure for its own sake is fine with them. Some will prefer opposite sex relationships, monogamous, multi-mate, whatever..

For the same reasons as there are in real life. But the reason it isn't frowned upon in society, though it is in real life in some cultures, is simply because life is WAY too short to worry about who the guy at the table next to you is fucking this week. The fact that he's getting any at all and lives to tell about it is something worth rejoicing, not something to scorn.

[spawnloser]

I'd also note, in addition to what Bestatte said, society also tends to follow those in a greater standing...the nobility.  The nobility is, to put it succinctly, a bunch of degenerates by our standards.  Of the male nobles I've seen in game, at least one was bisexual...of female nobles I've seen, at least two were bisexual or possibly lesbian.  That is almost half of the nobles I've met.  They have to have opposite sex relationships, as their families will require them to wed and mate for the purposes of having children.  Same sex relationships?  Their extramarital hanky-panky, however, is another thing...and commoners will see, or (be forced to) participate in.  Now...the nobility is better than commoners.  They know better.  It must be okay.

However, nobles happily practice bigotry when it comes to species and class differences.  They would discriminate against those that sleep with those of other species and the results of such unions.

Personally, I would prefer to keep any form of discrimination that can hit close to home in RL avoided...which would mean no prejudice based on color of eyes, skin or hair, no prejudice based on sexuality and no prejudice based on gender.  That does allow everyone, regardless of where they fall in those categories to feel safe as a player.  Racism based of races in Zalanthas, or region of birth in Zalanthas...that I'm completely fine with, as no player of this game is an elf/mul/dwarf/halfling/half-giant/mantis or from Tuluk/Allanak/Storm/Luir's etc.

[UnderSeven]

I'd like to add, the different cultures in arm also have different taboo's.  Lemme give a few examples.  In the south it's okay for a noble to mess around with commonres, though possibly frowned on or a very bad idea, dependant on the house.  In the north it's absolutely taboo.  More examples?  There is a culture on arm that mates for live.  They might have serious problems with someone who is constantly having multiple lovers.  They at least descriminate heavily against bastard children.  Some of the more poligomous cultures may in turn view monogamy as silly and even as a challanging notion to their life style.  No one likes to have someone else come around and make them think twice about their own life.  

My point is, the question you posed is a very broad one in a game that has a lot of small areas of specific differences.

[sarahjc]

Those are the ones most my characters (and I as the player) would consider the loose ones with no pride, who most of my characters (and I as the player) would assume exist for the express purpose of getting laid.

I have had characters who aren't into the monogamy thing at all, but they *tend* to be less in-your-face about it. With very few exceptions, you won't find them swivelling their hips suggestively or purring when they talk or reaching forward to pick something up off the floor just so they can show off their perfectly formed perky tits to the entire room. To each their own, obviously - however I as a player have no desire to RP the slattern, and whether appropriate or not, my characters will see such behavior as slatternly and *usually* disapprove of such behavior.

Afterall, even a decently played whore has a little class and understands the word "discretion."

Honestly.. I see nothing wrong with these people.. Infact I would go as far as to say that in your face sextuallty is just fine and when rp'd out well, it can be an impressive and persuasive tool. (to the horror and dismay of all feminists) :shock:

I think this post goes a bit on the side of personal attack Bestatte, as I think I know clearly of one characters that you are speaking of and she is one of the best Rp'ers in the game..If I am wrong do correct me.

That said, I think all walks of life are easily eccepted in Zalathas, from rough and tumble to sultry seductress.. Basicly put.. what you do in the private or not so private life of your PC is up to you. As long as you follow the rules.. anything goes. But expect everyone to judge, approve, disapprove...ect..

Cause there is nothing like a good sex scandel to keep us all interested.. and there hasn't really been one in a while..

[Bestatte]

I'll ask you to kindly not make assumptions. For the record, I have several characters in mind, and have absolutely no idea who plays most of them.

[spawnloser]

sarahjc...why would you make the assumption that what Bestatte did was a personal attack?  What is wrong with a character that acts like a slut being called a slut?  It's not a reflection on the player...unless that is all the player knows how to play.

[My 2 sids]

To keep from getting too longwinded I'll address questions three and four.

The predominant attitude towards sex and commitment in Arm. Specifically, do Zalanthans commit to one person and have girlfriend/boyfriend relationships, or do they have sex however they can get it?

In our society today (for the most part) sex is sacred.  Sex has religious overtones, economic and status overtones, commitment overtones, and other parts to it one would simply not find in Zalanthan.  Their sex I think basically comes down to two things.  Reproduction and "drink and be merry for tomorrow you may die" fun.  I think in any society where life is short, there is an underlying need to continue to populate.  It is my option then that sex would be on the minds of many Zalanthans.  That means many of them would focus on finding mates.  Mates, I feel, would require more commitment.  The relationship would take as long as it would take to raise any and all children from the relationship.   Because of the time commitment involved I think mating couples might be more one on one and building relationship, most likely the mates would be very good friends and have more of a two-way street.  The goal of which would be reproduction.   The other type of sex would be more casual.  One night stands good for sharing a brief bit of fun.  This I think would be more with prostitutes and pleasure slaves; at the very least there would mostly likely be one more dominate in the relationship and dictating what happens in it.  

Very much related to three, love and lifelong commitment. How common is marriage amongst the commoners of Zalanthas? How common, excluding marriage, are long-term relationships presuming the people in question don't die, or move away over the course of a number of years?

Again, I'd say most long term relationships would happen in a reproduction sense.  So parents would stay together long enough to raise children.  Or perhaps some sort of polygamy would insure.  Or a relationship would last however long the dominate partner decides to allow it.   Like with a call girl or concubine, or dwarven friendship where it works as long as it may help the dwarf get what they need from it.

Although I would guess virginity (being so hard to come across) would be worth a great deal, I also don't see sex itself as worth that much.  Life is too hard and too short to play games with people.  Either one has fun with a partner, produces a child or moves up in society, or its time to move on.  Dating always seems to bring about jealousy, battle of wits, and even self destruction... things that don't fit in a survival type society. What I don't see happening would be "dating".   It takes too much energy to put a great deal of time and emotional commitment into someone without at least trying to achieve an end result.

[ShaLeah]

I wonder if we're ever going to get sick of discussing the same topics over and over again. Sexuality comes up at least 12 times a year.

Is it at all possible to make an Imm approved web page of realistic Zalanthan sexual habits or customs?  Just a general... Homosexuality is A-OK and/or Multiple people  "marriages" are A-OK.

