Pin-Up of the East

Discussions about the latest news in the Might and Magic community.

Moderators: Moderators, Celestial Heavens Staff

User avatar
theLuckyDragon
Round Table Knight
Round Table Knight
Posts: 4883
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby theLuckyDragon » Jun 9 2007, 6:00

Corribus wrote:What doesn't make sense is you stating "If I were to nitpick, I would say X" and then when I ask why you would say X, you say, "I didn't say X! I just said that I would say X if I was going to nitpick." But saying you were going to say X if you were going to nitpick basically is saying X, or that you have an affinity for X, and so I wanted to know why you believe in X. It's like saying, "If I was going to get some icecream, I'd want chocolate chip." And then when I ask you why you want chocolate chip, you say, "I didn't say I wanted chocolate ship. I just said I would want chocoalte chip IF I was going to get icecream." But obviously you like chocolate chip icecream, otherwise you wouldn't have said you wanted it if you were going to get icecream.


If I see different aspects of a problem it doesn't mean I have affinities with all of them, it means that I can see them, that I am aware of their existence as someone else's possible arguments, that I acknowledge them, but without delving deeper.

In this case, my "If I were to nitpick" statement could indeed be the argument of someone who doesn't believe that "They're all exploitation".

Corribus wrote:And now I have a headache. :)

I hope it passed. :)

Corribus wrote:
The point is that you obviously feel that exploiting sexual desire is worse than exploiting alcohol, tobacco, bad food or any other vice. Otherwise you wouldn't have added the nitpicking statement. That's fine for you to feel that way, btw. Obviously our society does feel that way. I want to know why, although I already have my own answer (on a society-scale) anyway. I want to know why YOU feel that way.


To be honest, I did feel that way before engaging into this discussion, but I had never given the issue very much thought -- it was an instinctual reaction of some sort. (Maybe having do to with your "answer on a society-scale"? It would be interesting to hear your theory). A tentative explanation of my reaction would be that maybe sex is fundamentally different from alcohol, tobacco and violence. The latter have a distinct negative connotation, at least in my mind, while the connotation of the former, in my mind, is primarily positive. So using something that I perceive as positive to SELL stuff, to gain MONEY, just doesn't click with me. However, as I said, this is just a tentative explanation, I can't guarantee this is the exact same process that determined my reactions.

I added the nitpicking statement because that's the way I discuss things. I always try to see other aspects. I don't believe doing this can endanger my own standpoint in any way.

But then my opinion changed because of your example with junk food killing more people than sex, and when the change occurred, it came naturally, as it makes very much sense.

What I want to stress is the fact that my initial reaction was instinctual, that it was something that I felt more than consciously thought.
"Not all those who wander are lost." -- JRRT

User avatar
Corribus
Round Table Knight
Round Table Knight
Posts: 4994
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: The Duchy of Xicmox IV

Postby Corribus » Jun 9 2007, 14:01

theLuckyDragon wrote:To be honest, I did feel that way before engaging into this discussion, but I had never given the issue very much thought -- it was an instinctual reaction of some sort. (Maybe having do to with your "answer on a society-scale"? It would be interesting to hear your theory). A tentative explanation of my reaction would be that maybe sex is fundamentally different from alcohol, tobacco and violence. The latter have a distinct negative connotation, at least in my mind, while the connotation of the former, in my mind, is primarily positive..

Let's see.. to put it into words.

In brief: believe the reason why sex (more to the pont, anything at all have to do with sex) is so taboo in our society derives from religion. Whether you are personally religious or not, Western society is founded on Christianity, and in particular (going way back) Roman Catholicism. Back in the day, the Church was extremely powerful, and thrived off of using threats and negaitve reinforcement to retain that power and keep everyone in line. You follow the rules, or you're excommunicated - or worse. One of the most efficient ways to control the people was to dictate what they can and cannot do, and what they can and connot enjoy, to in essence control exactly how people live their lives. Given that sex, one of the most basic and simple desires, that anyone can enjoy no matter how impovershed, it was crucial that the Church use our desire for sex to mantain control over the people. There was probably also an element of balance of power between the sexes (male versus female). By maintaining a laundry list of common deeds that were and were not sins - sins that needed to be recanted in Church, by priests, who collected tithes for offering their forgiveness - the Church thrived on stomping on people and herding them, emotionally, like cattle. Sex is something everyone, from the lowliest peasant through the King himself, desires, and thus a perfect activity for the Church to tax in this way. By turning sex, even such simple manifestations as innocent lust, into a sin the Church was able to wield it as a weapon to keep the common people under its heal. Over time, like anything that we are taught is bad, anything even remotely connected with sex became stigmatized, and the remnants of that treatment of such a natural thing still echos through our society.

