nope Calistia is Chaotic neutral.
Wait...is it silliness or an objective moral evil?
And now the Triumvirate is complete.
This thread has become silliness. Where's a moderator when you need one?
This thread has become silliness. Where's a moderator when you need one?
GenCon?
This thread has become silliness. Where's a moderator when you need one?
Maybe Sara Marie and Crystal should untie one for 5 or 10 mins, before the next art blog.
I don't know how I should feel about the fact that A Man in Black is making me agree with Cartigan.
+1
MiB, you use slavery as an objective moral evil to compare prostitution to, but if you go back to the slavery threads there are many people, including myself, argueing that it is a nuetral act and only evil in certain implementations. Prostitution, in my mind, has even less reason to be considered evil. I have seen both of them portrayed sympathetically in liturature and am cofortable with it. Issues like this are morally complex, and you are painting them in a black and white light. Please stop claiming the material is lacking moral depth, when it is you who are trivializing it the most.
I'm saying that presenting prostitution as sympathetic in a setting is irresponsible as a publisher and not a mature viewpoint at all, not that all of the characters who do so are irredeemable blackguards. Even the sympathetic Cheliaxan characters are people who have done evil things, both (or either) with evil intent and because evil circumstances have been forced on them.
And later in exactly that post I state that in my opinion, paizo does not present prostitution as a good thing. You have not presented and argument as to why you think Paizo is presenting prostitution as a positive thing.
Of cause your argument completely fails to take into account that their are occasions where prostitution exists and causes no harm and provides benefits for the individual involves, just as their are historic examples from roman slavery where slaves have refused freedom, because their lot in life is better as a slave, than it would be as a free man.
Different forms of slavery, and different forms of prostitution, have different moral profiles. However, under the conditions you seem to be laying down, to say that belle de jour enjoyed many elements of her time as a sex worker, and that her career in research science was in part finances by that work, that she was not coerced into work and has benefited greatly from writing about her experiences, is some how immoral.
Where are you from that prostitution isn't considered exploitative and taboo?
Mostly anywhere other than the USA.
To consider prostitution to be shameful, illegal, wrong, or evil exhibits a narrow world view. It is historically a very well established and always highly popular vocation.
Yes. There are people that abuse it. There are also people that abuse alcohol. Guns. Cars.
I would rather people do not interfere with other peoples' right to pursue happiness. Even if it should cost $50.
"Good temples try to serve the community and usually function as a brothel with sacred prostitutes, as they believe that the relief of sexual needs eases other tensions that might lead to violence."From the Gods & Magic excerpt I was shown. Is there additional context I'm missing? I'd be happy to be completely mistaken about this in context.
...and?
That's their belief. Your point being what? The deity is CN. The practitioners can be CG. The N alignment itself can work morally ambiguous to the ends of good or evil. Surely you of all people can appreciate that with your incessant black or white attack vector.
|
The evil ones don't bother me one whit, the neutral ones probably don't, depending on how they're presented. I don't really care if fictional people are mistreated or abused; I care if fictional ideas are presented in a way which encourages real people to tolerate and defend real people being mistreated or abused.
There you go again, basing your view on prostitution as being exploitative, when it ISNT ALWAYS. American prostitution is that way only because its ILLEGAL and there are no regulations. Go to some of the European countries where it is legal: not every one is FORCED to do it (sex slaves aside), they are well taken care of and its very highly regulated. All you are doing is voicing moral objections based on a narrow view of the subject.
If this is you sticking up for a product because you like it, I would not want to see you on a product you dont care for.
nope Calistia is Chaotic neutral."Good temples try to serve the community and usually function as a brothel with sacred prostitutes, as they believe that the relief of sexual needs eases other tensions that might lead to violence."
From the Gods & Magic excerpt I was shown. Is there additional context I'm missing? I'd be happy to be completely mistaken about this in context.
Sacred prostitution is part of the goddesses worship, the above is a goodly interpretation(in my opinion) or the practice.
And you know what, in a world where magic and gods are real, such an institution could be a sound way of doing genuine good.
Firstly, prostitution will occur with or without the temples presence.
So based on that simple truth, the temple can act to limit harm caused by prostitution.
1. keeping sex workers of the streets of the city, their by limiting exposure to residences and reducing the lightly hood of attacks on workers.
2. Disease control, a temple can treat the protitutes, identify and treat infected customers.
3. Protect workers, by offering them sheltered housing, treatment for drug and alcohol problems and preventing exploitation by pimps and attacks by custommers. Also providing religious and secular education
4. Social engineering. With magic and sex, they might very well be able to help the community with its metaphorical bugbears. Certainly, sex is used in exactly this way by bonobo females.
