Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Deboche]

You'll have to explain what Radical Theory is, wikipedia only shows something related to chemistry.

Like one about how the human 'races' were actually different species altogether, like cats and dogs, and we only grouped us all as 'human' to make things easier, because interbreeding is possible.

That's silly. If two animals can produce viable offspring, they're the same species. That's pretty much the definition. And I'm pretty sure race is well defined and goes beyong stereotypes.

[BlackFlyme]

Race is arbitrary. We spent a good portion of the semester being taught that.

People in class thought that it was synonymous with heritage and culture, despite all three being different things.

[Deboche]

What about medication made specifically for black people because of their different body chemistry? And higher tendency for some populations to have certain diseases? I think we're arguing about terms again, I guess you could call it something other than race and claim that race is merely a human concept. But then would you call those breeds, like dog breeds?

This is going very off-topic though. The way dwarven society works is very important and I wish we had the option to play around with these things like polygamy, education, religious dogma, tradition and so on.

[Aslandus]

What about medication made specifically for black people because of their different body chemistry? And higher tendency for some populations to have certain diseases? I think we're arguing about terms again, I guess you could call it something other than race and claim that race is merely a human concept. But then would you call those breeds, like dog breeds?

This is going very off-topic though. The way dwarven society works is very important and I wish we had the option to play around with these things like polygamy, education, religious dogma, tradition and so on.

Different medication is mostly a cultural issue, we give different races different stuff because we think they are different despite the fact that the same medicine we use would work fine on them (for example the perception that black people feel less pain and so get prescribed lower dosage painkillers than white people). The disease issues often come down to wealth, some people, often people of different races, simply can't pay for medical care as well as wealthier people can. I'm giving benefit of the doubt myself on the troll accusations, especially since you apparently just equated people to dogs...

I will say this about dwarven society: it is NOT human society, we can't expect them to act exactly the same as humans would act. Though DF humans might be modified in the future to feature polygamy and religious dogma and such, I don't think dwarves will be moving in that direction at all.

[Deboche]

Different medication is mostly a cultural issue, we give different races different stuff because we think they are different despite the fact that the same medicine we use would work fine on them

Here's an example of what I mean:

http://www.webmd.com/hypertension-high-blood-pressure/guide/hypertension-in-african-americans

I'm giving benefit of the doubt myself on the troll accusations, especially since you apparently just equated people to dogs...

Please, let's try to keep the conversation intelligent. I can compare people to dogs if the subject is biology. What other name would you come up with for different genetic groups within a population? In dogs we call them breeds, in plants and microbes we call them strains, we can use a different word for people, such as races. But as BlackFlyme pointed out, race carries a different connotation.

I will say this about dwarven society: it is NOT human society, we can't expect them to act exactly the same as humans would act. Though DF humans might be modified in the future to feature polygamy and religious dogma and such, I don't think dwarves will be moving in that direction at all.

What I want is for us to discuss why things are the way they are in DF. Monogamy might seem normal and the default state in a society because we happen to live in a society where it is the norm. We might even say it was the norm in European medieval Europe and that's why DF also includes it. But guess what? Homossexuality and gender equality weren't the norm and I think sexual and gender repression go hand in hand with monogamy and patriarchy.

[Aslandus]

I will say this about dwarven society: it is NOT human society, we can't expect them to act exactly the same as humans would act. Though DF humans might be modified in the future to feature polygamy and religious dogma and such, I don't think dwarves will be moving in that direction at all.

What I want is for us to discuss why things are the way they are in DF. Monogamy might seem normal and the default state in a society because we happen to live in a society where it is the norm. We might even say it was the norm in European medieval Europe and that's why DF also includes it. But guess what? Homossexuality and gender equality weren't the norm and I think sexual and gender repression go hand in hand with monogamy and patriarchy.

You want to discuss it and are disregarding my attempts to discuss it, I believe dwarves should NOT have the issues you are bringing up because they are dwarves (lawful-good, by-the-books and very consistent, even through different fantasy worlds) and not humans (real, with real world faults and ideals they like to look to but cannot fully live by). Patriarchy is by very definition male-dominant, which dwarves are not. If you want to believe dwarves are patriarchal, feel free to do so, but your denotation of patriarchy is incorrect.

[LMeire]

You'll have to explain what Radical Theory is, wikipedia only shows something related to chemistry.
...

Marxism, basically. The idea that all human societies are made up of a ruling Bourgeoisie and an oppressed Proletariat, and that the ruling class will without fail base their decisions on further suppressing their inferiors no matter what form the government is.

I disagree with the philosophy, myself. Most people are too selfish to waste time and resources on hurting a vaguely defined "Other" unless they feel they'll lose something if they don't.

[Urist Tilaturist]

Deboche, this is a bit silly. Dwarves are not mediaeval Europeans, they are dwarves. I too think that DF humans should behave more like real humans, with prejudice, dogma and so on, but dwarves do not behave that way because of their different biology and therefore culture. They worship gods, but these gods do not preach sex discrimination.

Thats patrist-matrist diagram applies neither to real societies nor to DF. For a start, dwarves are accepting of homosexuality, which is on the matrist side. All I see there is an attempt to stuff all societies into 2 moral groups, with 1 being better than the other.

Monogamy was only the norm in mediaeval Europe if you mean marriage. Many men had mistresses and bred bastards. There were also constant fears that men were being cuckolded, some of which were true. These behaviours are not those of dwarves, who are loyal in marriage and do not copulate outside it.

[Pyrite]

What I want is for us to discuss why things are the way they are in DF. Monogamy might seem normal and the default state in a society because we happen to live in a society where it is the norm. We might even say it was the norm in European medieval Europe and that's why DF also includes it. But guess what? Homossexuality and gender equality weren't the norm and I think sexual and gender repression go hand in hand with monogamy and patriarchy.

Procedurally generated ethics for civilizations is likely to come down the pipe at some point, though polygamous and polyamorous relationships are likely to be rather complex to code.

But don't you think you're being distressingly anthropocentric throughout this discussion? I mean, even if the things you're talking about are intrinsically linked in real life human societies (Which I don't think they necessarily are by the way) they don't necessarily apply to dwarves. Dwarves are a separate species from humans and should be expected to have different drives. Some species mate for life despite a complete lack of a patriarchal social structure based on agricultural riches. There's basically no sign that any dwarves even desire to engage in sex outside of marriage, as bastard children never arise and dwarves never cheat on their spouses.

You have constructed a worldview where certain traits are always bundled together, and in an attempt to reject examples to the opposite you want to assume certain traits are present when they are clearly absent. You should free your mind from your preconceptions and view things as they really are.

[Deboche]

Monogamy is the moral ideal. Chris Ryan is the one who compares humans to bonobos as the ape that most resembles humans in behaviour and bonobos are polygamic. He also looks at primitive tribes as they exist today and the research done about them. Naturally if society forces humans into monogamic relationships, they're likely to cheat.

I don't understand why you guys won't even consider the link between patriarchy, accumulation of wealth, monogamy and the structure of society but that's fine.

In any case, why shouldn't dwarves be polygamic? I'll accept the argument that they're just not inclined to do so because of how they evolved or that it's just in their biology but is there a reason to think this way?

And as for the myth of monogamic animals, turns out there aren't that many. They had to come up with a distinction between social monogamy, sexual monogamy and genetic monogamy because they found out animals also like to "cheat"

[Pyrite]

I don't understand why you guys won't even consider the link between patriarchy, accumulation of wealth, monogamy and the structure of society but that's fine.

It's not that we won't consider it, it's that most of us have already considered it and come to our own conclusions about it. We seem to be generally in agreement that while what you're saying possibly has some merit in its particulars, you are reducing a complex situation to a simple dichotomy which boils down to women=good and men=bad.

In any case, why shouldn't dwarves be polygamic? I'll accept the argument that they're just not inclined to do so because of how they evolved or that it's just in their biology but is there a reason to think this way?

Honestly I don't know. Dwarven society from lore and general tolkienish perceptions seem to lend to the idea of them has having a tendency to be very stoic, very hidebound to old traditions and heirarchical structures, and to desire stability above all else. Filtered through our own cultural lens, these things seem to lend themselves toward very strict monogamy, but that's not necessarily the case.

Also as a point of fact, evolution did not occur in the world of dwarf fortress. The gods pop the first creatures into existence from nowhere in the first year of history.

And as for the myth of monogamic animals, turns out there aren't that many. They had to come up with a distinction between social monogamy, sexual monogamy and genetic monogamy because they found out animals also like to "cheat"

I don't have time to go through every theoretically monogomous animal, but a glance at a few shows that the research isn't nearly complete enough to render this a myth, though certainly rarer than previously thought.

[Graknorke]

Actually, it seems like things are popped in at the start of the first year, but a history is created before that (for example, "In a time before time someone fought someone" and other such legends). But it does seem to be a false history since none of it is properly dated.

[Deboche]

So at least we have some agreement that there's no apparent reason for either monogamy or lack of sexual dimorphism to exist among dwarves. Why not implement alternatives?

Of course, it's hard to decide which traits to give to females and not have it be sexist. I don't know proper research into this sort of thing but we could speculate about dwarves. Females shouldn't be any weaker physically since pretty much every dwarf is expected to dig which is hard work. But what about their personalities? Wouldn't motherhood make dwarf females more likely to be like human women when it comes to being more nurturing and so on?

And as for polygamy, I would like to at least have the option of allowing it.

[Kingbodz]

Amazing this thread ( most likely started by some one trying to troll) is alive and actual talking about army management. You  never cease to amaze me Bay12.

[Graknorke]

So at least we have some agreement that there's no apparent reason for either monogamy or lack of sexual dimorphism to exist among dwarves. Why not implement alternatives?

There are definitely reasons for monogamy. Social stability being a big one. The bigger a social circle is the more volatile it's going to be, it's kind of unavoidable. And on a stability related note, avoiding population growth, which dwarves really can't deal with very well.