Anyway, that's my brief take on it. I'm sure it's more complicated. But notice that societies NOT based on Christianity have a much more open, casual regard for sex and anything related to it. Particularly Americans are bad because of our puritan heritage.

I hope that made sense. I'm still half asleep. :)
"What men are poets who can speak of Jupiter if he were like a man, but if he is an immense spinning sphere of methane and ammonia must be silent?" - Richard P. Feynman

User avatar
theLuckyDragon
Round Table Knight
Round Table Knight
Posts: 4883
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Re: Pin-Up of the East

Postby theLuckyDragon » Jun 9 2007, 14:03

Moragauth wrote:... according to YOUR standards (ie not mine, not anyone else's who buys the product).


Then what the heck is the purpose of this discussion? Why the heck to we have minds to think with and fingers to type with if we can't share our opinions? Because that's what we're doing, not whining.

@Corribus
It did make sense. Though you could have simply said "Christian foundations of Western society" and I'd have understood. :)

I hope that made sense. I'm still half asleep.

Morning around there, right? Early morning?
"Not all those who wander are lost." -- JRRT

User avatar
Jolly Joker
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 3316
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby Jolly Joker » Jun 9 2007, 17:51

@Corribus
The reason is right, but the reasoning not. It hasn't got to do that much with power.
To get this deep under the skin of a culture people must really BELIEVE the crap. They really DID believe it, most of them anyway. I'm not in the mood just now to write something lengthy, but one thing to keep in mind is that the Puritans were protestants (Lutherians), not Catholics (!). It's a universal problem for the Christian culture that's still more or less fully in effect.

User avatar
Cleanpea
Demon
Demon
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Pin-Up of the East

Postby Cleanpea » Jun 9 2007, 18:41

Sexual intercourse before condoms must have been risky outside of marriage. Better then, to wait until married, unless you wanted plenty of kids to go with the bride. Are those that run away from fatherhood, sinning against the impregnated woman? And the law; no sex outside of marriage, does it not make sense?

User avatar
Jolly Joker
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 3316
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby Jolly Joker » Jun 9 2007, 19:07

You have ti mahe a difference between sex as in necessary to reproduce and sex as in just for FUN (and note that this is STILL soméwhat a problem today for the Catholic Church).
And now imagine a monastery with a couple dozen monks in it in the midsle ages. They are supposed to fight the temptations of the flesh and conscentrate on the spirit. Let's tentatively say that this is not all that easy for the young monks, especially since most have had a life outside the monastery ast least until they've become a youth and they might have been in love or something, so they do have some images that worm themselves into their minds in hot summer nights...
So the flesh is rather wayward and who gets the blame (because there must be someone or something to blame ecause they try so hard, do they)? And here we have the next collaboration between Satan and Eva who tempt all those hard-trying, believing monks and clerics.

User avatar
Grumpy Old Wizard
Round Table Knight
Round Table Knight
Posts: 2205
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Tower Grump

Postby Grumpy Old Wizard » Jun 9 2007, 19:16

Corribus wrote:In brief: believe the reason why sex (more to the pont, anything at all have to do with sex) is so taboo in our society derives from religion. Whether you are personally religious or not, Western society is founded on Christianity, and in particular (going way back) Roman Catholicism. Back in the day, the Church was extremely powerful, and thrived off of using threats and negaitve reinforcement to retain that power and keep everyone in line. You follow the rules, or you're excommunicated - or worse. One of the most efficient ways to control the people was to dictate what they can and cannot do, and what they can and connot enjoy, to in essence control exactly how people live their lives. Given that sex, one of the most basic and simple desires, that anyone can enjoy no matter how impovershed, it was crucial that the Church use our desire for sex to mantain control over the people. There was probably also an element of balance of power between the sexes (male versus female). By maintaining a laundry list of common deeds that were and were not sins - sins that needed to be recanted in Church, by priests, who collected tithes for offering their forgiveness - the Church thrived on stomping on people and herding them, emotionally, like cattle. Sex is something everyone, from the lowliest peasant through the King himself, desires, and thus a perfect activity for the Church to tax in this way. By turning sex, even such simple manifestations as innocent lust, into a sin the Church was able to wield it as a weapon to keep the common people under its heal. Over time, like anything that we are taught is bad, anything even remotely connected with sex became stigmatized, and the remnants of that treatment of such a natural thing still echos through our society.

