quote:

ORIGINAL: SmokingCoyote

Hello Ishatarr
I personally do not feel that all Freemen are the same.
Its the same as the rest of the world, some have control and some do not. Some come to this way for it is the only way that they can realise themselves, I would term them hedonists others are controlled by a set of rules. I myself live by the latter. I term them the ones who have a code. I would not think either way wrong, its only when they involve another it may come down to that.
As for kajirus, I have observed this dislike for them, I think it comes from fear that one day they might succumb to it.
Those are few thoughts on the subject.
I wish you well

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ishtarr

One of the essential tenets of the Gorean philosophy is that not all people are the same, and not all people aspire to the same things, or are even capable of the same things.

Norman especially emphasizes it using the literary tool of slavery, and the duality between the free woman and the kajira. At many times, he shows very clearly that not all women desire, or are capable of the same level of autonomy in their personal lives.

He uses many different tactics to underline this, with the most prominent one being the fact that free women are depicted as frigid, reserved and stand-offish, covered from head to toe in public, while kajirea are depicted a extrovert, wanton sluts, nearly naked for most of the series.
In effect, he uses the veils and the socially repressed status of the free woman as a social divider to separate those women with self-control from those women who lack that self-control.
In many way kajirae are, on a superficial level, more free than free women in the books, which means that free women are constantly tested on their self-control, and their essential desire for freedom and autonomy.
They are constantly faced with the question: "do I value my freedom enough to make certain sacrifices for it?"
Kajirea, on the other hand, are faced with the fact that they win a great deal of superficial social freedom to act out their primal urges, but the price they have to pay to achieve this is the loss of their general autonomy as an individual.

So considering that Norman went to great lengths to set up the situation in the books such that the behavior of the women emphasizes his point that not all people have the same measure of self-control, nor the same desire for personal freedom, what about the men?

Nearly all kajirus in the books where made slave by force, in contrast to the many women who deliberately seeks slavery themselves. When we do see a man as a slave, the story line usually focusses around his struggle to regain his freedom.
Men also don't seem to have the division in class between the free man and the kajirus that the free woman/kajira have. Kajirus are on many occasions treated much more like free man than kajirae ever are. Free men also don't face the social repression of their natural urges which free women face by means of the veils, and the social demand for a repressed sexuality.

So, do you feel that we are to conclude from Norman's set up that men are more generally the same to each other than women are? That they lack the extreme polarity difference between the free woman and the kajira?
Or does Norman simply mean to imply that the duality in men expresses itself in a different way than in the struggle between social freedom versus internal freedom? If so, how do you feel that such duality in men is shown?

Maybe Norman was just trying to play of reproductive behavior, and is using the free woman and kajira as a plot device to explain something about the nature of men's desire in women (the faithful woman who he is more sure will bear his children and thus stays and hunts for, versus the slut who he spreads his seed with but makes no commitment with) more than he's actually talking about the nature of women.
But at the same time, with all the emphasize he lays on the inequality of people, if find that all the male examples in the books are rather the same.
There are bad men and good men, but in the end it seems to me that, on Gor, in their essence, all men are still very much depicted as the same.

So is Norman talking about the difference between the sexes, when he casts away "sameness" more so than he's talking about the difference between free and slaves? Or is he expressing that differences in men are less obvious than in women? Or am I just plainly missing how exactly he emphasizes the duality in men because I'm not a man?

Ishtar

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ishtarr

One of the essential tenets of the Gorean philosophy is that not all people are the same, and not all people aspire to the same things, or are even capable of the same things.

Norman especially emphasizes it using the literary tool of slavery, and the duality between the free woman and the kajira. At many times, he shows very clearly that not all women desire, or are capable of the same level of autonomy in their personal lives.

He uses many different tactics to underline this, with the most prominent one being the fact that free women are depicted as frigid, reserved and stand-offish, covered from head to toe in public, while kajirea are depicted a extrovert, wanton sluts, nearly naked for most of the series.
In effect, he uses the veils and the socially repressed status of the free woman as a social divider to separate those women with self-control from those women who lack that self-control.
In many way kajirae are, on a superficial level, more free than free women in the books, which means that free women are constantly tested on their self-control, and their essential desire for freedom and autonomy.
They are constantly faced with the question: "do I value my freedom enough to make certain sacrifices for it?"
Kajirea, on the other hand, are faced with the fact that they win a great deal of superficial social freedom to act out their primal urges, but the price they have to pay to achieve this is the loss of their general autonomy as an individual.

So considering that Norman went to great lengths to set up the situation in the books such that the behavior of the women emphasizes his point that not all people have the same measure of self-control, nor the same desire for personal freedom, what about the men?

Nearly all kajirus in the books where made slave by force, in contrast to the many women who deliberately seeks slavery themselves. When we do see a man as a slave, the story line usually focusses around his struggle to regain his freedom.
Men also don't seem to have the division in class between the free man and the kajirus that the free woman/kajira have. Kajirus are on many occasions treated much more like free man than kajirae ever are. Free men also don't face the social repression of their natural urges which free women face by means of the veils, and the social demand for a repressed sexuality.

So, do you feel that we are to conclude from Norman's set up that men are more generally the same to each other than women are? That they lack the extreme polarity difference between the free woman and the kajira?
Or does Norman simply mean to imply that the duality in men expresses itself in a different way than in the struggle between social freedom versus internal freedom? If so, how do you feel that such duality in men is shown?

Maybe Norman was just trying to play of reproductive behavior, and is using the free woman and kajira as a plot device to explain something about the nature of men's desire in women (the faithful woman who he is more sure will bear his children and thus stays and hunts for, versus the slut who he spreads his seed with but makes no commitment with) more than he's actually talking about the nature of women.
But at the same time, with all the emphasize he lays on the inequality of people, if find that all the male examples in the books are rather the same.
There are bad men and good men, but in the end it seems to me that, on Gor, in their essence, all men are still very much depicted as the same.

So is Norman talking about the difference between the sexes, when he casts away "sameness" more so than he's talking about the difference between free and slaves? Or is he expressing that differences in men are less obvious than in women? Or am I just plainly missing how exactly he emphasizes the duality in men because I'm not a man?

Ishtar

First, you must realize Norman only wrote one book to propose his philosophy. The only Saga is the first book. He needed no others and in that single book no such distinction in the terms you suggest is made between free and slave women, that is, of one making self sacrifice to be free or the other lacking control and desiring to be a slave. Men also are not so simplified in that book. In that first book there are some very in control of themselves slaves and also very highly positioned free women who turn out not so in control of themselves at times.

Such is the state of a human being at any given point in time and this why kajirae and free are not that way simply because one sacrifices and the other is out of control. Indeed, in the succeeding books kajirae are used as you describe in almost every page to add spice to weak narratives produced only to make money and Norman laughs on the way to the bank when ever he sees someone making a big deal out of how he treats women and men and beasts in his books after Tarnsman. I think free women are shown as they are in latter books because Norman was blacklisted by a woman publisher and it hurt him greatly in many ways.

Not to say there are not insights into human psychology and expansions on his philosophy found in the succeeding books, naturally they appear from time to time because he cannot help himself. Let's take how the Captain of Ar really enslaves the Earth girl by simply holding the hedge open and pointing out into the cold dangerous unknown and she then turns back into the camp and never tries to escape again. This is how women are in truth handled and "enslaved" and you see it first in Tarnsman and so need not see it again in succeeding books to "get it" but we do simply because it lends some credence to the current tale of fantasy (at least for we men) and also gets our juices going to buy the next one because there is more truth in the next, ah no, there are more slave girls submitting in the next book and the tales serve to bring such a life to those men who cannot live the life themselves (as does endless forum posting and 2nd life particpation over years).

You wrote about "sames". "Sameness" refers to living a lie to be part of the accepted norm. It shows up in Tarnsman and of course later in another book when Norman writes about a group of people called, well, I think they actually were called the "Sames", but he only uses them there to fill some pages in a fairly amusing tale since "Sameness" is already illustrated in book one very well. This is because "sameness" is verifiable clue to a person's slave morality and "not the same" is the a verifyable clue to a person embracing and living the truth of Master Morality and both of these are key to Norman's true human philosophy in which he used Tarnsman only to propose.

Perhaps this is the only duality: those that try to be the same and those who know better.

Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Camerius

There are a lot more hands on examples of that will answer your question, but  too shows us the differences of why the men in the books are not the same. Maybe it's a matter of gender comprehension than anything else when it comes to this question. In that your'e reading it from an angle that you do not fully understand or ever wil as you are not a man.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cherylmazana

John Norman does show the differences in the men but in a different fashion to the women, with the women he shows them as changing from unhappy men haters to men lovers and in the process learning how to love themselves and become better people for it.

With men he shows the weak, the liars, the braggarts and those who lie to themselves about how they need no women to complete them, and shows them changing through trials until they become strong decent men.

The books are a process of transformation with most at the end becoming better people, the male changes are just not as obvious as the female ones because with women the process usually starts with slavery. While the male changes are instead usually caused by interaction with other men or women who cause them to readjust their own beliefs or actions, with them usually going through a period of suffering due to their own behaviour or beliefs before they come out the other side a better person for it.

Cheryl

quote:

For that we don't need to have any kind of an influence of others, be that of other men or women, for us to do so. All it takes is to reach our own conclusions and personal truths in conherence of and with both Gorean philosophy and its following ethos.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Camerius

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ishtarr

One of the essential tenets of the Gorean philosophy is that not all people are the same, and not all people aspire to the same things, or are even capable of the same things.

Norman especially emphasizes it using the literary tool of slavery, and the duality between the free woman and the kajira. At many times, he shows very clearly that not all women desire, or are capable of the same level of autonomy in their personal lives.

He uses many different tactics to underline this, with the most prominent one being the fact that free women are depicted as frigid, reserved and stand-offish, covered from head to toe in public, while kajirea are depicted a extrovert, wanton sluts, nearly naked for most of the series.
In effect, he uses the veils and the socially repressed status of the free woman as a social divider to separate those women with self-control from those women who lack that self-control.
In many way kajirae are, on a superficial level, more free than free women in the books, which means that free women are constantly tested on their self-control, and their essential desire for freedom and autonomy.
They are constantly faced with the question: "do I value my freedom enough to make certain sacrifices for it?"
Kajirea, on the other hand, are faced with the fact that they win a great deal of superficial social freedom to act out their primal urges, but the price they have to pay to achieve this is the loss of their general autonomy as an individual.

So considering that Norman went to great lengths to set up the situation in the books such that the behavior of the women emphasizes his point that not all people have the same measure of self-control, nor the same desire for personal freedom, what about the men?

Nearly all kajirus in the books where made slave by force, in contrast to the many women who deliberately seeks slavery themselves. When we do see a man as a slave, the story line usually focusses around his struggle to regain his freedom.
Men also don't seem to have the division in class between the free man and the kajirus that the free woman/kajira have. Kajirus are on many occasions treated much more like free man than kajirae ever are. Free men also don't face the social repression of their natural urges which free women face by means of the veils, and the social demand for a repressed sexuality.

So, do you feel that we are to conclude from Norman's set up that men are more generally the same to each other than women are? That they lack the extreme polarity difference between the free woman and the kajira?
Or does Norman simply mean to imply that the duality in men expresses itself in a different way than in the struggle between social freedom versus internal freedom? If so, how do you feel that such duality in men is shown?

Maybe Norman was just trying to play of reproductive behavior, and is using the free woman and kajira as a plot device to explain something about the nature of men's desire in women (the faithful woman who he is more sure will bear his children and thus stays and hunts for, versus the slut who he spreads his seed with but makes no commitment with) more than he's actually talking about the nature of women.
But at the same time, with all the emphasize he lays on the inequality of people, if find that all the male examples in the books are rather the same.
There are bad men and good men, but in the end it seems to me that, on Gor, in their essence, all men are still very much depicted as the same.

So is Norman talking about the difference between the sexes, when he casts away "sameness" more so than he's talking about the difference between free and slaves? Or is he expressing that differences in men are less obvious than in women? Or am I just plainly missing how exactly he emphasizes the duality in men because I'm not a man?

Ishtar

First, you must realize Norman only wrote one book to propose his philosophy. The only Saga is the first book. He needed no others and in that single book no such distinction in the terms you suggest is made between free and slave women, that is, of one making self sacrifice to be free or the other lacking control and desiring to be a slave. Men also are not so simplified in that book. In that first book there are some very in control of themselves slaves and also very highly positioned free women who turn out not so in control of themselves at times.

Such is the state of a human being at any given point in time and this why kajirae and free are not that way simply because one sacrifices and the other is out of control. Indeed, in the succeeding books kajirae are used as you describe in almost every page to add spice to weak narratives produced only to make money and Norman laughs on the way to the bank when ever he sees someone making a big deal out of how he treats women and men and beasts in his books after Tarnsman. I think free women are shown as they are in latter books because Norman was blacklisted by a woman publisher and it hurt him greatly in many ways.

Not to say there are not insights into human psychology and expansions on his philosophy found in the succeeding books, naturally they appear from time to time because he cannot help himself. Let's take how the Captain of Ar really enslaves the Earth girl by simply holding the hedge open and pointing out into the cold dangerous unknown and she then turns back into the camp and never tries to escape again. This is how women are in truth handled and "enslaved" and you see it first in Tarnsman and so need not see it again in succeeding books to "get it" but we do simply because it lends some credence to the current tale of fantasy (at least for we men) and also gets our juices going to buy the next one because there is more truth in the next, ah no, there are more slave girls submitting in the next book and the tales serve to bring such a life to those men who cannot live the life themselves (as does endless forum posting and 2nd life particpation over years).

You wrote about "sames". "Sameness" refers to living a lie to be part of the accepted norm. It shows up in Tarnsman and of course later in another book when Norman writes about a group of people called, well, I think they actually were called the "Sames", but he only uses them there to fill some pages in a fairly amusing tale since "Sameness" is already illustrated in book one very well. This is because "sameness" is verifiable clue to a person's slave morality and "not the same" is the a verifyable clue to a person embracing and living the truth of Master Morality and both of these are key to Norman's true human philosophy in which he used Tarnsman only to propose.

Perhaps this is the only duality: those that try to be the same and those who know better.

Arturas

This is another fine example of just how wrong things can go when you haven't read all of the books.....


Camerius