ShaL

[Law&Order]

This reminds me of long ago when a single man named Onyxwolf brought the race of half-elf to the world.  A man, a dream, a scheme, Onyxwolf.

[Akaramu]

I wonder if we're ever going to get sick of discussing the same topics over and over again. Sexuality comes up at least 12 times a year.

Thats why I'm not going to comment. The whole subject is pretty much self-evident. And not all that interesting. Its as old as humanity... how many layers of dust would that be?

Where is the official Doc that says that everyone is a polygamist. The consensus is that because its a different culture from ours that there would be no such thing as monogamy?

Because life is hard and fast, then sleep around all you want.. Shrug maybe but what about people who want someone to be there for them. To watch their back when everyone else is against them. etc. Perhaps in the cities, but I think that in tribal situations, there might be instances where there was religious or cultural  influences that promoted monogamy, whether for descendant of the chief or who knows what.

I say it exists. Now I was watching a show about a completely free sexual culture existed in central or south america. But once they discovered the concept of jealousy it swept into their little happy world. So I say that since it does exist the concept does exist,  and some people in the cities are descended from tribals, so the idea and practice would get around. I am not saying it is prevalent, Perhaps on the same level as homosexuality. Known and accepted as a slight deviation from 'the norm'.

[Bestatte]

I don't think anyone here is claiming that everyone in Zalanthas is a polygamist, Dead Newbie. Nor that monogamy is unkosher in the genre. The point is, like beauty, preferences for sexual relationships are by and large up to the beholder.

There is no taboo on any of the usual variants such as polygamy, monogamy, hetero or homosexuality, sexual ambiguity, bisexuality. None of these things are considered "bad" or "immoral" in the world of Armageddon.

My only issue is with blatant, intentionally public sexual promiscuity, no matter whether the character is monogamous or has their own harem.  But that's just me, and doesn't necessarily reflect the social mores of the game world.

[crymerci]

Maybe I just don't get around enough, but I rarely see actual polyamory.  I see open sexual relationships, but polyamory sort of implies that while having multiple sexual partners, they are more than just sexual partners, and they are involved not only with you (as a lover) but with your other partners (as extended family) and that you are likewise involved with their partners (as extended family) and so on.

Granted, lots of things happen behind closed doors, but I've rarely seen anyone spend time with two lovers at the same time, where everything was out in the open and relations were not only civil but amicable between all.

Of course I'm not implying that this should be the norm.  I think the norm on Zalanthas should be that there is no norm.

[I Have Steel]

One of my best roleplay experiences by far actually involved things along these lines...

My character had grown up to a father and two mothers. Over the span of her career, she eventually fell for one of her co-workers, who was raised by a mother and father alone.

She was always discussing "one day taking a few lovers and raising a family." And he was always just kind of quiet, till one day stating that he was kin dof uncomfortable with her sharing another man, or him being with a woman other than her.

So they decided in the end to take on the "We'll stay with only each other, until the day comes that someone might interfere and cause emotions to run wild, then we'll discuss it, but no flings."

So the couple room up, have a child together, and profess themselves as lover to everyone.

Hehe, one day in a tavern, she pops off and starts talking about how so and so is her 'husband', to which another person responds, "Wow, the House must have plans for you, if they have you marrying a man!" and my character was like "Eh? House ain't marryin' us, he's just my husband, who the fek needs a contract to have a husband?"  :lol:

I'm not too sure how that relates to all this, but I can say that the joy of having such a broad range of options, that differ so much from our society, is part of what makes this game unbelievably addicting.

There's some 'loosely based' guidelines on what's accepted, and what isn't, but beyond that, I say to be creative with it all. Have one character who thinks it's absolutely sick that a man would wanna stick his thang in the same place that your wastes fall from. Have a girl who stays a virgin, because after a youth of whistles and cat calls, she -knows- she's too good to engage in such barbaric activites with a bunch of bumbling morons. Perhaps play a loose tavern gal who wants to, no, who HAS to sleep with more purse jingling bynners than that VNPC harlot at the back of the Gaj, who's always taking your man. And I'll stop those ideas, because I'll never catch AC.  :oops:

Creative freedom, without getting the imms mad enough to have Halaster kill you at the next HRPT... The lifeblood of this game.

[Anonymous]

I'll try to refrain from getting too esoteric here.  I apologize if that doesn't happen.  heh.

There are many factors, internal and external that function as 'drives' in animals (please forgive me if I lump people as inclusive in the term 'animal').  Of these, I think most would agree, that fear, hunger and desire are the strongest.  One could argue that physical hunger is a desire as well, but I'm seperating it here.

The sex drive is an incredibly strong and influential drive in sexually reproductive animals....and even plants.  I take the liberty of using the fact that threads regarding sex in Zalanthas are so frequent, and generate so much heated discussion to illustrate the power of the sex drive...at least in terrestrial humans.

Another strong 'drive' in terrestrial humans is curiosity.  Most mammals, especially predatory mammals are insatiably curious about their environment and the other beings who share it.  We are insatiably curious about sex.  We want to know what others think and feel about sex, to the point of being interested in hearing their intimate experiences.

With that in mind, I turn to Zalanthas.  A harsh, perhaps dying, desert world where only the strongest and fittest (in one way or another) survive.

Sure, some who could be considered 'weaker' live long enough to have offspring, but how many such people found dynasties?  I would be willing to say none.  Only the most powerful...physically, mentally, politically or financially in Zalanthas have founded family dynasties...where generations of people are able to survive and reproduce.

For the vast majority, the object is to find a mate and produce children before dying.  This is rather similar to many animals in the wild on Earth.

To that end, I believe sexual mores in most societies on Zalanthas would be fairly open.  Polygamy most likely being the norm (believe it or not, among terrestrial human societies, it is the norm...in spite of what religious and social organizations might say to the contrary.  There is firm ground to suggest that many, if not most of the marital problems in existence stem from the fact that humans are biologically geared toward polygamy, but in the socio-religiously repressive dominant societies, emotionally bent toward monogamy).

Polygamy offers many benefits which cannot be found in monogamous relationships.  First, the familial bonds in a polygamous system are extremely strong, and centered around producing and raising offspring.  Polygamy is far from being a 'swinger paradise'.  Most polygamous social groups consist of several males and females living communally in shared living space with shared work responsibilities.  
Most of these groups have at least the same number of females as males, and in many, there are more females than males.  Sex is usually one to one, and partners exchange frequently, although group sex among several members may take place occasionally.  Some partners develop emotional bonds which keep them gravitated together regardless of either having the tendency to have sex with others within the group.
Second, children are considered a group resource and a group responsibility, and in true polygamous cultures, (rather than sub-cultures within a larger monogamous culture), the father of the children is not always known.  Relations are descended through the mother, since it is always known who birthed whom.  
There is always at least one adult present to care for the children while the others work on providing basic survival resources for the group.  In long-standing groups, such as nomadic tribes, the elders of the tribe are truly sedentary in the home and provide social and spiritual guidance, in addition to child rearing, for the group.  Homosexuality exists, but is rare and bisexuality is frequent in polygamous groups, especially among the females, where it is an emotionally bonding element.

Considering that the polygamous tendencies of terrestrial humans are shared with all primate species to various extents and with various, differing mores and customs, I consider it to be a survival orientated social trait for primates, including humans.

In a world such as Zalanthas, I would suggest that monogamy is extremely rare.  Due to the nature of the harsh day to day struggle for survival, a communal group of shared emotional and sexual bonds between adults is a much more viable system than the monogamous system most of us are familiar with.  I honestly believe that monogamous couples, hetero or homosexual, would be viewed as strange and unseemly by the common people of Zalanthas.

In the more affluent and politically powerful social strata of Zalanthas, things may indeed be quite different, but this would be due to the constraints the class places upon itself as a custom of the elite, rather than the normal survival orientated social order of so-called 'commoners.'
Customs of the nobility and merchant Great Houses would include mores that, by design, seperate them uniquely from the masses.  Thus the monogamous marriage contracts between families, and the tendency of nobles and Merchant Great House members to demand sexual exclusivity from their commoner concubines.

Another difference to consider about Zalanthas is that females are as equally physically powerful as males of the various intelligent species.
The only time I can see where a woman on Zalanthas would be weaker is during pregnancy and child-birth.  In a polygamous group such as I've described above, this would hardly be a bother.  Others in the group would look after the pregnant female and see to her survival needs during this vulnerable time until she gave birth and recovered from post partum.

Although most of what I've covered is geared toward the populous city-states, to various degrees it would hold true for the various smaller populations scattered across the Known World.  At least....in my opinion.
:twisted:

[naatok]

Sorry.  that last post was by the Naughty Monkey.  I guess I timed out while writing it.   :evil:

[Rindan]

Personally, I avoid MUD sex.  I have no morals against it, I just personally find it takes role playing to a pit I don't want to touch.  It just comes off as cheap prono in my opinion.  I played an RP wiz on another MUD ages ago long enough to find it too silly for words.  To each their own, but I think I'll just stick to the real thing.  I can get sex in the real world without much problem, it is the constant death, destruction, and other assorted features of Zalanthas that I crave.

As to having 'virtual' sex with VNPCs, I say go for it.  I had a particularly vile mercenary at one point who made a good deal of money.  Every now and then he took a break from his regular line of work to go hit up Red Storm where he would blow his 'sid on spice, drink himself stupid, and by all accounts screw anything that moved.  I didn't have a problem coming back from Storm claiming I had gotten it on with a few whores.   It certainly fit my character's personality and no one ever doubted the stories.

If someone is claiming they slept with a noble, then you are probably pushing the line.  Claiming you got your rocks off with your local whore or even some virtual commoner is a-okay in my opinion.

[Akaramu]

I have no morals against it, I just personally find it takes role playing to a pit I don't want to touch.  It just comes off as cheap prono in my opinion.

It doesnt have to be cheap porno. If I happen to be in the right mood for it I make it clear that I detest smutty language, and I dont go into anatomical details. Besides, describing a passionnate kiss or the tease while both partners are still dressed is usually more entertaining than the actual mudsex. I tend to fade to black before I go too far.

[Krath]

*shrug* When it comes to RPing "porno" scenes, I just fade to black, give a comical shout or two for the people in the nearby rooms and go get a coke or something to eat for the time to elapse. It turns out to be fun and enjoyable.

[Seeker]

Part of the issue is that, it seems, the whole concept of romantic love is not as universally enmeshed in Zalanthas culture.  

I do believe that the smallest unit for survival of humans is two individuals.  Not just from a reproductive standpoint, but because we simply require to be heard and to hear, see and to be seen to be complete.  But it does not follow that this unit of survival and completeness must always be the -same- two individuals.  

A unit of three is, arguably, better because death comes quick, and trust takes a long time to build.  In case of death, this leaves the remaining two as an interacting whole, still.

I just do not see, in Arm, the whole concept of "we were made for each other", or the concept of "soul-mates".   I tend to see it more as an openness and gratefulness to find -anyone- worthy to trust and share with.  I think that this type of grateful, cautious trust is probably the basis of relationships more than concepts of True Love and Destinies of the Single Heart in Two Bodies.  

Romantic Love seems to imply that it is not true if it spills beyond two people, it is somehow weakened and impure.  Trust implies that its value lies in the trueness of the individual, regardless of how many share and interact with that individual.  A person in Love is not -really- in love if he shares that feeling and actions with more than that one special Other.  A person to be trusted is a person to be trusted, perhaps even more so, because he shows that trustworthiness to other people as well.

Sex will always be part of human interaction.  I think on Zalanthas, though, that most people have such a hard life, that there are just very few fantasies about its nature.  It is some measure of trust, it is pleasure, it is relief, it is power, it is a tool.  Just not so much a sacrament of We Two are Now One Person Now and Forever.

As far as how the average commoner reacts to other's sexuality, I think the issues would not be who is with who, or how, but rather whether their sexual choices were a wise choice to help keep them alive.  I think there is far less stigma attached to seeking relief with a paid sexworker, then going, needy and vulnerable, to strangers.  My understanding is that Zalanthians value survival over most everything.


Seeker

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Believe it or not, the moral concepts of Christianity color even the typical modern Athiest's view of morals and rights and wrongs.

There is no Christianity in Zalanthas. Consider this, and then refine your roleplay accordingly. You'll find a far different mindset in hand.

[naatok]

The7DeadlyVenomz wrote:

"There is no Christianity in Zalanthas. Consider this, and then refine your roleplay accordingly. You'll find a far different mindset in hand."

When I contemplate the virtues of non-Christian morality, I usually find something VASTLY different from a 'mindset' in hand."

:twisted:

Sorry.  I simply couldn't resist.

[Cenghiz]

*grins evilly* A little bit IC but, playing my second female char.. I'll fade for sure, do not ask why....
Ma' girlfriend tells me that I'm more feminine after I started playing this char.. Is there suck a risk playing the opposite sex?


.... anyway, sorry if I was more clownish than I planned to....