5. Since the temple is good, we can assume that such an institution will help those who wish to stop working as prostitutes to do so.
Prostitution is a bad thing because of harm it does. If it isn't causing harm, it isn't a bad thing.
Tivilio wrote:
I've been intrigued by some cultures in fantasy and fiction (possibly based on historical accounts), who present "sacred prostitutes" not as disease-infested, low-life street dwellers, but as keepers and instructors of the sacred sexual. In modern culture, especially in the U.S., men are condition to obtain the big "O" as quickly as possible, and the sexual act is simply a means to that end. However, there are some societies who explore all aspects of sensuality and the spiritual aspects thereof. I can see a "Sacred Prostitute" as being such a person.You and I don't disagree in the main. I don't have any beef with a society where sexual acts, even casual sexual acts, are sacraments (although I wouldn't subscribe to such a religion, most likely). But at that point you're not talking about prostitution any more; there's no quid pro quo.
Wait a minute. Are you implying there has actually been a sexual act in the history of man kind where there WASNT a quit pro quo? Even no sexual act is completely selfless, you wouldnt be doing it (willingly) if you got nothing from it. It is by definition a quid pro quo.
How does a sacrement become less so if the provider (whether church, priest or prostitute) become less so if a tithe is asked for afterwards. Have you ever known any church in all of history to not ask for donations in exchange for their sacrements? Some are less demanding then others, but they all ask and expect. If sexual acts are a sacrement of the church, it HAS to be a quid pro quo because churches always ask for money/donations/offerings/slaughtered livestock in exchange for their blessings.
Quote:
I am sorry, but no, that isn't a mature view. its staggering black and white, and dependant on a sort of moral absolutism that falls appart under serious scrutiny.
It is a view that completely ignoring that individuals are motivated by complex series of social, enviromental and genetic presures. Actions, even atrocious ones, are rarely acts of pure good or pure evil, and trying to fit such terms onto them almost always leads to a Myopic world view of good guys and bad guys.I'm saying that presenting prostitution as sympathetic in a setting is irresponsible as a publisher and not a mature viewpoint at all, not that all of the characters who do so are irredeemable blackguards. Even the sympathetic Cheliaxan characters are people who have done evil things, both (or either) with evil intent and because evil circumstances have been forced on them.
So what is wrong with the trait? There are traits for being a murderous brigand, an angry outcast devilblooded bastard. Why is this wrong? Traits are there to help you develop your character. Not all of them have 'positive' causes, but they all have a positive bonus for taking them. So even in a setting where prostitution is black and white wrong (your table obviously) why is it wrong to have a trait where a former prostitute gains something for their past experience? Certainly someone who spent any significant time as a prostitute (and did reasonably well) would have gained ability to determine the motives of their customers right?
Quote:
Interesting, by the way, that playing a character that used to be a sacred prostitute previous to starting her adventuring career seems to be so much more offensive and reprehensible, than say, playing a chaotic evil antipaladin, whose code requires him to seek atonement if he passes up the opportunity to commit an evil act, or - Abyss forbid! - commits a good act.Former prostitute, in the same sense as former slave or orphan, doesn't offend me at all. Having been wronged by a social evil doesn't make you a bad person. And nobody thinks antipaladins are good people. I am offended by a publisher presenting people who promote, perpetuate, and defend institutional prostitution as sympathetic people doing good work. Nobody thinks antipaladins are sympathetic people doing good work.
So it isnt the trait that offends you but the church itself right? The fact that their is a non-evil institution in the golarion world that promotes and defends prostitution? That more or less excludes a god/godess of sex or seduction from the pantheon. And while you may not like the idea. It is heavily present in fantasy literature, and clearly there are fans of that literature, and here of paizo itself that approve of it's existence. Paizo have commited no injustice by including it. It is unfortunate you are offended, but paizo did nothing wrong by including it.
I'm glad someone on this thread pointed out Inara and the companions from Firefly. Too bad it's buried under four pages of bickering.
Prostitution is not necessarily pimps and hookers on street corners. In a lot of modern societies, they are merely professionals doing their jobs. They don't hang around in dimly lit areas waiting to jump any john who walks by with some cash. It is certainly not comparable to slavery, since prostitution, when done right, is like any other business.
Unfortunately, the fact that it's often typified by the illegal and immoral activities of pimps on the streets of America often leads folks in the United States to condemn the activity worldwide while knowing nothing about it.
This is of course not mentioning that historically prostitution has had a place in society dating back to ancient civilizations, making the trait in question at least somewhat historically relevant.
And of course it's not mentioning the most important point of, if you don't like it, don't use it because IT'S YOUR GAME.
And as a final point, the whole moral objectivism thing might work better if you first show a knowledge of the subject matter you're debating.
I like the trait and I'm glad it got included in the APG. I haven't bought the book yet but this thread has made me that much more interested in doing so.
Thanks AMiB!
Don't feed the troll, guys.
I find the OP's opinion to be more offensive towards prostitutes than prostitution in itself, it does not imply these are abused women, infact they are considered sacred / highly respected within the religion for their skill. There is no mention of abusive pimps or anything and it is not at all how I imagine it. However to be offended by the mere mention of prostitutes with any skill makes me scratch my head.
Wait a minute. Are you implying there has actually been a sexual act in the history of man kind where there WASNT a quit pro quo? Even no sexual act is completely selfless, you wouldnt be doing it (willingly) if you got nothing from it. It is by definition a quid pro quo.This is probably not the forum to discuss power exchange in the context of sexuality.
So it isnt the trait that offends you but the church itself right? The fact that their is a non-evil institution in the golarion world that promotes and defends prostitution? That more or less excludes a god/godess of sex or seduction from the pantheon.No, it doesn't. There are forms of sexual expression other than prostitution.
It is heavily present in fantasy literature, and clearly there are fans of that literature, and here of paizo itself that approve of it's existence. Paizo have commited no injustice by including it. It is unfortunate you are offended, but paizo did nothing wrong by including it.Yeah they have done something wrong, but I was mostly worried more with NIMBY than the whole. It makes me sad that Golarion has this sort of nonsense in it, but I wasn't buying Golarion anyway. I'd like them to keep this nonsense out of the books I do buy, especially since those books are supposed to be mostly free of Golarion conceits anyway.
If you don't like agree with the trait, then BAN it in YOUR games, but there are a lot of other people around here, myself included that think this is another piece of flavor they would like to see in their games.
However to be offended by the mere mention of prostitutes with any skill makes me scratch my head.I'm more offended by prostitutes with no skill.
lol, ask for a refund ?
So it isnt the trait that offends you but the church itself right? The fact that their is a non-evil institution in the golarion world that promotes and defends prostitution? That more or less excludes a god/godess of sex or seduction from the pantheon.
No, it doesn't. There are forms of sexual expression other than prostitution.
There are, but not from a church. A church always has their hand out in one form or another. Like i said there is no church in history that has not asked for some kind of contribution in exchange for its sacrements. Individuals within the church, sure but never the organization as a whole.
It is heavily present in fantasy literature, and clearly there are fans of that literature, and here of paizo itself that approve of it's existence. Paizo have commited no injustice by including it. It is unfortunate you are offended, but paizo did nothing wrong by including it.Yeah they have done something wrong, but I was mostly worried more with NIMBY than the whole. It makes me sad that Golarion has this sort of nonsense in it, but I wasn't buying Golarion anyway. I'd like them to keep this nonsense out of the books I do buy, especially since those books are supposed to be mostly free of Golarion conceits anyway.
Its one god and one trait in a massive book, series of books. Get over it. In fact, I would be glad to personally express mail you some white out to correct this horrible oversight Paizo has made.
This is probably not the forum to discuss power exchange in the context of sexuality.
Why not? You are trying to say that because the trait exists, it is making a moral statement. If you are willing to make this leap, why can't other people begin to discuss this?
Here is the problem. I'm a practicing Catholic. In the real world, as a moral choice, I believe that prostitution is morally wrong. However, I have zero problem with the trait, as presented. Why?
Because the game is about telling a story in a certain setting. In that setting, having been trained as a sacred prostitute gives a certain bonus for a character that takes the trait. It even gives a logical bonus.
This doesn't say "hey, being a prostitute, not only in the game world but also in all instances everywhere, is a good thing, and since its a good thing, here is the bonus you get from being a prostitute."
It is only saying, very specifically, that if you have a character that was given the background of being trained as a sacred prostitute, you will get a certain bonus. There is no moral judgement one way or the other.
Even taking this one step further and saying that because Calistria can have good followers, and thus you can have good prostitutes, this must mean that the game is saying the prostitution must therefore be good is kind of silly.
I hate to loose man cred by citing this as an example, but in a fictional universe, I'm pretty sure that Julia Robert's character in Pretty Woman was suppose to be portrayed as a "prostitute with a heart of gold," i.e. a good person, even though prostitution was portrayed as something that she needed to "get away from."
