Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6287601" data-attributes="member: 4937">Hmmm.... I'm not sure I can actually explain myself in detail without violating board rules.  It's related however to my comment about not believing that things are arbitrary.  That things have reasons which are understandable in context.   Basically I'm saying that the particular set of mores you are expressing in DiBella, in conjunction with your desire to have her seen as a 'good' goddess is not an arbitrary set of ideas and desires.  I really would have thought however that the comment about birth control would have had some resonance, seeing how often the 'sexual revolution' is linked to the development of convenient and effective birth control.  As far as the technology goes, I'm just extending that line of thought, and connecting other revolutions in sexual mores to earlier technological developments. The same is true in my homebrew.  I really think that this is almost an inevitable conclusion of the D&D magic system.  You could change this trope, but only by radically reinventing the D&D magical system in ways that made it less reliable and more frightening.  After examining that possibility, I decided that it would be too difficult to run that as a game and probably not that fun for someone that wanted to be a wizard.  As far as your setting information about knowledge goes, I really like it.So do the people of your culture not have reasons for wearing clothes and having decency laws?  Note that medieval or ancient decency wasn't necessarily the same as ours - it wasn't that unusual for French women to go topless while working in the fields for example.  And of course almost all stone age cultures don't consider exposure of the female breast to be erotic.  To my mind it is an important question as to whether Im-Tinar considers whatever reasons that the culture may have for thinking exposing oneself is indecent or immodest are arbitrary, as if they sort of flipped a coin and said "Coin says flesh should be covered", or whether she actually considers them wrong.  For example, suppose the reasoning is, "We don't want anyone to feel ashamed by comparison to one far prettier than they are.  We don't want people to be judged primarily on the basis of physical attributes.  We would like to have a society were women can travel unaccompanied by men and still feel safe, as opposed to the [Greek] society where women have to be protected from inspiring eros in men."   Would Im-Tinar consider this arbitrary, or would she consider it wrong?I don't think that is lazy at all.  I think that is the opposite of lazy.  I think the English language, for all its expressiveness and adaptability, is particularly lazy with regards to words for desire and affection and in particular the word for love.</blockquote>

Verification