[EvilRoeSlade]

I can get sex in the real world without much problem, it is the constant death, destruction, and other assorted features of Zalanthas that I crave.

Yes, exactly.  Mudsex is for those of us who can't.

[Bestatte]

Yeah, what ERS said. Or maybe we can but don't wanna! Or maybe it's just another aspect of RP that can be fun to explore on occasion. Or maybe you really need it for your character's development.. you know, the virgin who gets kanked for the first time and you really would like to know how she responds and reacts to various things. You can't do that with a fade, because it's all assumed. Nothing so bland as:

Chick with traumatic history gets banged for the first time.
Dood fades to black and says "ok we did it"
Chick's player oocs, 'so, um, what did we do, so I know if I'm sore and walking around happy/sad/traumatized..."
dood's player oocs, "whatev"
Chick's player sits there thinking, "Huh?"

I hate not knowing what happened, or having to guess, or spend an hour OOCing the situation. If I have to OOC the situation just to give my character some idea of how she's reacting to something, I'd rather just RP it out.

Not that I've RPed it out much in Arm - I think 4 times total in all the opportunities my various characters have had. Lots of fun fades though. I love emoting a good fade!

[Comrade Canadia]

Believe it or not, the moral concepts of Christianity color even the typical modern Athiest's view of morals and rights and wrongs.

There is no Christianity in Zalanthas. Consider this, and then refine your roleplay accordingly. You'll find a far different mindset in hand.

Sorry dude, wrong.  Christian values are alive and well in Zalanthas, no matter how hard anyone pretends otherwise.  When I log onto armag, I do not see hard bitten desert people with alien values and ethics - I see the adolescent fantasies of a bunch of North American college students and thirty something divorcees.  My adolescent fantasies are included in this bunch, but our concepts of gender, sex, right and wrong, and all that fun stuff are imposed on armag, and all we can do is 'bend' the rules.

I mean, men and women are supposedly equal on this mud - and I call bullshit.  There's no real need to get into examples, but sexism is alive and well on armag... albeit in a lighter form.  Beyond that, if the genders were equal, ideas like homosexuality, marriage, and maybe even monogamy wouldn't even exist as we know them.  It's my greatest problem with armag, it tries to have a very different and alien culture, but just can't do it because everyone wants to populate it with knights in shining armour and fair damsels in distress.

ANyways - refining your roleplay accordingly is almost impossible.  All you can do is alleviate the symptoms of this sort of thing.  You can treat men and women equally, and try to avoid these Christian values... but it's artificial.  There's no social -history- on armag of any different set of values, as the entire history of the mud has been structured by people unintentionally forcing their own Christian values on the game.  Acting otherwise is admirable, and I try to do it, but my actions are -still- tainted by the fact that this hard-bitten desert warrior is played by a 23 year old university student in Canada.

Hm.  That was cynical.  Oh well.  Mud is still fun.

-Der Comrade[/quote]

[grog]

I can get sex in the real world without much problem, it is the constant death, destruction, and other assorted features of Zalanthas that I crave.

Yes, exactly.  Mudsex is for those of us who can't.

I'm a virgin in the real world, but I'm not that interested in mudsex.  But I'm generally regarded as weird.

[UnderSeven]

Believe it or not, the moral concepts of Christianity color even the typical modern Athiest's view of morals and rights and wrongs.

There is no Christianity in Zalanthas. Consider this, and then refine your roleplay accordingly. You'll find a far different mindset in hand.

See now I agree, you're wrong here.  While it may not be christianity, remeber where Christianity got it's roots in the first place?  A bunch of nomadic desert tribes.  So to say that Zalathanus might not have these values some where or another by comming up with them on their own?  Well that's a little hard of a pill to swallow.

People who try to say the game is one way and quote help files to then tell you why you're rping wrong make me sick.  It's not a one sided, one cultured game.  A statement like above while is true in the sense christianity doesn't exist on arm, is false in that such values could exist in many different ways.

[flurry]

This brings us around to sexuality, which I suggest follows in similar vein.  I have seen a few instances of roleplayed revulsion between 'species' which holds a degree of safety, but I suggest that the roleplay of sexual discrimination between those of the same 'species' strikes too close to the RL issues of the day for people to play comfortably, which I suspect is a very large reason for its absence in-game, from a player and staff perspective.  

In summation, I suggest that the greater struggle for life on Zalanthas as a whole as opposed to ol' planet Earth would indeed cultivate a deeper divisiveness along all issues as people factionalize and marginalize into ever smaller and more manageable groups for the purposes of the feeling of enforced safety and clannishness such bigotry provides, as well as the greater hearts-ease of 'reclaiming resources' from beings that are clearly 'inferior' or 'degenerate', as opposed to just killin' fellow sentient beings just to take their loot.

I've been meaning to write a response to this since I saw it on the first page, but I never got around to it.

I don't doubt that part of the OOC motivation for Zalanthans to be accepting/apathetic about sexual preferences was to cut down on some things that might hit too close to home for some players.   However, I also find it completely plausible and really no less believible at all than the alternative.  

The way I look at it is that prejudice against sexual orientation is pretty arbitrary.   Take religious concerns out of the equation, and there's really no rational reason that there would be more prejudice based on sexual orientation than there would be based on eye color or left-handedness or what you eat or whether your hair is straight or curly.   So since it's pretty arbitrary, I see no reason that it would be more believable that this type of prejudice would exist in Zalanthas than that it wouldn't.    In other words, why would there be more reason to expect homophobia than there would be more reason to expect hatred toward people with cleft chins or people who like their mekillot steaks cooked well done?    I don't see any.  So the way things are seems perfectly believable to me.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Believe it or not, the moral concepts of Christianity color even the typical modern Athiest's view of morals and rights and wrongs.

There is no Christianity in Zalanthas. Consider this, and then refine your roleplay accordingly. You'll find a far different mindset in hand.

See now I agree, you're wrong here.  While it may not be christianity, remeber where Christianity got it's roots in the first place?  A bunch of nomadic desert tribes.  So to say that Zalathanus might not have these values some where or another by comming up with them on their own?  Well that's a little hard of a pill to swallow.

People who try to say the game is one way and quote help files to then tell you why you're rping wrong make me sick.  It's not a one sided, one cultured game.  A statement like above while is true in the sense christianity doesn't exist on arm, is false in that such values could exist in many different ways.

Well, whatever. Argue if you like. I'm still correct. By the way, Christianity got its roots from a single man and his teachings, as well as a singular religion. Argue with that as well, if you like. I'm still correct.

