It is currently Mon Jul 24, 2017 5:38 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours

Devil Incantation
by Feather

Comic (47 pages)
EUR 19.99
Dark Vengeance 4
by Fernando

Comic (53 pages)
EUR 24.95
Prison Horror 8
by PRedondo

Comic (40 pages)
EUR 19.99
Witch-Hunters 5
by Damian

Album (25 pages)
EUR 12.95
Mudwater High 2
by Slasher

Comic (25 pages)
EUR 12.95



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 11:05 am 
Offline
The Artist
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 8:04 am
Posts: 2542
Fave character: Sherry & Maggie
Gender: other
Fave comic: The last one.
Rufus wrote:

I think there are two aspects to this argument.

On an individual level, then Bitch Beater is entirely correct. Most males would see it as none of their business, and just freeing up more slavecunts for them.

On a national, political, level however there would be sanctions as "unmanly" activities and doubtless the politicians would decry it, and the press make a fuss about it for "demeaning the Glorious Revolution". I think they would try and make an example out of someone, just to be seen to be doing something. In rreality however I would imagine that they are far more worried by "equalists" who do actually attempt to subvert the new reality.

Pretty much what I had in mind. It would be naive to think that a fascist society that is based on male-top hierarchy of sexes and clearly-defined gender roles would be tolerant toward male homosexuality. But there would be little reason to persecute the gays, as long as they don't dabble with counter-revolutionary activities. I imagine there would be some kind of de facto "don't ask don't tell" policy. Gays would prefer to stay closeted if they want to rise up the party ranks or get cushy state jobs. They would go about their business in their private lives, buy slavegirls, marry women, etc.
There would be aggressively anti-gay elements within the revolutionary party of course, especially during the actual revolutionary period and a few years after that. But after the short reign of terror, the party would concentrate on consolidating the revolution by normalizing the country with a wider social coalition that includes (or not actively excludes) the gays.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 4:27 pm 
Offline
Transcended
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 6:55 am
Posts: 1606
Location: Still in that Cunthound
Fave character: Bouncie
Gender: male
Fave comic: SlaveCop 2 The Breed
Bitch Beater wrote:
Maybe the focus isn't on "being manly" but rather just men being the top of the social order. If men want to have sex with each other, that is their right as the top of the social order. They can decide to do what they want. Men having sex doesn't raise women's status in the nation. If being gay is presented as something that you are born with it could be even more reason to allow them to do what they want.



I would agree with this principle, if the nature of the government was different This is a deeply idealogical state (think Soviet Union or North Korea) and the idea is far more important to them than reality. The doctrine is male superiority over the female and sex is the main weapon for achieving this, those who ignore their "civic duty" cannot be seen to get away with it.

Such governments don't tend to deal with realistic explanations During the infamous Show Trials of Stalin's "enemies" in the 1930s men confessed to having betrayed the Bolshevik Revolution decades before it actually happened, and a class of 12 year olds were convicted and condemned for "assassinating" Stalin despite never getting within 1,000 miles of the man. ( the latter death sentences were quashed by a higher official before Stalin even saw them)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:59 am 
Offline
Transcended

Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 2:59 pm
Posts: 1368
Location: Roving about the earth and walking about in it
Fave character: Sir Humphrey Appleby
Gender: female
Erenisch wrote:
Rufus wrote:

I think there are two aspects to this argument.

On an individual level, then Bitch Beater is entirely correct. Most males would see it as none of their business, and just freeing up more slavecunts for them.

On a national, political, level however there would be sanctions as "unmanly" activities and doubtless the politicians would decry it, and the press make a fuss about it for "demeaning the Glorious Revolution". I think they would try and make an example out of someone, just to be seen to be doing something. In rreality however I would imagine that they are far more worried by "equalists" who do actually attempt to subvert the new reality.

Pretty much what I had in mind. It would be naive to think that a fascist society that is based on male-top hierarchy of sexes and clearly-defined gender roles would be tolerant toward male homosexuality. But there would be little reason to persecute the gays, as long as they don't dabble with counter-revolutionary activities. I imagine there would be some kind of de facto "don't ask don't tell" policy. Gays would prefer to stay closeted if they want to rise up the party ranks or get cushy state jobs. They would go about their business in their private lives, buy slavegirls, marry women, etc.
There would be aggressively anti-gay elements within the revolutionary party of course, especially during the actual revolutionary period and a few years after that. But after the short reign of terror, the party would concentrate on consolidating the revolution by normalizing the country with a wider social coalition that includes (or not actively excludes) the gays.


And here we have it. An official ruling on the subject!

_________________
If Knowledge speaks and Wisdom listens then I am omnipotent.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 21, 2014 1:19 pm 
Offline
The Artist
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 8:04 am
Posts: 2542
Fave character: Sherry & Maggie
Gender: other
Fave comic: The last one.
m113 wrote:
And here we have it. An official ruling on the subject!

:D That's why I refrain from joining some discussions. Don't take this as an "official ruling". This is one aspect I haven't clarified in my mind before, I'm just thinking aloud. Obviously universe-building is a impossibly vast project, and I can't have ready-made answers to every issue that might come to mind. I benefit from the discussions on the forum greatly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 21, 2014 5:39 pm 
Offline
Transcended
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 4:20 pm
Posts: 1517
Location: Ne Plus Ultra
Fave character: Heather
Gender: male
Fave comic: Fam Slave Set & The Bottom
Erenisch wrote:
Don't take this as an "official ruling".

