Gor SL
23. August 2014, 01:35:18 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Contact Search Calendar Login Register   *
PayPal Donations

Donations of any size and regularity are always welcome to help offset the costs of maintaining this site.
Recent
links one shouldn't miss
SomaFM commercial free internet radio" border=0 width=150 height=50

Visit the GRC in SecondLife"  border=0 height=187 width=150
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Smugglers of Gor - new information about panther girls  (Read 13346 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Chimes Acker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 218


~Beast~ MA Storm BC


« 07. November 2012, 13:44:39 »
I've read and re-read this conversational topic and it's interesting all these words about quote this or quote that. Forget the quotes and let's talk about the information as a whole. If you read it all, then quotes are not necessary. I did find it fun to read Snugglers because there were so many things to read in it, including about Panthers. Were panthers ugly? No. Were they feminine? No, as long as they were free and in Panther mode. Where they nice? No. Were they power hungry? Yes, within their own groups and would do just about anything to take over that power. So, of course they were NOT trustworthy, even within their little group. Where they build and muscular etc? Of course, look how they lived and traveled.

Now, when you read the entire story regarding them, you'll find that when placed in a compromising way. Collared and stripped, they weren't so unlike any other feminine, obedient slave once tamed with the whip or tamed out of fear, or tamed to know what the depth of their belly was because it was natural to a woman.

Obviously these panthers showed some beauty because each one was quite pleased with the Masters they were given to. And those Masters were very pleased to own them and the fit seemed almost perfect to each.

So, of course they weren't ugly. I'm assuming (in my own way of thinking) that just stripping them and collaring them, even for only a short bit, made them beautiful. Weight was perfect. They had not one bit of fat on their lovely bodies from the way they lived and survived. Always moving, hiding, climbing etc.

But the main lesson shown to me? Panthers were devious, untrustworthy, cruel and cutthroat more so with their own... But they certainly were not ugly or unattractive when placed in a collar like any other slave.....

What is very cool about this information, is I think panthers, if they stay to this jaundra, will allow themselves to have a whole lot more fun with their roles and creating additional storylines. Many panthers I know, to me, just have no clue. But, I think with this newest book? I think they have a better clue.

Happy Hunting !!!   
Logged

“An archaeologist is the best husband a woman can have. The older she gets the more interested he is in her.”

Agatha Christie
Violetta Daviau
Guest
« 07. November 2012, 14:52:52 »
I alter my roleplay to suit Gor. Playing a ever sexy honorable hero, friend to all men, of torvaldslander or taharian heritage, sword swinging with twin-fist-crossbows bount to the thighs, appearing in shining archangel armor and able to enter each city, to even battle wild wars against anyone for some pewpew fun... would be much easier, but I play Gor, not my Gor, but our Gor, by the books Gor.

You often sound like you are sacrificing yourself for some higher cause - but there is no higher cause. It is just role play - just something to do in our free time. If you enjoy playing the way you do - that is great. But if not being so btb would be more fun and easier for you - then you should do that - no doubt! Who wants to suffer through role play in the name of being btb?

Actually, you are not wrong in your assumption, yet not fully right either.
I do play - each theme - including all the restrictions it brings to my roleplay. Restrictions make the roleplay interesting for me, challenging even. Superhero is boring for me, every child can do that. The true conflicts come not from daily, worldspanning, universe scattering wars but from the overcoming of restrictions set in a roleplay - the Orc in the clouds cannot fly but has to maybe escape from the airship, the warrior cannot cast spells and has not the dexterity to lockpick like a thief - that is all restrictions. I play them because I enjoy them. Gor has just another set of restrictions. Oh, and playing theme authentic is also a challenge often, in whichever but most modern time themes.

Do I though talk about these restrictions and advertise them as being authentic and fun maybe even often? Yes. For a higher cause? Yes, maybe. Panther girls have such a bad reputation, are claimed ungorean, GE, bad players, thus even banned, and often not for "BTB reasons" but OOC reasons which the banning people but also the banned people are responsible for. The result of this bad reputation and OOC motivations makes me directly suffer. And I hate OOC suffering. But I like the depth of the roleplay possible in SL Gor, the IC challenges, the role based challenges (not the challenges though that are global punishments to other people behaviour). It is a selfish reason so why I am voicey about it: I do not want to suffer OOC for what others did. So I can leave or work to better the situation. Since I have no tail to put between my legs when running or white feathers to show, I fight.

I know GE well, I know where it suffers and where it excells. I know its difference to BTB and where it is parallel. It is not for me, not anymore. If I would play something else than BTB Gor, it would be something else than Gor. Other themes, other roles, but with other restrictions and challenges for my avatar.

The commonly forum advertised "Each to their own" might be a nice, so mature appearing attitude, but in Gor it is not that, not only. It is "Each to their own but if a few show ill own we ban and badmouth them all".

Would panther girls look very different from slave girls? Of course! They might be more sturdy, more fit, stronger - all those things. But! they would also look very different in many other ways. They certainly would look a lot less feminine. Living out in the wild and roughing it would certainly do that for you. Huge difference if a woman can take care of herself  relative luxury every day - and has cosmetics and such things - compared to living in the northern woods. If panthers role players want to be realistic they need to do away with the perfectly washed, combed, and styled hair - with the make up their have on their characters and so on. It makes a big difference if a woman is always out in the elements, has only ver primitive means of taking care of herself - or, like many slave girls, has it as her lives's mission to take care of herself and beautify herself for the eyes of men.

That is pretty much what I am trying already. But hell it is really hard to find non-hairdresser made hair, especially in the mesh section, yet I think I have had some lucky finds.
While "sturdy" might be an unlucky word given how people translate it and what they interprete into the meaning, I agree fully with the paragraph, though also considering realism in both ways: Knowing it is not what you precisely said, a panther girl needs not be perma dirty or stinking, one can wash in nature too, dirt and stinkyness are temporary issues (and also men wash to some extend, even in cities), and combing is possible with e.g. bone made combs. Hunters of Gor speaks about the girls trading for mirrors and other vanity items, yet I would guess surely not full flavored makeup sets, yes.

I would love to see more panther girls that follow the descriptions in the books and realism... yes... tall, athletic, tanned skin, yes at times also ruffled and dirty, somewhat dignifiedly covered (in comparison to the furkinis I mean), with non-steampunk and non-flower bows and spears... also Panther girls that play also other panther girl things than shooting/capturing men or getting captured, trading with settlements or drinking blackwine at their campfires.
« Last Edit: 07. November 2012, 15:09:30 by Violetta Daviau » Logged
Violetta Daviau
Guest
« 07. November 2012, 14:55:40 »
I've read and re-read this conversational topic and it's interesting all these words about quote this or quote that. Forget the quotes and let's talk about the information as a whole. If you read it all, then quotes are not necessary. I did find it fun to read Snugglers because there were so many things to read in it, including about Panthers. Were panthers ugly? No. Were they feminine? No, as long as they were free and in Panther mode. Where they nice? No. Were they power hungry? Yes, within their own groups and would do just about anything to take over that power. So, of course they were NOT trustworthy, even within their little group. Where they build and muscular etc? Of course, look how they lived and traveled.

Now, when you read the entire story regarding them, you'll find that when placed in a compromising way. Collared and stripped, they weren't so unlike any other feminine, obedient slave once tamed with the whip or tamed out of fear, or tamed to know what the depth of their belly was because it was natural to a woman.

Obviously these panthers showed some beauty because each one was quite pleased with the Masters they were given to. And those Masters were very pleased to own them and the fit seemed almost perfect to each.

So, of course they weren't ugly. I'm assuming (in my own way of thinking) that just stripping them and collaring them, even for only a short bit, made them beautiful. Weight was perfect. They had not one bit of fat on their lovely bodies from the way they lived and survived. Always moving, hiding, climbing etc.

But the main lesson shown to me? Panthers were devious, untrustworthy, cruel and cutthroat more so with their own... But they certainly were not ugly or unattractive when placed in a collar like any other slave.....

