Would you allow this paladin in your game? (new fiction added 11/11/08)

[Kahuna Burger]

I think what he is saying is that the notions of today's general society were shaped by those early influences, even if those influences are not the reasons people would state today.

And I am saying that it is very much possible for someone to deliberately put aside that background for a moment and consider what prostitution means to a society and what it means about the role and value of sex, women, etc and come to a conclusion that has nothing to do with those early influences, even if it ends up somewhat agreeing with them. You might be suprized at the number of people who engage in just that sort of consideration, especially when they find that they cannot accept some of the other notions that came from the same influences. (then again, hey, you might not. )

I think that telling people what they believe or why they hold the beliefs they do is not only rude but often leads to making a fool of onesself. :\

 

[Rystil Arden]

And I am saying that it is very much possible for someone to deliberately put aside that background for a moment and consider what prostitution means to a society and what it means about the role and value of sex, women, etc and come to a conclusion that has nothing to do with those early influences, even if it ends up somewhat agreeing with them. You might be suprized at the number of people who engage in just that sort of consideration, especially when they find that they cannot accept some of the other notions that came from the same influences. (then again, hey, you might not. )

I think that telling people what they believe or why they hold the beliefs they do is not only rude but often leads to making a fool of onesself. :\

And I am saying that it is very much possible for someone to deliberately put aside that background for a moment and consider what prostitution means to a society and what it means about the role and value of sex, women, etc and come to a conclusion that has nothing to do with those early influences, even if it ends up somewhat agreeing with them.

You're absolutely right. And I'm certainly not disagreeing with you. I don't think he is either (from reading the part of his post you quoted). But what he is saying (I think, anyway) is that it is also very much possible for someone to deliberately put aside that background for a moment and consider what prostitution means to a society and what it means about the role and value of sex, women, etc and come to a conclusion that ends up completely disagreeing with them.

So therefore, unless you want to accept the early sources and just say something like 'It's Evil, end of story,' you rather need to say 'I have come to my own conclusions on this matter, and I think it is wrong. However, that doesn't mean that other people who are also not evil people cannot hold valid contradictory opinions.'

 

[Fighter1]

wow, religion, politics and telling people their opinions all in one neat little package! I gotta admit, I'm impressed.

Prostitution being amoral or immoral is an opinion that many people hold for many reasons. Telling someone what theirs is is pretty poor form. I'm uncomfortable with broad acceptance of prostitution for reasons that have zilch to do with the catholic church or "anti-sexuality". (which I acknowlege are political, so I'm gonna hold off.)

If anyone found this insulting in some way manner or form you have my humblest apologies.

 

[Fighter1]

I think what he is saying is that the notions of today's general society were shaped by those early influences, even if those influences are not the reasons people would state today. In some sense, this is true. It is quite surprising how many ideas that many people find to be common today (or at least some that one would think came earlier) originated in 10th-12th century that the church, as a political force in the middle ages, created for reasons that were often quite interesting (no divorces and crackdowns on 'legitimate' children versus bastards (as well as primogeniture)? 12th century reforms hoping to crack down on wars caused by angry fathers of the first wife that was thrown away for the second and succession wars, respectively. Complicated incest prohibitions that keep you from marrying third cousins? That's the escape clause for the no divorces thing for royals--you could pretty much always prove incest and have it annulled, like Eleanor of Aquitane did with her first husband before marrying Henry II, who was even *more* closesly related).

You hit it on the nose - thanks.

And to add, again, that applying anyone's moralities of today to an ancient setting does not hold water - people had a very different life for a wide variety of reaons (necessary , political, or otherwise) and a very different way of thinking.

 

[Fighter1]

And I am saying that it is very much possible for someone to deliberately put aside that background for a moment and consider what prostitution means to a society and what it means about the role and value of sex, women, etc and come to a conclusion that has nothing to do with those early influences, even if it ends up somewhat agreeing with them. You might be suprized at the number of people who engage in just that sort of consideration, especially when they find that they cannot accept some of the other notions that came from the same influences. (then again, hey, you might not. )

I think that telling people what they believe or why they hold the beliefs they do is not only rude but often leads to making a fool of onesself. :\

You're absolutely right. And I'm certainly not disagreeing with you. I don't think he is either (from reading the part of his post you quoted). But what he is saying (I think, anyway) is that it is also very much possible for someone to deliberately put aside that background for a moment and consider what prostitution means to a society and what it means about the role and value of sex, women, etc and come to a conclusion that ends up completely disagreeing with them.

