Aswad
Posts: 6908
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: xoxi
The more I read about the difference between a Free Woman and a kajira the more it drives me insane...
No wonder... The word kajira in the book refers to several distinct processes and roles.
Observe how the different kajirae are treated, and some patterns will emerge.
quote:
There is a quote from the books that says that every woman has inside her both a free woman and a slave...so why separate the two?
That statement can be read in many different ways. One of which is the following:
quote:
I don't understand why, if John Norman was aware that both the modest, respectable side *and* the sexually wanton side are both facets of every individual woman, he would force an unneccessary dichotomy between the two.
Consider the possibility that he is saying society forces an unneccessary dichotomy between the two, just as he does in some of his non-fiction work in plain text. One of the reasons for making a woman a kajira in the books would appear to be to liberate the wanton side, much in the way some people in BDSM want to be "forced" to do a thing, except the force is very much real on Gor due to the legal institution of slavery.
Not all societies on Gor are as... Middle-East'ish... as Ar, Ko-Ro-Ba, and so forth.
quote:
A man in this philosophy doesn't need to choose between being respectable and dignified and being a sexual creature - he can be the Ubar of a city or a peasant farmer and still enjoy himself between the sheets.
It has frequently been commented that the definition of a slut is a woman with the sexual morals of a man. Consider that men are generally less conflicted about their sex drive. I would, however, say that there may be instances where any conflicts they have could be resolved in a similar manner, but that is posited as unnecessary in a society which is more openly sexual, which may be the case, based on certain tribal societies, but may also be false.
quote:
A kajirus wasn't a man who was *sexualized* but rather a man who was submissive.
A kajirus was, for the most part, a man that had been captured and/or broken.
One who did not hold his freedom higher than his life, and thus didn't deserve his freedom.
quote:
Yes this is a rant but I'm also looking for any insights. Am I missing something here, or am I just not understanding the justification?
Applying "common sense" to the books can sometimes help resolve the confusion of terms and concepts in the clutter Norman left in the books. Bear in mind that the books are, at least initially, based on taking a stance of opposition to the prevailing culture of the environment Norman lived in, and the value of what opposes is more incidental, perhaps even accidental. It's what Nietzsche correctly identified as the slave's approach.
Derive the master's approach that resembles it from what rings true; it isn't inviolate scripture. Goreans, like other people, are a highly varied lot; ask yourself what a Tuchuk, a man or woman of Tharna, a Torvaldslander and a man of Ar all have in common, and you have the essence of the thing. The culture varies from place to place, but the underlying philosophy is essentially constant across the different places on Gor.
Edit: Too early in the morning, obviously, as I forgot to mention the fertility/procreation thing. It was covered well by nephandi and Rule, however, so I'll not duplicate what they have said. Leonidas spoke a fair bit about the two opposing strategies of reproduction elsewhere in this section, so you can find what he said if you're curious, by searching.
Health,
al-Aswad.
< Message edited by Aswad -- 10/19/2007 6:02:51 AM >
_____________________________
"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.
|
Madonna/Whore Syndrome - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread