|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some thoughts on honour and society 'I have paid my price to live with myself on terms that I will' I can hear the groans now, 'Not another article on honour!' Well, the word is waved like a flag, offered up to show one clique is more Gorean than another, so it can never be ignored and as it is a wintry New Year's Eve and I have no intention of stepping out into the howling gale I find this an opportune time to share some thoughts with you all. We often hear the word 'honour' used, but what does that word mean to us? What picture does the word 'honour' bring to your mind? Is it a picture of Knights in shining armor? That is the most common image conjured up. What is it about Knights that makes us think of honour? Generally the image of fairness, the upholding of laws and keeping the masses free from dictatorial rule. Interestingly those things that we give Knights 'honour' for were imposed on them, they were not their ideals. These ideals were imposed by a Plantagenate King who decided that if the country was to become a great society then standards needed to exist. From this came the first set of English laws, a set of ideals (a code of behavior) that was imposed on a group against their will (initially). This action caused great problems and led to more than a few of the nobility getting the chop, after all these people had been the ultimate authority in their land. Who was the person to tell them that there were boundaries of what they could do with their property? (serfs) When the blood cooled down at this affront to their authority, the realization that for there to be a society we have to act out of a set of common beliefs was gained. This required some compromises in the thinking of some individuals, but from it they gained this concept of honour. Which brings us back to what is honour? The Oxford English dictionary offers up the definition of honour to be great respect or public regard. It is when we get drill down to the definition that we can see where the problems we encounter with this issue come from. For what is public regard? Indeed what is our public? Well as the public is our community, and if we restrict who is in that community, and obtain the regard of that community, does a person not have honour? In a strict sense yes they do, however is that how we build a society? Or is that how we build a whole set of little feudalities? History has shown that a society (civilization; culture) does not come about from small groups each ignoring the other due to a different take on a set of beliefs. A society grows when that local sense of honour becomes a global one, not an easy thing to do for sure as history shows us. This sense of 'honour' leads to a lot of schisms in what should be a unified Gorean society. Why a unified society? Well I for one would enjoy it if my chosen lifestyle was taken more seriously, something that will not come about whilst we stick to our own small little factions. These battling factions yelling louder and louder, using bigger and better media bring to mind for me a true classic 'The Butter Battle Book' by Dr. Seuss. Two factions, the Yooks and the Zooks, fighting it out in an ever more strident manner over whether bread should be butter side up or butter side down. If my ideals (or concept of honour) says 'butter side up!' and yours says 'butter side down!' should we bluster and snipe at each other or should we look at what is the common theme (in this case bread)? Maybe we should step back and take a new look and see if our ideals can encompass bread buttered on either side. To be serious we are all part of that larger concept 'Gorean', let's focus on building on the commonality instead of dividing on the differences. When we do that we can truly claim to have honour in the sense of a true public regard. So then why not abandon that concept and just focus on a term we hear online often, 'personal honour'? 'Personal honour', now this in itself is a curious term. If we accept that honour requires the respect of the 'public', then how does personal honour exist? By this definition we have reduced that 'public' to one, our self. When we carry out actions in our lives we can justify to ourselves what we are doing, no matter how poorly others may view what we are doing. If we can not persuade ourselves what we are doing is right, what is the chance of persuading anyone else (and thus gaining their regard and that tag 'honourable')? I would hope that someone who is Gorean has regard for himself! Maybe the term that people are groping for is really 'integrity.' Setting that aside, there is a huge problem in the concept of living by ones 'personal honour' and imposing it on everyone else, after all my set of ideals is not the same as yours. I have heard the familiar cry, 'Goreans do as they please! You can not impose your ideals on me.' Really? No one imposed any ideals on the Goreans and shaped their society? Funny thing that, in the books I read there were Priest Kings who most assuredly did help shape Gorean society. The society of Gor was not an anarchistic one, law and order existed. These laws most definitely had cultural variations just as they do here on Earth, but they existed. So if you were on Gor you would have had a code of ideal imposed on you, but they would have been from birth. They would have been your societal ones, the ideals by which you would live to gain the tag of 'honourable.' Now we have come to the Gorean philosophy after the cradle, having been raised amongst far different ideals than a native Gorean would have been. So we have to adapt, we have to modify our ideals and be open to looking at what judgments we have made to date if we are to continue to grow and forge a Gorean society. I for one have paid the price in my life to live with myself on terms that I will, we all have. It is through being open to re-evaluating those terms and coming to new understandings that allows me to continue to grow. I wish you well in this New Year and I hope that we can all resolve to set aside our narrow focuses and work on growing a Gorean society in which we can truly have honour.
Jon |
|
Gor vs. BDSM By Malkinius This is just one man's opinion about the differences between Gor and BDSM. It was written in response to a question a slave asked me and replied by e-mail. She wanted to know the difference between the two as she came from BDSM areas. That is not a place I have ever been a part of. Others will tell you similar things and different ones, including that there is no difference. I say to the last group, you just don't understand what Gor really is. It is correct to say that some things are the same between BDSM and Gor, whereas many are diametrically opposed to each other. The biggest differences are in the control of the Master over the slave and the point of what we do. Please understand that while I have read some about BDSM, I have never participated beyond reading a couple of Usenet groups on occasion and wandering into a very few IRC BDSM channels. What I say here is based on what I have read, what I have seen, and the people I know who are into that scene. Safe, sane and consensual. I am sure you have heard those words before. They are the watchwords of BDSM. Gor doesn't follow those rules. Yes, we do want to be physically and mentally safe...being sane is probably a good thing...[grins]...and the slavery we practice is consensual, up to a point. There are no safe words, there are no days we do this and days we don't. It may not be something we do in front of children, but some do. Gor operates on Honor and Trust. I like to add Honesty and Responsibility to them. The slave must trust her Master enough to give herself into his hands. Trust that he will care for her life and well being as long as she is pleasing to him. A Gorean Master takes the responsibility for his slave in what she does, how she acts, what she wears, what she learns; responsibility for all parts of her as well as her well being and health. A true man does not willingly damage something valuable to him. Like anywhere else, there are pretenders, abusers, and people trying to do something they really are unfit to do. Goreans would say that a man must master himself before he can master a slave. The good Masters do not need to prove themselves to anyone because they have already proved what they are to themselves. The other big difference is that BDSM seems to be about sex. That is the main point of BDSM as far as I can see. Gorean slavery is about service of a slave to her Master and the pleasing of him. Sex is there but it is not the most important thing. A Gorean slave is not only free to explore and reveal her sexuality, she is required to do so. She is not allowed to withhold any part of her from her Master. Most Goreans do not seem to do much BDSM play. There may be a bit of bondage or things (besides collars) which could be called fetish wear, but they are not central to being Gorean. A Gorean Master does not whip a slave for her erotic enjoyment, or his, but to punish her. To make her understand that she was displeasing in her actions or attitudes and that she needs to change what he found displeasing. It is hard, though not impossible to do BDSM by yourself. A man or a woman can be Gorean without owning a slave. Being Gorean is an attitude and a way of life, not something you do in the bedroom or when you put on special clothes and go to a play party somewhere. It does not turn on or turn off when convenient, Gor is. Understand that I am talking in generalities here, and perhaps the idealized Gorean Master, but from what I have seen and read, these are the main differences between the two. Some people involved in BDSM use Gor to spice up their play at times, sometimes Gorean use BDSM to spice up their sex. However, if I bind a slave's hands behind her back, for example, it is because I do not wish her to use them while I am doing something with her, to her or while she is doing something. Or it could be as punishment for doing something with them that I did not want her to do. It could also be for training purposes. Many different reasons, but her sexual enjoyment of being bound is likely to be very low on or totally off of the list of reasons. I have said that we can not do everything as the books do it. We live on Earth, not Gor. We live within the confines and legalities of our society. We do what we can to recreate parts of the Gorean philosophies and Master/slave system, but more importantly for men; we look to the books as a guide to our behavior and existence as men. It has been said, and I believe it to be true, that a man can be Gorean and never own a slave. A free woman can be Gorean and never be a slave. A slave can be Gorean only while she is a slave to a Gorean Master. Telling the difference between those who might properly be called Gorean and those who only play or pretend to be Gorean can be hard at times. I do not claim to be able to tell in all cases. I look to see if they walk the talk. If they do, and what they speak is what I consider Gorean, then I call them Gorean. There are those whose words and knowledge I respect as they say they respect mine. Some of those people I count as being Gorean. As it pleases them to consider me Gorean, I have come to accept it. Malkinius A Warrior by nature...A questioner by inclination... |