Rystil is correct about what I am saying – to add – the whole idea of sex in general as being “wrong”, “taboo”, or “evil” spurns from a specific ideology of a VERY small group (I cannot recall the specific name of them) within the Catholic Church, which essentially ran Europe. There were thigns "taboo" already in place but not with the extremeism that one sees even today.

Regardless - without them society may very well be exactly as it is now.

But a point to be made is that from the Greeks to today; as pointed out directly or otherwise; many moralities that are politically motivated or the belief of a very, very small group may have formed significant portions of western society today. That being said; to bring it back to the original subject; as my original comments were intended to; is why, IMO, it is quite believable to have a lusty Paladin as his morality would not necessarily fall under the modern (or even post 12th century) Judeo/Christian belief system.

So therefore, unless you want to accept the early sources and just say something like 'It's Evil, end of story,' you rather need to say 'I have come to my own conclusions on this matter, and I think it is wrong. However, that doesn't mean that other people who are also not evil people cannot hold valid contradictory opinions.'

So very, very true

 

[Plane Sailing]

Fighter1, thanks for putting in the apology to any who may have misconstrued your remarks.

Kahuna Burger, I suggest you graciously accept Fighter1's apology and move back to discussions more directly related to the thread.

Remember all, that sharing our views and opinions on a topic is cool; if you think that someone is overstepping the line please report it to the moderators whose round-the-clock monitoring system should kick in quickly (we don't have moderators based all around the world for nothing!)

Cheers

 

[The Sigil]

I'd allow him.

As long as you made him a Paladin of Lust.

Personally, I don't care about RAW, or whatever.

It's an interesting background and character, the Goddess of Lust needs Paladins to protect her temples and worshippers and holy places.

So yeah, you'd be in.

Not to threadjack this thread, but IIRC, a paladin's God must be within one step of LG, no? In other words, LG, LN, or NG.

Maybe it's just me, but I tend to see "Lust" as more of a Chaotic trait - one that is about "personal freedom" rather than "order" - thus disqualifying said goddess from having paladins... anyone care to tackle a LG Goddess of Lust?

(And to further run on a tangent, why is it always a *Goddess* of Lust? Why not a *God* of Lust? Is it our own social norms which have "straight" men somewhat approving of female bi-/homosexuality ... but still a bit put off by male bi-/homosexuality, thus making the ultimate incarnation of Lust a bisexual female (but NOT a male) in their minds?)

--The Sigil

 

[Plane Sailing]

And to further run on a tangent, why is it always a *Goddess* of Lust? Why not a *God* of Lust?

Indeed, considering Eros, Pan, possibly even Baal (and Ishtar?) the Caananite gods which had formalised temple prostitution... Plenty of historical beliefs to choose from to model gods of lust.

Cheers

 

[shilsen]

(And to further run on a tangent, why is it always a *Goddess* of Lust? Why not a *God* of Lust? Is it our own social norms which have "straight" men somewhat approving of female bi-/homosexuality ... but still a bit put off by male bi-/homosexuality, thus making the ultimate incarnation of Lust a bisexual female (but NOT a male) in their minds?)

Interesting question. Are you talking about deities from real-world or fantasy religions? Off-hand, the first deity of lust who comes to mind for me is Aphrodite/Venus, followed closely by Eros (who is often somewhat feminized). I was going to mention Priapus, but his endowment is almost wholly a symbol of fertility and not really sexual.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Not to threadjack this thread, but IIRC, a paladin's God must be within one step of LG, no? In other words, LG, LN, or NG.

Maybe it's just me, but I tend to see "Lust" as more of a Chaotic trait - one that is about "personal freedom" rather than "order" - thus disqualifying said goddess from having paladins... anyone care to tackle a LG Goddess of Lust?

I could probably write up a LG god or goddess of fertility in a moment. It would almost certainly require virile males to do their "job" as regularly as possible (though perhaps seasonally, thanks to inherited rules from ancient times).

I'm not certain there every WERE gods specifically of lust. It's too narrow a concept, I think. Love, yes, but Love generally included lust in non-Christian cultures, without it being a problem (Although, I suppose one could make a case that several deities of "Love" were really sex/fertility gods that were "romanced up" by Christian historians hundreds of years later). There were also plenty of hysteria/debauchery-deities that included lust, yes, but they weren't specifically dedicated to it, and included many other appetites along with it.

The Occidental religions mostly threw all that stuff out in favor of heavy-duty wife-protection. But you see lots of that in all severely patriarchal social systems, across primates.