Regardless, my point was not to start some religious discussion, but rather to point out the fact that Zalanthan and Modern ethics and morals are different...vastly so. If you perhaps missed my point, and I stated it too obtusely in previous posts, there you go, in layman's terms.

[UnderSeven]

Gah, you missed my point too, let me explain:

Monogamy is not a soley christian view, if anything they're just the place we're most used to hearing it.  It's actually a natrual way things can be done, there are some animals that actually practice it.  Poligomy is just yet another way.  

My point is, take away christianity or ANY modern reasons for us having the views we do and there may very well yet be perfectly logical reasons to come up with the same views.  I hate to say it (actually I don't) but christianity wasn't that clever or creative with it's morals, infact I think you can find the same thing in several different faiths.  

I really hate people who try to say arm is one way or arm is another, just because it's their view.  Armageddon can have varying people of varying oppinions you know.  They can have people who see the world one way and people who see the world another way.  

And I wish people would stop bringing up that security issue and harshness of survival.  Just because our lives are not on the edge all the time with the possibility of death over our every move doesn't mean that hasn't happen.  I think historically people in the same position your typical armageddon person is in is very common and yet they still have ranging beliefs and ranging morality.  

I really don't care how anyone plays their char, I just for the love of god want to stop hearing people who tell you that one way is right and another is wrong using half baked reasons to do it.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Ok. I'll agree then, in that case. I find Christianity the most prevelant force upon morals and ethics in the real world...therefore, I simply used that to point out the difference in cultures between our world and Zalanthas.

I'd say that the thing that would be a constant here or there would be that thing which is called 'the little voice on my shoulder'. I'd think that single thing is the same here or there, and would be the most listened to influence upon one's actions.

Given that senario, morals and ethics would still exist. But many things that we find odd in today's society would be ok in a society such as Zalanthas's.

[Quirk]

Monogamy is not a soley christian view, if anything they're just the place we're most used to hearing it.  It's actually a natrual way things can be done, there are some animals that actually practice it.  Poligomy is just yet another way.

Yeah, what he said. The Romans were mainly monogamous, as were the Greeks at many points in their history. The commoner Egyptians were usually monogamous, although their higher classes generally were not. China has been mostly monogamous for the last several thousand years. None of those races or nations were at all Christian.

There is also plenty of precedent for polygamy in history, of course, particularly among the richer members of society, and I'm not saying there isn't, merely that monogamy should not be seen merely as some odd effect of Christian morality.

Quirk

[Candi]

Sorry to tear you all away from the "fascinating" topic of the bearing of Christianity on the moral evolution of modern society and the history of sexual development in the civilized world, but I HAD to have a bit of a giggle about the topic of cyber-sex in Zalanthas.  I was quite impressed as I skimmed some of the other replies...after all, it takes real literary talent to make sex sound boring.
    I read through these postings, and I have to say that I found this little peek into the mind-set of the average Armageddon player to be too much fun not to comment on.     The funny thing from my point of view stems from my background with MUDs.  I used to be Totally into Achaea, I have a very powerful character there and still have lots of friends that I made in-game.  (Don't hate me because I'm shallow, I also played D&D , Arduin, and Hackmaster faithfully for years. :wink: )  Cybering in Achaea is almost literally where 98% of the RP talent is directed for the average player.  They may be totally OOC spending the majority of time mingling, having laughs, bashing beasts, etc. in a relaxed, careless, casual way...but you get into their "cyber-pants" and...Boy, they are all business now! They go from not emoting anything that isn't a preprogrammed "social" to paragraph long detailed descriptions of every breath and movement.  :shock:  Suddenly the bumbling basher skipping his way mindlessly through the MUD becomes a libido-driven poet of monumental proportions.  Does anyone else see the irony here?      
    Now here we have Armageddon, where RP is consistent and intense, * coughs *...evidently for many players just up to the point where you drop your towel...then we suddenly step back and "fade to black".   How funny is that by the way..."fade to black".  I laugh every time I type it. "Fade to black" There, I'm laughing again right now.   :lol:  But Hey, I kid!  The person who is a 98% IC player is suddenly too indignant to contemplate muddying their performance with smut (btw: I'm not talking about You, I just meant all the Other ones. :mrgreen: )  I gotta tell you, smut is fun people!  Come on, stoop down to my level, the view may not be as grandiose, but it's much more intriguing.  :twisted:  
    I think it's a serious "hoot" that many of you find taking the time to emote that you are carefully dipping your spoon into your stew to be much more fulfilling than a well RPed animalistic sex romp.  Go figure!  Personally, I am a healthy all-American gal and I actually have real live S-E-X in the real life world.  Whoa boy, stay focused...I know for some of you I just became your hero.  Let's not digress.    The point:  Why wouldn't I want to emote having a good time when I am willing to emote picking straw out of my hair, scratching my neck, or laying out a bedroll and settling in to rest while I am in a room completely by myself?  I'm not too good to admit that I don't mind getting laid in-character and out.  But hey, that's just me. Perhaps, I'm just not the same quality of serious Thespian as many of you seem to be.  Perhaps someday I too will be a dignified beacon of light among the polluted sea that is the average RP.  Then I too, may don my "cyber-chastity belt" and "fade to black".   :wink:
    By the way, If you can't tell...this is all for fun...don't give me that pouty face.... I kid! I kid!     Jokes are not meant for the weak, do Miss Candi a favor, and don't give me any crap. :mrgreen:

[Bestatte]

I realize your post was made to bring a smile, and it does - honest!

However there's one thing you're forgetting, if there's a hint of serious "why can't we just have fun sometimes?" in your post. That is the time restraint involved. A really good, labido-inducing, one-handed-typing-inspiring cybersex session would normally last at -least- an hour. And that's if you skip most of the foreplay and move right up into the heavy thrusting.

An hour of real time is an entire day in Armageddon. An entire day of sex - well let's just put it this way: required sparring sessions for clan schedules generally only last 20 RL minutes for a reason, eh?

I'm all for the occasional complete and utter disregard for game time and let's get nekked and sweaty BAYBEE sex session. But for the most part, it's just way too unrealistic given the time constraints of the game to get into it all that often. And so a fade to black, or even getting into the foreplay, then a nice 2-emote fade like.. so and so lifts off you and rolls over after a few hours of wild passionate monkey-sex and lights up a thick tube of spice...is really all you have time to type before it's time to meet your hunting buddies, or your lieutenant for sparring practice, or whatever.