Anyway, that's my brief take on it. I'm sure it's more complicated. But notice that societies NOT based on Christianity have a much more open, casual regard for sex and anything related to it. Particularly Americans are bad because of our puritan heritage.

I hope that made sense. I'm still half asleep. :)


Nope, doesn't make sense. Christianity is a "continuation" of Judiasm. Neither Jesus nor the apostles invented a new religion. The Old Testament and New Testament both prohibit sex outside of marriage as sin. The Catholic priests did not make rules up stomp on people, and I think that statement has no validity at all. They preached the same same values that the OT taught, that sex outside of marriage is sin.

I am not Catholic and I am not going to get into religion bashing.

GOW
Frodo: "I wish the ring had never come to me. I wish none of this had happened."
Gandalf: "So do all who live to see such times but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us."

User avatar
jeff
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 3713
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby jeff » Jun 9 2007, 20:54

While I can accept the view that parading half naked women onto a magazine cover is not an appropriate way to advertise a game aimed at the whole family (age wise at least). However, this whole dragging religion and sex into the argument is equally inappropriate as feelings will certainly be stepped on, and the risk of inadvertently offending someone increases. Before all of this sanctimonious and irreverent babble creates any damage intentional or otherwise to peoples feelings it would probably be best to lock this thread
Mala Ipsa Nova :bugsquash:

User avatar
Omega_Destroyer
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 6939
Joined: 28 Feb 2006
Location: Corner of your Eye

Postby Omega_Destroyer » Jun 9 2007, 20:57

Or at least cleaned up.
And the chickens. Those damn chickens.

User avatar
Cleanpea
Demon
Demon
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Pin-Up of the East

Postby Cleanpea » Jun 9 2007, 21:05

Most of the offensive threads starts with joking about it (bottom of the thread is all witty one-liners), and end up with people getting really hurt. I think the thread should continue, because there are many good questions here. But perhaps in a less aggressive tone. By the way, everyone should be updated on the science and history of the genders. It could lift a historic illusion or two for some...

User avatar
Moragauth
Demon
Demon
Posts: 305
Joined: 22 May 2007

Pin-Up of the East

Postby Moragauth » Jun 9 2007, 22:43

"Then what the heck is the purpose of this discussion? Why the heck to we have minds to think with and fingers to type with if we can't share our opinions? Because that 's what we're doing, not whining."

Arguments against sexual imagery tend to be religious (like most expressed in this thread), and as such I cannot sympathise, given that I do not believe in a God. Neither do most players (or at least they do not care about such things). Thus the argument does not take place on a shared premise, but rather a very questionable one. Most of Nival's customers do not mind such advertising or game content. One could perhaps argue that the game's advertising and imagery makes it unsuitable for children - fair enough. Then the choice is not to buy it. If Nival wants to maximize profits it will include options to conceal mature content in the game and perhaps will tone down its advertising. if not, it won't. There is nothing immoral in all of this.
Edited on Sat, Jun 09 2007, 18:44 by Moragauth

User avatar
Cleanpea
Demon
Demon
Posts: 329
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Pin-Up of the East

Postby Cleanpea » Jun 9 2007, 23:22

Whether or not the argument take place on a shared premise, there are enough posts here to prove it is a subject that needs to be addressed:)

Since we all have to get along, communication is important. This forum has a good shared foundation to make a lot of different people, both in age and religion/society, communicate

User avatar
Moragauth
Demon
Demon
Posts: 305
Joined: 22 May 2007

Pin-Up of the East

Postby Moragauth » Jun 9 2007, 23:46

My point was that trying to convince others that something is immoral based on a a belief they don't espouse will not go very far. No more than that. As I said, I am fine with the idea of something to disable mature content for those who do not like it, so long as Nival is willing to implement it.

