Diederichos Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 This thread has quickly become a rabid fest, but I will address just one thing. The Deathwatch Guard are the most arrogant, self-promoting bunch of soldiers that the Empire has, they are also its best, in many ways they are an odd combination of Borderlanders and Gaidin. The members of the DG very consciously act as DG are supposed to act and by everything we have read, that is very honourably. Da'covale are property but there are obligations between an owner and his property, unspoken ones mayhaps, but with the majority of Seanchan, honour seems to be a big deal and I see no reason to not say that most Seanchan would consider bedding one's property without their consent as anything but extremely dishonourable. Now, combine that with the fact that Suroth is not just any da'covale but a traitor against the Crystal Throne, in essence she's lowered herself to the point of being no more than an animal, on par with damane, or far too close to one. Now, if I was a member of the DG, why would I want to not only soil myself but the entire Guard by sleeping with a traitorous near-damane creature like Suroth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Entreri Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Neutering her would be a bit harsh. But being that it is Last Battle, more radical measures would be understandable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Selig Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Da'covale are property but there are obligations between an owner and his property, unspoken ones mayhaps, but with the majority of Seanchan, honour seems to be a big deal and I see no reason to not say that most Seanchan would consider bedding one's property without their consent as anything but extremely dishonourable. So all those beautiful da'covale with the see-through robes who are always around the Blood and are trained into complete obedience are just for aesthetic reasons and are never forced to have sex with their owners? I find this really far fetched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mats Spare Hat Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Neutering her would be a bit harsh. But being that it is Last Battle, more radical measures would be understandable. Spay, you mean spaying her would be a bit harsh. (Neuter's for dudes) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diederichos Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Suroth is shown to consider the shead dancers as visual entertainment more than anything, at least if I remember reading that section right. Are you telling me that Seanchan honour would accept rape? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capuga Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Suroth is shown to consider the shead dancers as visual entertainment more than anything, at least if I remember reading that section right. Are you telling me that Seanchan honour would accept rape? Its not rape if it is an accepted and expected job of the "willing" pretty da'covale. Just like the damane are not really people. Its how the Seanchan view certain classes of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muad Cheade Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 The Seanchan think any man who would lie with a damane is totally depraved. As the majority of da'covale are just above damane in the social hierarchy, I find it unlikely that rape would be permissible or even conscionable by a man of honor. As off topic as it is, we simply don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Selig Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 The damane are considered not really human, they are dangerous monsters who has to be kept leashed, so of course the Seanchan think those who sleep with them are depraved. This doesn't apply to other da'covale. Let's review again - every Seanchan noble has a bunch of beautiful girls or boys, who are almost naked, trained into complete obedience and to show off their bodies to anyone. How likely is that they are never used for sex or that they are allowed to object to anything? They are property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capuga Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 The damane are considered not really human, they are dangerous monsters who has to be kept leashed, so of course the Seanchan think those who sleep with them are depraved. This doesn't apply to other da'covale. Let's review again - every Seanchan noble has a bunch of beautiful girls or boys, who are almost naked, trained ito complete obedience and to show off their bodies to anyone. How likely is that they are never used for sex or that they are allowed to object to anything? They are property. This ^^^. My thoughts exactly. I'm not saying that the Seanchan are not a mostly honorable people. But it seems incredibly naive to me to think that the nobles do not have sex with the property that they force to prance around mostly naked and perform erotic dances for them. And again, they wouldn't view it as rape (although it is). It would just be a job duty performed by their "willing" property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randsc Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 We have no reason to believe that "consent" is a concept that Seanchan would ever apply to property. And pretty good reason to believe they would not. Leaving, I think, two possibilities; 1. A universal taboo against having sex with da'covele, similar to that against having sex with damane (clearly a frequently violated taboo, itself) 2. No concern for whether there is consent. Property is meant to be used. I think if there were a taboo against sex with da'covele; it would have been mentioned. Particularly in light of the Eaganin/Boyle relationship. So we are left with #2. The Seanchan are pretty awful. The fact that their system provides stability for those they decide not to enslave, kill or rape doesn't excuse much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muad Cheade Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Once again, we simply don't know. Well, can just as well say if rape is permissible, we would have seen evidence of it. Bayle and Egeanun are different. Bayle was her so'jhin just like Selucia was to Tuon. Heights among lowness. They are da'covale yet different. Just clarifying that. Anyways. What's the point of focusing on rape? Just to demonize the Seanchan culture? Regardless, sadly rape happens in every society whether fictional or not (see pre-Rand Tear and Valda and Morgase). We'd be better served focusing on the original topic, how to "fix" Tuon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plague fiend Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 We have no reason to believe that "consent" is a concept that Seanchan would ever apply to property. And pretty good reason to believe they would not. Leaving, I think, two possibilities; 1. A universal taboo against having sex with da'covele, similar to that against having sex with damane (clearly a frequently violated taboo, itself) 2. No concern for whether there is consent. Property is meant to be used. I think if there were a taboo against sex with da'covele; it would have been mentioned. Particularly in light of the Eaganin/Boyle relationship. So we are left with #2. The Seanchan are pretty awful. The fact that their system provides stability for those they decide not to enslave, kill or rape doesn't excuse much. I believe that in WH they said it was alright to have sex with your da'covele, but it was not alright to brag about it. Also, you must remember that if you are not free in the Seanchan society, you are property, which makes you less than human. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord D Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 We have no reason to believe that "consent" is a concept that Seanchan would ever apply to property. And pretty good reason to believe they would not. Leaving, I think, two possibilities; 1. A universal taboo against having sex with da'covele, similar to that against having sex with damane (clearly a frequently violated taboo, itself) 2. No concern for whether there is consent. Property is meant to be used. I think if there were a taboo against sex with da'covele; it would have been mentioned. Particularly in light of the Eaganin/Boyle relationship. So we are left with #2. The Seanchan are pretty awful. The fact that their system provides stability for those they decide not to enslave, kill or rape doesn't excuse much. I believe that in WH they said it was alright to have sex with your da'covele, but it was not alright to brag about it. Also, you must remember that if you are not free in the Seanchan society, you are property, which makes you less than human. Blacks in pre-Civil War US were thought to be less than human in the South, but it didn't stop white landowners from sexually abusing their black female slaves. In fact, if people think you're human, you're less likely to get sexually abused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Entreri Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Neutering her would be a bit harsh. But being that it is Last Battle, more radical measures would be understandable. Spay, you mean spaying her would be a bit harsh. (Neuter's for dudes) She has balls, don't you doubt it! Neuter it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.