Unless you're an Arabet, whose primary function seems to be to have sex, or a dwarf, who could possibly create a focus to set some kind of kinky record, there just isn't room for that much cybersex in any given character's life.

I would also add that my opinion on the whole time issue extends to people who insist on taking a good 10 minutes to send 5 emotes describing every movement they take to get from the door to their seat at the table in the bar. I find that equally distracting, disruptive, and pointless. By the time they've sat down, it's time for me to get up. Nice talking to ya, we autta do this again some time REAL soon, c-ya kthxbye.

[EvilRoeSlade]

After Candi's interesting and informative post, I get the sinking feeling that this thread is being followed by people from other sectors of the gaming community and world wide web...

People who are subsequently laughing their asses off at us.

[ShaLeah]

I'll be brief, all these things have been said before.

People seem to have a problem with sexuality on Zalanthas OOC'ly. So frequent does this topic come up that after 2 years, I can not believe we haven't come up with some kind of understanding, some kind of neutral ground on it.

Why, I don't understand this, why do people look down on people who emote that kind of thing out? Why, when it's 2004, are we still with the mind frame that sex is bad?  Comments like "whose primary function seems to be to have sex", seemingly ho-hum but used in a way to make it seem more like... "whose primary function seems to be to have sex and therefore can't do anything but so they must be mudsexing twinks".


Here's what I think... Roleplay it, don't roleplay it, entirely up to you.
I can't believe people aren't sick of this discussion.


Oh! And I might add:

Players are required to maintain a high level of roleplay at all times, and our standards are demanding.

-She who got a mental image of the Immortals watching events like the olympics, holding up cards with scores on them for each player.

[John]

Zalanthas differs from ancient Greece in the fact that heterosexuals in homosexual relationships wouldn't be the norm.

Why would it differ? Other then Zalanthas not being ancient Greece

how do you handle people who start playing their characters as thinking less of your own PC because she/he has sex with a lot of people?

I generally treat them the same way I treat people whose parents refuse to let their kids go to their friends places. I pity them that they can't enjoy a perfectly reasonable part of life.

What would the polygamous population of Zalanthas say to someone who was taking the attitude that sex with multiple people means you are less honorable than someone who is monogamous?

I'd just treat them the same way I'd treat Zalanthan vegetarians. Prigs who need a reality check.

And how do you deal with these attitudes over time when the PC doesn't change opinions because the player doesn't know sexuality Armageddon-style? (granted, many people do change how they play this)

If they're still a newbie, I try to cut them a fair amount of slack, unless they make it REALLY obvious (such as bring it up every single time I see them).

nobody gives a damn, not only across genders but often apparently across different sub-species as well. It doesn't quite ring true.

According to the docs, people are SUPPOSE to treat those that have sex across species as disgusting people (the only people who would probably not have a problem are muls and half-elfs, half-elfs themselves would probably see having sex with another half-elf as disgusting). However based on how people treat half-elves, the docs are quite possibly ignored in this regard. I've only made the mistake of cross-species sex once (when I was a newbie) and DID have a person disgusted at the mere thought of me having sex with an elf. But I've never encountered it since then.

There are no instances in Zalanthas of 'dark-skinned' or 'red-haired', or 'narrow-eyed' or 'blue-eyed' individuals harboring animosities toward each other based on those differences, not when there are 'skinnies', 'baldies' and 'bugs' that can be safely hated and discriminated against through roleplay with out feeling pangs of conscience in RL.

That's a really good point. I'm sure we've all seen the documentaries where people go on about how they use to hate another group of people cause of their hair. You also have people who hate you because of where you grew up "oh, you grew up on Miners Road? Those people are such fucks." There is also some (little-hearted) discrimination against people who grew up in small villages. Yet none of that happens in Zalanthas, a supposedly harsh world. I think there could definitely be some more discrimination in Arm I have been experimenting with characters who discriminate based on clothing lately. Easiest being to hate those that are REALLY REALLY REALLY poorly dressed and assume their 'rinthers who're trying to steal some money (don't need a 'rinther accent either). I don't see any of these really being all that bad, as in real life it isn't too bad, and could make things a bit more interesting.

I suggest that the roleplay of sexual discrimination between those of the same 'species' strikes too close to the RL issues of the day for people to play comfortably, which I suspect is a very large reason for its absence in-game, from a player and staff perspective.

I'd definitely say that's the case (at least it is for me). The staff have said (in docs and posts) that there is no gender discrimination or sexual preference discrimination amongst your normal every day person as well. So it's also a staff decision to not include this form of discrimination in the game, because they (probably) feel it would hit a bit too close to home

I rarely see actual polyamory.

I tend to stick it in my backgrounds. I'd also love to have the chance to RP it out, but I don't live long enough to have relationships

[Angela Christine]

The person who is a 98% IC player is suddenly too indignant to contemplate muddying their performance with smut (btw: I'm not talking about You, I just meant all the Other ones. :mrgreen: )  I gotta tell you, smut is fun people!  

There are a few factors in play here, but the important part is that it is a-ok to roleplay through intimate situations if all the people involved want to.  If you decide to do it on the balcony of the Bard's Barrel or the Byn barracks there may be realistic IC consequences, ranging from wolf-whistles to a visit with a Templar who just happened to be walking by and didn't want to see your grubby commoner ass in the air, to a thief who takes your moment of distraction as a good opportunity to steal your pants.  If there is ever a good time to sap, backstab or steal from a person it's while they are distracted by a hot piece of ass.  OOCly, there is no problem with mudsexing yourself blue in the face if you want to, as long as it is appropriate behavior for your character, and most characters would be happy to get laid.

The tricky part is that some people don't want to be involved in it, sexual roleplay isn't what they are looking for.  So there are some conventions around it.  Like if you are using the "review" flag you turn it off before you get oiled up, just as a courtesy.  

You have to get OOC consent, that is that everyone has to clearly agree to play out the senario, because some people do have OOC things that make watching or participating in a sex scene uncomfortable for them.  That goes double for a rape or torture scene.  You can rape someone without IC permission (duh, if you had permission it wouldn't be rape) but since the other _Player_ may not want to see that, you have to get OOC permsion to emote it out blow by blow.  That makes sense.

Some people find sex really funny if they aren't actually turned on.  The sounds, the smells, the whole situation.  Despite what romance novels would have us belive, many of the parts involved are kinda funny looking.  Describing the body parts involved means using words that are either clinical, insulting, or absurd.  Can anyone really read phrases like "steely manhood" or "honey hole" and not break out laughing?  I tried buying a copy of Playgirl once, the pictures certainly didn't get me hot, mostly it was all pretty funny looking.  Thinking "hey, maybe this means I'm gay" I got a copy of Hustler, but those pictures were all pretty funny looking too.  Genitals are funny looking, and pretty disappointing if you've been reading stories describing things "standing at attention," being "ramrod straight" or "velvet steal" and don't even get me started on "openening like a flower."    Is there anything inherently less sexy than mucus?  Yet mucus is an essential part of sex.  (Possibly proving that God or Mother Nature has a sense of humour).  To me mudsex is pure comic relief.  Oh, and don't forget the high mutation rate, some characters may have a surprise waiting for you under their loincloth.  I once had a PC with vaginal teeth, saddly she didn't ever get to show them off.  :mrgreen:

Other people may just be uncertain about how to go about it.  They may or may not be virgins, but they are on-line virgins.  No mud-sex, not chat-sex, no email-sex.  They don't no how one goes about describing the scene, they've never done it and they've never seen it done.  The people making out on the balcony of the Bard's Barrel may be performing a public service, allowing an audience to stand on the street below and watch.  :twisted:  If you want to help, perhaps you could post some cybersex logs on your website, so all the mudsex virgins can see how it is done.

Then there are people who are concerned about the legal issues.  There is no way to tell absolutely who is on the other computer.  If it is a minor and Mansa's mom sees it, than you could get into trouble for corrupting a minor or something even worse.  "I swear, she typed like she was 18" will get you even less sympathy than claiming she looked like she was 18.  The danger probably isn't that great, but it is something some people are concerned about.  There are plenty of people playing here that are over 30, if it turns out that their mudsex buddy was only 14 then the authorities will tend to assume the adult knew it and is a pedophilic sexual predator.  An 18 or 19 year old might get away with it, a 45 year old probably won't.

Many people have had unpleasant sexual experience in real life.  They may want to allow their character to have a warm, loving relationship but not want to roleplay through penetration because it is unsettling for them.  The consent rule protects them, allowing them to go as far as they are comfortable without feeling they need to do something they really do not want to do just to prove they are good roleplayers.

There are many reasons to not emote through a sexual situation, and many players that choose not to.

There are also reasons to do it.  Some players find it fun.  Some want to know -exactly- what happened because the details will effect their character's development.  For example: was it your basic missionary shag, or something more exotic?  Did the first person to "finish" want to just roll over and go to sleep, or did they keep giving their all untill everyone involved was satisfied with the outcome?  Some players are just so elite that they have to emote the exact maner in which the slurp their soup or take a shit, and they use the same high standards when it comes to describing the way they grind their hips or the way their pupils dialate when they are really turned on.

Do it.  Don't do it.  Despite what you may get from the GDB crowd, I doubt most players care what your character does in private.

AC

[Bestatte]

Well since Shaleah used quotation marks to make her comment and incredibly wrong assumption (you know what happens when you assume), and I'm the only one who put what she quoted into those exact words...I'll respond as if it was directed toward me.

The reason I said "it seems" the Arabet don't do much else besides have sex, is because the *official* documentation clearly states that the Arabet are an incredibly libido-driven group.  If you took my comments personally, perhaps you might want to look at your own behaviors and ask yourself why you took them that way. I have no idea who you play, and so obviously my comments couldn't possibly have been directed toward you.

I've met a few Arabet PCs over the past year. Some seem to be all about the sex. Some focus more on their dancing and being graceful in their movements. If you'll re-read that paragraph - in fact, that exact sentence, you'll see that I was using the Arabet as a humorous semi-tongue-in-cheek example to show why most people would -not- spend all that much *real life* time under the sheets. Unless you're an Arabet, or a dwarf with a kinky focus - I mean really, MUST I add those insipid smiley faces after every thought?

Your sentence was sandwiched in an entire paragraph that complained about why some people can't stand knowing that there are mudsexers. And since you used my quote as your example, it seems (see that? it seems! Not it is, not YOU DID THIS..wow) as though the entire paragraph was directed toward me. I'll direct you to the paragraph preceding the one you quoted, where I stated (emphatically I might add)....

I'm all for the occasional complete and utter disregard for game time and let's get nekked and sweaty BAYBEE sex session.

So you can see that I have no problem with mudsex, as things go. I also have no problem with characters portrayed as people with healthy libidos. But (here it is again!!!!) UNLESS those characters are Arabets - who SEEM to be primarily concerned with sex and sensuality, or dwarves with a kinky focus, I don't think it's realistic or even much fun to have to interact with characters who show up for the -express- purpose of getting laid.

Try real hard to -not- read between the lines of my posts, Shaleah. I generally keep them nice and neat and clear of innuendo or hidden meanings.

-She who loathes smiley faces

[Candi]

I was eager to see what kind of response I would get from my post.  I was hoping for something that would really make me laugh.
And the Golden Cookie goes to.... AngelaChristine for

To me mudsex is pure comic relief. Oh, and don't forget the high mutation rate, some characters may have a surprise waiting for you under their loincloth. I once had a PC with vaginal teeth, saddly she didn't ever get to show them off.  

*takes off her hat, sweeping it through the air and resting it upon her chest, and performs a low, exaggerated bow*  I salute you! :mrgreen:

[ShaLeah]

Try real hard to -not- read between the lines of my posts, Shaleah. I generally keep them nice and neat and clear of innuendo or hidden meanings.

Umm... okay.  *chuckle*

If you took my comments personally, perhaps you might want to look at your own behaviors and ask yourself why you took them that way. I have no idea who you play, and so obviously my comments couldn't possibly have been directed toward you.

I didn't take your comment "personally" Bestatte, I took your comment literally.

Unless you're an Arabet, whose primary function seems to be to have sex, or a dwarf, who could possibly create a focus to set some kind of kinky record, there just isn't room for that much cybersex in any given character's life.

That comment could be seen as insulting. -You- clearly don't believe so and as a result of my using your comment as an example of typical, anti-sexual-roleplay behaviour, you felt the need to retort as if I had personally attacked you.

Try real hard to -not- read between the lines of -my- posts, Bestatte. I generally keep them nice and neat and clear of innuendo or hidden meanings.  If you took my comments personally, perhaps you might want to look at -your- own behaviors and ask yourself why you took them that way. I have no idea who you play, and so obviously my comments couldn't possibly have been directed toward you.  Next time, you can just ask me if I meant to say something to -you- rather than just use a comment you made as an example.