And anyway, there's more than one nation/culture in the E-verse!

Even among the slave holding nations they could go their own way on other topics. :geek:


(so keep talking) :)

_________________
GAZE UPON MY AVATAR, YE MIGHTY, AND DISPAIR!

OBEY MALE AUTHORITY!
Everything is about Sex except Sex. Sex is about Power! - Oscar Wilde


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 1:05 am 
Offline
BFA Director

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 11:48 am
Posts: 148
Fave character: Paul
Gender: male
Fave comic: Slave cop
Hater665511 wrote:
Erenisch wrote:
celestical wrote:
Speculation I feel is ok. I just would feel weird with anything stating that X basically wiped out homosexuality, or any particular group like that

I don't disagree with you in any way, but I find it amusing that in a fictional world where women are systematically enslaved, r@ped, beaten and worse, you are disturbed by the possibility of chemical straightening of gays. :)


Well, because people, at least on this forum, may find the thought of such fictional things occurring arousing.

And the chemical straightening of gays comes a little close to a storyline Chris-Chan did. Speaking of him, I'm surprised no one like him has appeared yet in the comics. He seems like the exact kind of person who would ironically love this system.


Well in case any of you or actually curious about the fissility of altering a person sexual orientation I can actually provide some insight although let me just get out the disclaimer that a lot of the answers based on theoretical work which of course the light upon our current ideas about the you know workings of the brain are in back correct. So with out of the way, The answer is it possible is a big fat YES. Although it cannot be accomplished through the typo of chemical processes that the government uses in the EU. The necessary technology needed to perform such a alteration of the mind would be nanomachine capable of allowing us to manipulate/reshape the neural pathways in your brain in addition to a understanding of how those neural pathways fuction to a much greater extent than we currently possess.

So now all that's left is pouring bother to tell us whether or not the technology exists in the EU.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 1:17 pm 
Offline
Transcended
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 6:55 am
Posts: 1606
Location: Still in that Cunthound
Fave character: Bouncie
Gender: male
Fave comic: SlaveCop 2 The Breed
m113 wrote:
This reminds me of the reported Roman view that it was unmanly to be the passive/submissive partner. That might be the reason homophobia exists.


It was common throughout the Classical World, not just in Rome. The Classical World didn't distinguish between Homosexuality and Heterosexuality, only sexual dominance and submission as displayed by the role played. They didn't particularly care what you did or who you did it to as long as you were the man doing it. Good luck to you mate. Passiviity during sexual activity was seen as suitable only for women, younger partners or slaves. So it was fine . . .as long as you weren't doing somebody else's wife.

There were some pretty savage laws around adultery. When Augustus was going through his "morality phase" he made people get "honest" i.e married. This eventually to led to "couching laws" where male adulterers could be tried for crimes against the state and women bedding anyone who wasn't her hubby could face disgrace and potentially banishment. Augustus inflicted this on his own daughter so he didn't do exemptions. The Greeks were even harsher on cuckolds than the Romans, they would have a radish (think more carrot shaped rather than a modern radish) rammed where the sun don't shine.

As to Blue Hat Man's point. I can see the technology being available as you suggest but I wonder if anyone would deem it economically viable to use it. I doubt there would be the political will to spend that much on a problem they offficially deny existing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 2:09 pm 
Offline
BFA Director

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 11:48 am
Posts: 148
Fave character: Paul
Gender: male
Fave comic: Slave cop
Rufus wrote:
m113 wrote:
This reminds me of the reported Roman view that it was unmanly to be the passive/submissive partner. That might be the reason homophobia exists.


It was common throughout the Classical World, not just in Rome. The Classical World didn't distinguish between Homosexuality and Heterosexuality, only sexual dominance and submission as displayed by the role played. They didn't particularly care what you did or who you did it to as long as you were the man doing it. Good luck to you mate. Passiviity during sexual activity was seen as suitable only for women, younger partners or slaves. So it was fine . . .as long as you weren't doing somebody else's wife.

There were some pretty savage laws around adultery. When Augustus was going through his "morality phase" he made people get "honest" i.e married. This eventually to led to "couching laws" where male adulterers could be tried for crimes against the state and women bedding anyone who wasn't her hubby could face disgrace and potentially banishment. Augustus inflicted this on his own daughter so he didn't do exemptions. The Greeks were even harsher on cuckolds than the Romans, they would have a radish (think more carrot shaped rather than a modern radish) rammed where the sun don't shine.

As to Blue Hat Man's point. I can see the technology being available as you suggest but I wonder if anyone would deem it economically viable to use it. I doubt there would be the political will to spend that much on a problem they offficially deny existing.


Although I can't see the individuals who don't buy into the propaganda their society but also here's to speak their mind, the very knowledge of this technology's existence would serve as a ray of hope for them.

Because they know if the government has managed to suppress the upper part of the brain while giving more stimulus to the lizard half. That it would be possible to perform the beavers if they could only get the technology and somehow defect from the nation. Hell I could see that goal being the way that they are able to mentally club with the things they have to do to not appear suspicious which is especially important if he wants any hope of dictating this probably government controlled hi technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group