I'm not presenting any of this as something that will prove or disprove prostitution as a good thing or a bad thing. That's actually my point. The various points that have been presented, that the trait gives a benefit, that the trait can be taken by PCs, and that someone with the trait can be good, have nothing to do with prostitution being good or evil, or neutral.
I really don't get why this particular trait would set anyone off, unless they didn't think that Paizo products touched on this kind of topic at all, which would be odd since its pretty obvious that the pulp roots of fantasy are a lot of the inspiration for Pathfinder.
Here is the problem. I'm a practicing Catholic. In the real world, as a moral choice, I believe that prostitution is morally wrong.Out of interest Knight Errant, what is your reason for that moral stand point. I can see a few ways you would come to it, but I am interested in which one led you to it.
I understand that it's a fantasy world. It's a fantasy world constructed in such a way that it perpetuates the idea that a real-world social evil can be harmless and even beneficent, illustrated by all the people arguing in this thread that prostitution is harmless and beneficent in the real world. That makes me sad and ill and angry.
Most of the rage I post on these boards is joking bluster, tongue-in-cheek and mostly staged. This really does make me deeply angry and sad.
I think the problem here is that you've taken the position that prostitution is inherently wrong, for either or both moral reasons and harm to those involved. And as such, find even a fantasy representation of such a thing being done in such a way that it is not evil or harmful offensive.
That being said, I think this is a discussion that has little do with with the Advanced Player's Guide. As this is simply an example that demonstrates that prostitution can exist in such a way where it is neither evil nor harmful. And this seems to bother you, a lot. That's not to say that most instances of prostitution, especially in the real world aren't harmful and exploit and abuse women. But that doesn't mean that the act of prostitution is in of itself these things.
Much like you can attribute many social ills to things such as religion (or any corrupted authority), that doesn't make these things in of themselves harmful. Just that particular instance. Even if most are being executed in a wicked fashion, that doesn't make them in of themselves wicked. (For another fantasy example, just look at the vast amount of fiction where the government is a terribly corrupt social state. That doesn't mean that government is in of itself evil. Even most or even all of the existing examples in the world are.)
Paizo, please keep this moral conservatism suggested by A Man in Black out of setting neutral books. I can't make it any clearer than that.Uh, guys, I think A Man In Black is making the minor mistake of assuming the sacred prostitutes of the Church of Calistra are pimps (aka men of our modern age in the real world who exploit the most desperate women for prophet) or slaves being exploited by pimps. It's actually quite the opposite AMiB. They are powerful clerics who believe in gaining control of society and enjoying life by embracing their most sensual desires and helping others to embrace theirs as well. They aren't being used AMiB or exploited as the goddess Calistra grants them spells and power in return for following her edicts.And this is EXACTLY the party line of organizations in the real world which ruthlessly exploit people.
Paizo, please keep this Terry Goodkind/Robert Heinlein benevolent-prostitution horsecrap out of the setting-neutral books. I can't make it any clearer than that.
Very well put.
|
I think being offended at a fantasy world's inner workings is kind of pathetic to be honest...
Like many posters before me have said; if you don't like it don't have it in your game. The APG is full of optional content.
You haven't really said much more about this since your original point, you've just been regurgitating the same points you made early on and ignoring the several good counter-points that have been thrown your way. It comes across like you just want to rant and rant and rant... Isn't there an off-topic thread for that somewhere? :)
Out of interest Knight Errant, what is your reason for that moral stand point. I can see a few ways you would come to it, but I am interested in which one led you to it.
I respect that you are interested in this discussion, but the only reason I pointed this out was to point out that you can have a problem with something in the real world, and not have a problem with the game having rules for something or that it might serve as a good background or roleplaying wellspring.
In general, I usually don't go into discussions about my personal beliefs on gaming forums, because I don't expect that most people come here to here my moral beliefs, and to do so tends to just drag threads further off topic.
But I do appreciate and respect the interest.
Out of interest Knight Errant, what is your reason for that moral stand point. I can see a few ways you would come to it, but I am interested in which one led you to it.I respect that you are interested in this discussion, but the only reason I pointed this out was to point out that you can have a problem with something in the real world, and not have a problem with the game having rules for something or that it might serve as a good background or roleplaying wellspring.
In general, I usually don't go into discussions about my personal beliefs on gaming forums, because I don't expect that most people come here to here my moral beliefs, and to do so tends to just drag threads further off topic.
But I do appreciate and respect the interest.
Thats fine.