She who thinks people should practice what they preach... and lighten the fuck up   :wink:

[Mekeda]

I have to agree with Shaleah on this one. I took the comment about Arabet and dwarves with single minded sexual focuses as insulting as well. Having just reread the documentation on both dwarves AND Arabet, I do not see anything that states "These pc's are intended as blow up sexual toys, please roleplay them accordingly". What I see is a document that stresses the need to keep clan numbers up for a tribal clan that has no steady home terrain in a game that is harsh and brutal. I see a documentation that actually discusses how bloodlines are established and maintained and sets out details for a mating ceremony. Not a "hey baby, flip up that loincloth and bend over" ceremony. I think perhaps a large of the problem goes back to one simple statement.

If you do not like mudsex, don't do it: Don't talk about it, don't complain about it, don't hold yourself up as holier or purer than someone who does and don't nag endlessly and forever on the GDB about those who do practice netsex.

The game is multifaceted for a reason. Go whack a gurth if you don't want to go whack a dwarf. Whatever but for the love of all that is holy, can we PLEASE stop bashing people for chosing to roleplay out the intimate details of their characters lives?

This message expresses the opinions of this staff member only and is not designed to reflect the feelings of the staff as a whole. Limited time offer. Send 4.95 for shipping and handling and allow 6 to 8 years for delivery.



Mekeda

[John]

What I see is a document that stresses the need to keep clan numbers up for a tribal clan that has no steady home terrain in a game that is harsh and brutal.

I find people's reaction to that interesting then. *goes off and reads the docs*

Yeah. I don't see anything saying that "Arabet's are sexaholics." I see a doc that goes on about families and keeping the population alive. I've also had tribals whose traditions went from having an orgy once and never ever having sex again, to leaving the tribe for extended periods of time and coming back to bonk every female to them having to bonk females as a job and bonking guys for pleasure to seeing any form of sex as a duty and not a pleasureable act.

One thing most of my tribals have in common is having sex ceremonies. This is because I don't like to play in the wilds with a VNPC tribe, but prefer to get sent off to scout or whatever. I then make that a typical aspect of certain people in my tribe so the need for sex ceremonies is quite large to keep the population up.

[Bestatte]

I agree with Mekeda that people who can't stand mudsex should refrain from discussing it.

That is why I have no problem discussing it - since I have stated clearly in my recent and previous posts in other threads - that I have nothing against it. I just really don't like having to RP -at all- with anyone who RPs with me for the singular purpose of mudsex, because it makes their character flat and one-dimensional, and it's not the primary reason I RP.

Fortunately I don't see much of that in Armageddon.

[Gorobei]

Zalanthas differs from ancient Greece in the fact that heterosexuals in homosexual relationships wouldn't be the norm.

Why would it differ? Other then Zalanthas not being ancient Greece

In ancient Greece, if I've been correctly informed, the belief was that women were soil to plant your seed, and men were the only beings you could share true love with.  It was a sign of status to have a sexual relationship with your superiors, as well, and was standard practise.
What I meant was, on Zalanthas is wouldn't really matter who's bed your sharing, so heterosexuals would generally have heterosexual relationships.  Same goes for homosexuals.  Therefore, most people would be having heterosexual relationships, and nothing else.

[Guest]

May I have your In-Game Way-Number, Candi?

*emotes the best mudsex ever emoted in the history of Armageddon to seduce Candi*

This is not the actual emote, this is only a tribute to the best cybersex session you've ever had.

[Anonymous]

May I have your In-Game Way-Number, Candi?

*emotes the best mudsex ever emoted in the history of Armageddon to seduce Candi*

This is not the actual emote, this is only a tribute to the best cybersex session you've ever had.

There shined a shiny demon....in the middle...of the mudsex.  AND HE SAID

[naatok]

Um, sex is dirty.  Um-kay.
And mudsex is bad.  Um-kay.

Gods.  I dunno.  I somehow feel that the original focus of this thread just got lost somewhere along the way.  I keep coming back to it to see and occasionally post because, like most primates and all homonid species in existence (sapiens sapiens being the only one left at this time...that we know of), I'm just insatiably curious about what others are gonna say here on this topic!

I dunno who Miss Candi is, but girl...your post was quite amusing!  Thanks for your input and sarcastic wit.   :twisted:

The only problem I really see with roleplaying out a sexual scene (so long as only consenting adults are involved), is the RL to IC time ratio, as other have already pointed out.  But I've also had conversations last for DAYS IC.  Is it realistic for someone to talk for days and days?!  Hell no, but we do it in Zalanthas.  Why?  Because it is more important to maintain the IC integrity of the situation, and allow conversation/activity to develop than it is to conform to the time conventions of the game world.  So long as this doesn't happen all the time and disrupt what would be considered a normal flow of activity for a person's IC life, I see no freakin' problem with it...no matter what sort of IC interaction is going on.

Let's face it, folks.  If we all conformed completely to the time progression of Zalanthas, NOTHING ICly worthwhile would EVER get done in ArmageddonMud!  So why should sexual roleplay be any different?

Now that isn't to say that I think roleplayed sexual activity should last for days and days, and be engaged in every IC week.  That would be going overboard, and limit your character and game experience in alot of ways.

My interest in roleplayed sexual activity centers around the bonding experience.  Besides being nifty for procreation and tension release, sex is a BONDING experience between people.  No, I'm not trying to say that you should make room in your life to everyone you fuck (sometimes a fuck is just a fuck.  Somtimes it is deeper and more personal).  Characters in game should experience bonding and I've found that roleplaying out intimacy helps to create that in the game.

Sure, I like titillation.  Sure, erotic art and literature is titillating.  Sure sexual roleplay often falls into that category.  But the point of sexual roleplay with me isn't to get off.  That, I can do on my own, or with my mate.   :wink:

As for the talk about mucous and the other 'messy' aspects of sex.  What's wrong with mucous?  It coats the insides of your lungs, your esophagus, stomach, bowels, nose, constitutes the bulk of your sexual fluids....it's the body's primary defense against airborne disease!  But the BEST thing about mucous is that it's slippery and wet!

Sex is SUPPOSED to be a primal, messy, salty-sweet, sweaty, slippery, wet business.  IMHO that makes it all the more appealing.  I love the mess!!!
But, what do I know?  I'm just a dirty little monkey.

[Candi]

May I have your In-Game Way-Number, Candi?

*emotes the best mudsex ever emoted in the history of Armageddon to seduce Candi*

This is not the actual emote, this is only a tribute to the best cybersex session you've ever had.

*Claps her hands together merrily and Squeals with excitement*  :twisted:

(Just kidding! Please don't PM me about how this wouldn't be good RP, *crosses her eyes and sticks out her tongue*)