What is very cool about this information, is I think panthers, if they stay to this jaundra, will allow themselves to have a whole lot more fun with their roles and creating additional storylines. Many panthers I know, to me, just have no clue. But, I think with this newest book? I think they have a better clue.

Happy Hunting !!!   

Very nice post! Thank you!
Logged
Junea Demonia
Hero Member
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1332



« 07. November 2012, 18:57:28 »
That is pretty much what I am trying already. But hell it is really hard to find non-hairdresser made hair, especially in the mesh section, yet I think I have had some lucky finds.
While "sturdy" might be an unlucky word given how people translate it and what they interprete into the meaning, I agree fully with the paragraph, though also considering realism in both ways: Knowing it is not what you precisely said, a panther girl needs not be perma dirty or stinking, one can wash in nature too, dirt and stinkyness are temporary issues (and also men wash to some extend, even in cities), and combing is possible with e.g. bone made combs. Hunters of Gor speaks about the girls trading for mirrors and other vanity items, yet I would guess surely not full flavored makeup sets, yes.

I agree - it is difficult to find fitting hair if you want to go for a more unkempt look. I recently created the chubby peasant woman Elvira - and what you see in the picture is the best I could do in the time I had. Elvira tells people she gave herself a haircut before she came to town - to fit in better with the city folk - she thinks she is pretty stylish  Wink

I do not agree with you that being out in the elements does not make a huge difference in appearance. It makes a huge difference if a person is out all the time - if a person does not have access to skin care products - and so on. People who live like that would have a rougher look - hands would be rough, feet would be a mess, skin would not be as soft and so on....especially in comparison with women who take care of themselves very well. It makes a big difference and would give the woman a lot coarser look.


* Snapshot 1_001.jpg (900.3 KB, 1680x883 - viewed 138 times.)
Logged

International Lady of Mystery
Dayton Nymphea
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« 07. November 2012, 19:07:08 »
Quote
Can you elaborate please how infirmaries, lightbulbs and the Priestkings restricted and with only few exceptions outfitted advancement of a >10.000 years lasting culture in the surroundings of the PK nest and the highly civilized, titanic building style representing city state centers are correlated to the looks and garments of panther girls, or how such would even justify B-movie amazonian looks or clothings?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Os-gE6rgmKI

That should do the trick!

In all seriousness though, I don't find the IDEA of Gor to be campy. I think we'll all agree that John Norman's writing isn't going to be winning any awards nor will it be recorded as classic literature.  It is what it is.  His books are just... B movie books....  Now I know I'm going to piss a lot of people off with that statement.  I'm not trying to be deliberately provocative here, but if you would classify them as prime examples of fantastic writing,  you reeeaaally need to read more books.  There's nothing wrong with liking it though! No not at all.   Compare it to classic Star Trek,  I don't think that would be a defining piece of cinematography in a technical sense.  It's campy as hell and the scripts are usually rather... bad,  but it's something people still enjoy.

Quote
I surely do not want to attack "your Gor", yet there is no "my Gor" - for me there is Gor, and I do not bend Gor to suit my roleplay

Oh dear,  now  how do I put this without making it seem bad?   There is no Gor...  In SL we play an approximation of Gor.  Just like if you're playing on a Star Trek sim.  There is no Enterprise....  you're just playing on an approximation of one.  At least with Star Trek though, you have visuals to base off of.  We don't have that luxury with Gor.  Everything is open to interpretation.  Here's an example

Quote
They carried knives on a loop slung about their shoulder. They carried light spears. Their hair was bound back in talmits. On their necks there were no collars, but barbaric strings of claws. On their arms and wrists were golden bands. Two had a golden anklet. Clearly then they were women. Did they not have their vanity? They were clothed briefly, and not that differently from slaves, but they wore not rep-cloth, the wool of the bounding hurt, or silk, work silk or pleasure silk, but the skins of animals, of forest panthers.
(Smugglers of Gor, Chapter 29)

What kind of Anklets did you picture in your head?   Were they thick crudely formed gold bands?  Fine, thin strips of gold?  Ornately designed?  There's a myriad of ways to interpret a gold anklet.   Which one is Gorean?  Which one is deemed BTB?   Now with the description  Brief for clothing,  Which is the right interpretation?  Is it the Furkini?   Is it a Fur tunic?  Is it just a patchwork of furs sewn together?    What makes sense to you, and to me doesn't mean it will make sense to everyone.

Now throwing in Arch angel armor,  or parking the Millenium Falcon on a Star Trek sim.  These would not make sense in either respective universe.  That's not something that's subject to interpretation. It would be taking vast liberties to make either of those things happen and nearly anyone you RPed with would likely want nothing to do with it.

In the end, we're all just a bunch of nerds playing make believe, and I think that's fantastic
Logged
Micah Jules
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 204



« 07. November 2012, 19:50:53 »
Quote
Can you elaborate please how infirmaries, lightbulbs and the Priestkings restricted and with only few exceptions outfitted advancement of a >10.000 years lasting culture in the surroundings of the PK nest and the highly civilized, titanic building style representing city state centers are correlated to the looks and garments of panther girls, or how such would even justify B-movie amazonian looks or clothings?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Os-gE6rgmKI

That should do the trick!

In all seriousness though, I don't find the IDEA of Gor to be campy. I think we'll all agree that John Norman's writing isn't going to be winning any awards nor will it be recorded as classic literature.  It is what it is.  His books are just... B movie books....  Now I know I'm going to piss a lot of people off with that statement.  I'm not trying to be deliberately provocative here, but if you would classify them as prime examples of fantastic writing,  you reeeaaally need to read more books.  There's nothing wrong with liking it though! No not at all.   Compare it to classic Star Trek,  I don't think that would be a defining piece of cinematography in a technical sense.  It's campy as hell and the scripts are usually rather... bad,  but it's something people still enjoy.

I don't think you will piss anyone off with that statement but there are many who disagree with you.  I happen to love the books and I believe his style is unique and it draws in readers who enjoy that style.  I don't know many people that have read Wuthering Heights or Odyssey, both considered great literary works and I didn't enjoy either any more than I enjoyed Assassins of Gor or Nomads of Gor.  Literature at the end of the day is a personal preference that is best measured by readership.  In that area, frankly, the facts aren't on your side.  32 books with many selling outrageously for the sci-fi/fantasy genre over more than 45 years points to the fact that someone enjoys the books.  I don't believe the population in SL Gor is a good barometer of the enjoyment of his readers.  I find most players to be poorly read and what copy they have read is limited to a smattering of quotes, plagiarized books, the Luther scrolls and poorly constructed notecards.  There are plenty of readers who enjoy his writing and pay for the privilege.  Smugglers of Gor currently ranks #17 on the list of best selling recent titles in all categories.  In the fantasy genre Smugglers of Gor is #1 and Conspirators of Gor is #3.

As for it being a B movie book who really knows.  It would be impossible to depict the genre with any accuracy under the current movie rating system.  I don't exactly see a major movie house that might do the genre justice thematically, stepping up to take on slavery and sexual objectification of women as a potential box hit.  If it were done I suspect it would do quite well.   
« Last Edit: 07. November 2012, 20:05:45 by Micah Jules » Logged
Micah Jules
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 204



« 07. November 2012, 20:23:19 »
...
Obviously you play a panther girl so you are invested in them being attractive and not built like trees but I doubt that would be the norm.  The fact that Norman even comments on their "prettiness" in some cases only furthers that logic rather than strengthening your case.  You also seem to keep emphasizing tall and athletic which is not the same as sturdy and broad shouldered.  There are woman in various sports from basketball, soccer and volleyball who are at the height of physical fitness but it doesn't add to the width of their shoulders.

Quote
stur·dy  (stûrd)
1. Having or showing rugged physical strength.
2. Substantially made or built; stout: sturdy canvas.
3. Marked by resoluteness or determination; firm: sturdy resistance.
4. Vigorous or robust.

Quote
Definition of STURDY
a : firmly built or constituted : stout
b : hardy <sturdy plants>
c : sound in design or execution : substantial
2
a : marked by or reflecting physical strength or vigor
b : firm, resolute
c : rugged, stable

Let's take a common synonym for sturdy that appears in the definition - stout

Quote
Definition of STOUT

1: strong of character: as
a : brave, bold
b : firm, determined; also : obstinate, uncompromising

2: physically or materially strong:
a : sturdy, vigorous
b : staunch, enduring
c : sturdily constructed : substantial

3: forceful <a stout attack>; also : violent <a stout wind>

4: bulky in body : fat

I can't think of a single woman I know who would take being called sturdy or stout as a compliment or an indication of attractiveness.

You keep on bringing earthen standards for this matter. A woman's beauty, for a Gorean, lays in her feminity. Muscles, athletic appearance, also fur clothing, is obviously not seen as a feminine attribute to a Gorean - unlike eventually to an Earthling - thus it is not beautiful to them.

The books are written in English so it makes perfect sense to look at the English definition of the word "sturdy".  That has little if anything to do with an earth standard.  I also don't find that Smugglers is in conflict with the previous books on this issue.  While he didn't emphasize it as much, he did speak of the size of panther girls in Hunters or Gor.  I've always thought of them as large, thick women much in alignment with his description of peasant women who would need a significant transformation from diet and exercise to become the gorean ideal of a beautiful slave.  Even in Smugglers he describes the panther woman Emerald as being "pretty".  It is possible.  In comparison to slaves and some high caste FW they would still not be as attractive in general.  The beauty of Verna and Sheera does not discount this possibility.  You also can't use their appeal to men as justification either since they believe all women should be slaves and they are naturally prettier in the collar. 

I really don't have a problem with every panther girl deciding to take on the appearance of a beautiful, tall, lithe women in make-up dressed in a fur bikini.  I would look at them in the same fashion I view Free women with long cascading hair and no veil and handle it in character.   Where I do have a problem is when those same characters have the expectation they should be dealt with as if they were just the opposite in appearance and strength as the visual I see.
Logged
Violetta Daviau
Guest
« 07. November 2012, 21:45:57 »
Quote
Can you elaborate please how infirmaries, lightbulbs and the Priestkings restricted and with only few exceptions outfitted advancement of a >10.000 years lasting culture in the surroundings of the PK nest and the highly civilized, titanic building style representing city state centers are correlated to the looks and garments of panther girls, or how such would even justify B-movie amazonian looks or clothings?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Os-gE6rgmKI

That should do the trick!

In all seriousness though, I don't find the IDEA of Gor to be campy. I think we'll all agree that John Norman's writing isn't going to be winning any awards nor will it be recorded as classic literature.  It is what it is.  His books are just... B movie books....  Now I know I'm going to piss a lot of people off with that statement.  I'm not trying to be deliberately provocative here, but if you would classify them as prime examples of fantastic writing,  you reeeaaally need to read more books.  There's nothing wrong with liking it though! No not at all.   Compare it to classic Star Trek,  I don't think that would be a defining piece of cinematography in a technical sense.  It's campy as hell and the scripts are usually rather... bad,  but it's something people still enjoy.

I will surely not go through a long video with which something shall be said. And my opinion about the quality of the books is not a matter of the thread nor any relevant. I and apparently quite some others have decided to play the world of those books. They give a lot of lore - for some roles more, for some less. I do the best from it, I have researched a lot, talked and discussed with various players, amongst them long term fans part of which have learned the books and any possible interpretation about by heart. Do I play things that do not outright appear in the books that are still written with the means to be sold? Yes, but carefully. I play special book similar events, everyday things, daily life, mundane, details that are written as general things, and things that are played with people who do not appear in the books (obviously, but the books state also that there are others not named). And of course also now and then the standard SL Gor things as long as I consider them BTB from my knowledge or any interesting.
What I do not do is to extend the books in ways that run against their idea, the base athmosphere of the books. If I wanted that I would play in GE or totally different adult themed RPs.

Quote
I surely do not want to attack "your Gor", yet there is no "my Gor" - for me there is Gor, and I do not bend Gor to suit my roleplay

Oh dear,  now  how do I put this without making it seem bad?   There is no Gor...  In SL we play an approximation of Gor.  Just like if you're playing on a Star Trek sim.  There is no Enterprise....  you're just playing on an approximation of one.  At least with Star Trek though, you have visuals to base off of.  We don't have that luxury with Gor.  Everything is open to interpretation.  Here's an example

Quote
They carried knives on a loop slung about their shoulder. They carried light spears. Their hair was bound back in talmits. On their necks there were no collars, but barbaric strings of claws. On their arms and wrists were golden bands. Two had a golden anklet. Clearly then they were women. Did they not have their vanity? They were clothed briefly, and not that differently from slaves, but they wore not rep-cloth, the wool of the bounding hurt, or silk, work silk or pleasure silk, but the skins of animals, of forest panthers.
(Smugglers of Gor, Chapter 29)

What kind of Anklets did you picture in your head?   Were they thick crudely formed gold bands?  Fine, thin strips of gold?  Ornately designed?  There's a myriad of ways to interpret a gold anklet.   Which one is Gorean?  Which one is deemed BTB?   Now with the description  Brief for clothing,  Which is the right interpretation?  Is it the Furkini?   Is it a Fur tunic?  Is it just a patchwork of furs sewn together?    What makes sense to you, and to me doesn't mean it will make sense to everyone.

How close we get to the books is each our's decision, that about no one plays exactly what is written and how it is written is obvious, it is the nature of RP. Every game, pen&paper or theme based functions that way. The questions are just:
Do we understand the world, do we adhere to it and do extensions in its theme/spirit/idea or do we extend it in ways that would not fit?
Where do we extensions? In central, theme defining topics or in side effects?
What do we base the extensions on? Other themes that are maybe not even remotely compatible/comparable (books, movies, comics, other RPGs, etc.) or do we base it on e.g. realism that is compatible to the books, plausible, explainable or even correlates to single aspects of the books that are maybe mentioned but not with more than 1-3 lines?

Example: I once ran a group of cultists in Gor. It was a group that believed that the PKs are of the shape of giant Hith snakes, that the Initiates' teachings are wrong, that the PKs demanded blood sacrifices, sexual rituals and all that. The Priestesses were in fact slaves to the temple guards although thinking in drug influence to be above them in rank, free men, and the temple slaves rather uneducated dina level slaves.
Plausible? We were indeed called ungorean by some people because they did not know the group type "cultists", only outlaws, mercs, citizens, pirates and panthers/talunas.
But: Tarnsman of Gor though states the presence of cults and sects, other books stated that least Goreans actually know the true form of the PKs, and our backstory was that there was a powerhungry outlaw organizing all the faith, working with drugs on the priestesses, bribing people, working with tricks to have miracles appear to fool people into his faith and pay and serve him on his lucrative plans. The base behavior of the people of the group was Gorean, they treated slaves as slaves, women accordingly, and so on. The only really ungorean item was that it was in GE and so the women could partake in meter fights - which we had none ever really.

What kind of anklets are BTB? That IS in fact such a side effect. Yet even that can be argumented with logics and realism in mind which is still compatible to Gor:
Example: An anklet that is just a thin golden chain of sorts, or a likewise thin ring open at one end to be taken off when wanted, is unlogical to be chosen. As many panther girls apparently run else barefooted through the forest, the forest being dense and uncultivated, they would surely lose such a trinket after latest the third bush they run through. Then adding the Gorean sense: For what is that thing crafted? To be traded to panther girls in exchange of e.g. slave men worth less than a silver tarsk. The merchant wants to make profit, he will surely not give them jewelry worth far more than he can get for the good he acquires.
Else? If it is a thick ring, a shackle, a ten times slung snake interpretation... does not matter at all.
And yes, such things I keep in mind when I chose attachments for my avatar.

Now throwing in Arch angel armor,  or parking the Millenium Falcon on a Star Trek sim.  These would not make sense in either respective universe.  That's not something that's subject to interpretation. It would be taking vast liberties to make either of those things happen and nearly anyone you RPed with would likely want nothing to do with it.

In the end, we're all just a bunch of nerds playing make believe, and I think that's fantastic

Exactly, those things make no sense - just as measuring Gor with earthen standards or comparing panther girls to any kind of Amazons. You cannot even compare them to cave women fully. You can, in aspects get ideas, yes, but those aspects cannot still be taken 1:1 often enough. E.g. comparing the garments of FW to Muslim Burkas, base idea, but still not the same, neither the entire idea of RoC being worn is comparable to the reason of Burkas being worn.

Are panther girl outfits furkinis, fur tunics or sewn fur patches hung about their body? That is not the question, it is the result.
- The quotes we actually have indicate that their garments are short. For a Gorean also a camisk or FW kajira tunic is already short, often already scandalously short.
- The quotes indicate that panther girl outfits conceal them from the looks of men ("She was one of the most exciting beautiful women I had ever seen. I resented the brief, tight skins which concealed her from me. ~ Hunters of Gor")
- A showing naval is considered, throughout Gor, and Panther girls are Goreans, DO follow the culture except for not wanting to be enslaved themselfes and reacting in their way to it, as so called "Slave Belly", slavelike dressing.
- Being stripped is also for a Panther Girl humiliating as both Hunters and Smugglers shows. If she wears barely anything anyways, how could that concept still work?
- Panthers are, even if some would not admit it, women in the end, escaped free women or run away slaves. Sewing at least is a set woman’s work on Gor which also the later Panther Girls had learned while still living in the society as FW or slave
- etc.

Now from Gorean quotes and culture to logics and realism:
- Panther girls move, swiftly, through dense, thick, uncultivated forests, thorney branches. Their body needs protection to not be scratches all the time
- They live in the northern hemisphere, i.e. it is not too warm, only short summers. They need to warm themselfes somewhat

So how much do we actually need an outright firm written quote that says "the furs, made from the hides of the tawny forest panther, are shaped as tunics, at times as brief as the scandalous slave camisks"?


...

The books are written in English so it makes perfect sense to look at the English definition of the word "sturdy".  That has little if anything to do with an earth standard.  I also don't find that Smugglers is in conflict with the previous books on this issue.  While he didn't emphasize it as much, he did speak of the size of panther girls in Hunters or Gor.  I've always thought of them as large, thick women much in alignment with his description of peasant women who would need a significant transformation from diet and exercise to become the gorean ideal of a beautiful slave.  Even in Smugglers he describes the panther woman Emerald as being "pretty".  It is possible.  In comparison to slaves and some high caste FW they would still not be as attractive in general.  The beauty of Verna and Sheera does not discount this possibility.  You also can't use their appeal to men as justification either since they believe all women should be slaves and they are naturally prettier in the collar.

Well, the earthen standard - maybe not applied then by you outright - is that people start to compare panther girls now to massive stationary burst strength athlets such as the ones I repeat mentioning. That IS conflicting to the early books, where panther girls are described as beautiful, tall, athletic.

Else you say you compare them to thick/large peasant women, which is basically a bit the same as those athlets with just less muscles and more fat. Did peasant women do caste work, or did they only cook very fat so the hard working men would get enough calories to burn, growing fat themselfes over it? Left or right, such women cannot perform the tasks described as part of panther girls' lifes, so the comparison seems to head into the wrong direction, incomplete at least.
Anyways, your imagination shall be your's - my sole intend is, and I know you react differently, that people from now on demand from panther girls, in order to be BTB, to appear as really fat/muscular weightlifter hulk or else such, which is absolutely irrealistic for their life and does not even remotely match prior descriptions about them and their value to men.

Maybe we are though not too far off each other in imagination. I personally imagine panther girls as tall, if now 2 inches or 10, does not matter, athletic which means to me muscular, yet not for burst strength but for enduring strength, with agility supporting tendons, comparable with the difference between Schwarzenegger in his best times and Bruce Lee, pumped up muscles and efficient muscles that are indeed smaller. Yet I would not say that all panther girls or many at all would have such well defined muscles, but muscles would definitely show, and those would, by their very nature, also make panther girls appear more broad around the shoulders. I never saw them as bodybuilders, I never saw them as comparable to Conan fantasy barbarians, I never saw them neither as weightlifter hulks.

Now to earthen standards: Even many or most men on earth - and even most women themselfes - consider a girl that shows muscles, even only slight but still defined/visible mucsles as unfeminine, manly even. For a Gorean, both man and women, who is much more used to the reduction of genders to their very stereotypes, such muscles must appear much "earlier" as manly, as unfeminine. And that is all I say: A gorean would consider even a track and field athlete, how lean they appear, if they show muscles even in relaxed state, as manly. Muscles are manly, strength is manly. Feminine is beauty, softness - Gorean perception.
A bit off comparison: A dog-fancier / breeder sees the base qualities of his chosen race of dogs much more strict as well than a normal dog fan. The breeder would be the Gorean, the fan the Earthling.

I really don't have a problem with every panther girl deciding to take on the appearance of a beautiful, tall, lithe women in make-up dressed in a fur bikini.  I would look at them in the same fashion I view Free women with long cascading hair and no veil and handle it in character.   Where I do have a problem is when those same characters have the expectation they should be dealt with as if they were just the opposite in appearance and strength as the visual I see.

And there we approach each other again at least, apart of two things:

1) the makeup/furkini (or even less). But although I would usually react on it like you, IC, in the case of panther girls I suffer for another reason: There are too many of those, and it does give the role and its players, beneath other factors, a bad reputation, we get lumped together as ungorean, which makes the entire struggle based on e.g. widespread RL maledom attitudes and motivations even harder.

2) skins can be expensive, and if players e.g. play other things outside Gor as well, and RP to be strong even if not giving the visuals thus, I accept that. Yet only being so very strong and in the next emote, right after captured and laying under a man, cock inside, being at once tender and soft skinned, curvey, with sensual blue orbs and finely flowing hair and trying to outdo in looks and feminity the long dieted and actively shaped pleasure kajira kneeling in the next room does not match. Even less if 2 hours after the fuck and the man logged one is outright super strong again, rude and crude, and able to flee with ease... no. But vice versa accounts for FW and kajirae, who often tend to become supergirl in strength as well the moment they see a panther girl without weapons freshly captured or are captured by them in the forests themselfes and threatened to be permanently sold into the other direction of their love master's homestone.


ETA: Fancy side note: As panther girls do not live in tribal structures, i.e. like amazonian or other native tribes who have families in place, often mixed gender, birth their children there, but are instead outlaws that origin from society, having been FW or kajirae before, aspects like physical size DOES occur amongst those, as a human does not grow if they only change their habitat and lifestyle (as opposed to their muscle tone which can very well change). This implies that mostly the taller runaways FW/Kajirae, who grow muscles more easily will survive or be able to proof their worth to join a band as a free forest woman. The rest, given the indicated share of tall and muscular/athletic women, seems to fall into slavery rather, or dies on the way trying.
But do we play that? No, as the gaming platform of SL influences us with its differences to book Gor, brings up terms like RL money, traffic, group size requirements to the schedule and often players are also influenced by personal RL taste... in other themes it works easier. Play an Orc or Drow, Dwarf or Elf, you know you will not look as in RL. A doll shaped (broad hips, big head and eyes, cutsie made hair, AO and garment) Orc would just look too off. And the greenskin does not turn cute and soft suddenly either when an Ogre captures and rapes them (ugh, the image! Go away!!)
« Last Edit: 07. November 2012, 22:29:34 by Violetta Daviau » Logged
Dayton Nymphea
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« 07. November 2012, 22:26:03 »
Quote
I will surely not go through a long video with which something shall be said.

Just so you know,  that's the movie Outlaw of Gor.  It's just hosted  by the mystery science theatre 3000 guys and they razz on it the whole time.  It's definitely a B movie and campy as hell.  Certainly worth a watch if you want a good laugh.  I'm pretty sure the people who made that movie had a very different image of Gor than you.... or pretty much anyone...   But it has Jack Palance in it!
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

  Powered by SMF | SMF © Simple Machines LLC
TinyPortal © Bloc | Design © GOR-SL.COM
SL and Second Life are trademarks of Linden Research, Inc. www.gor-sl.com is not affiliated with or sponsored by Linden Research.