User avatar
jeff
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 3713
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Postby jeff » Jun 9 2007, 23:46

There are things that should be discussed civilly, but religion and politics end up being hot button issues that should be avoided when possible, otherwise things spin to stupid and hostile levels.
Mala Ipsa Nova :bugsquash:

User avatar
Moragauth
Demon
Demon
Posts: 305
Joined: 22 May 2007

Pin-Up of the East

Postby Moragauth » Jun 9 2007, 23:55

Exactly - I do not see why religion had to be brought into this in the first place.

User avatar
winterfate
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 6191
Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Location: Puerto Rico

Postby winterfate » Jun 10 2007, 0:09

When you get into talks about sex (or for that matter, life beyond death and other related things), religion is never more than a half-step away.

This thread certainly grew since I posted my relatively short opinion on the subject. :D
The Round Table's birthday list!
Proud creator of Caladont 2.0!
You need to take the pain, learn from it and get back on that bike... - stefan
Sometimes the hearts most troubled make the sweetest melodies... - winterfate

User avatar
Corribus
Round Table Knight
Round Table Knight
Posts: 4994
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: The Duchy of Xicmox IV

Postby Corribus » Jun 10 2007, 0:32

@JJ

I know that puritans were protestants, but protestants came from Catholicism and thus share many of the same values.

@GOW

The Catholic Church was a powerful transnational organization, while the Judaic religion had no such representation. The Catholic Church (by which I refer to the organization, not the Christian belief system - important distinction) had interests that extended well beyond the Christian faith and mysticism. They were intimately involved in politics, war, and power. Just because I impugn the historical actions and motivations of the Catholic Church, that does not mean I have anything against Christianity as a religious belief system - please understand that.

@All

The reason I brought up religion is because tLD asked me to explain what I thought were the origins of our society' negative general reaction to and impressions of public displays of sexual images and material (vis-a-vis violent analogues). I find it irritating that nobody anymore is allowed to criticize any aspect of a religious organization, especially historical aspects of it, without being accused of "religion bashing". That is not my intent. The point is, there is a clear distinction between the religion and its teachings, and the organization behind it. While Christianity as an religion/idea may very well be founded in admirable moral values, and indeed most adherants who honestly live by those morals, end up being positive contributors to society, you cannot deny that the organization of the Catholic Church has, in the past, used its religion as a means to manipulate people, not to mention international politics, for its own ends. Certainly, the Catholic Church has provided much good for the world, but it has also at times facilitated much harm. And however you interpret its motives and the outcomes of those motives, you certainly cannot argue against the fact that the two millenia of its history have shaped our society's collective morals and philosophical views, for good or ill.

The point is that today and in the past, "good" religions have been represented by organizations, organizations headed by human individuals, all of whom have various personal objectives, some of them good, and others evil. And until people are able to have open and honest discussions of religion, and in particular look at how, historically and in the present, the organizations that represent those religions conduct themselves, then we will continue to have religion-based strife in the world. Without objective dialogue, and a willingness to look within oneself and the origins of ones beliefs, there will always be misunderstandings.

What does this have to do with a bare-chested orc in a Russian CG magazine? Nothing, other than to say that our reactions to it are an interesting example of how two thousand years of history have shaped every facet of our current collective consciousness, no matter how seemingly insignificant.
"What men are poets who can speak of Jupiter if he were like a man, but if he is an immense spinning sphere of methane and ammonia must be silent?" - Richard P. Feynman

User avatar
Campaigner
Vampire
Vampire
Posts: 917
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Campaigner

Postby Campaigner » Jun 10 2007, 0:55

Just want to add that I think the magazine cover is nice and that I want to see more of that :D

And why isn't any women posting in here? Milla! Mythical! Where are you??
It's fun to see women talk about these subjects :D

Religion....I really can't wait for the day when mankind will just shake its head and wonder how people could ever buy that stuff.

User avatar
Moragauth
Demon
Demon
Posts: 305
Joined: 22 May 2007

Pin-Up of the East

Postby Moragauth » Jun 10 2007, 1:02

HodgePodge is a woman I believe.

User avatar
Campaigner
Vampire
Vampire
Posts: 917
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Campaigner

Postby Campaigner » Jun 10 2007, 1:05

She's the only one I don't count. We can't stand eachother.

And I value young womens input more ;)


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests