Real-world sensitivities and game names

[HoneyBadger]

While there's no authentic, irrefutable *proof* of Ius Primae Noctis, there's definitely a body of evidence for it. So...you're right that it may possibly not have existed as such. That it definitely never happened, ever, I seriously doubt you could prove. Scopes has a good article on it. I quote Charles Panati, from the end of the article:

"Surely the use of political power to secure sexual favors is ancient and widespread. The droit du seigneir (another term from Ius Primae Noctis) in the broadest sense - political pressure for sexual favors, what we now call sexual harrassment - must have been invoked all the time, but was formalized in the myths as if it were an unofficial right or law. One that was, from the start, intolerable. It may never, or seldom, have been technically legal, but it was not "just another myth"

Ofcourse, arranged marriages did occur, and still occur today. How that's a whole lot different, or a whole lot better, than Ius Primae Noctis escapes me. And it must be remembered that rulers in ages past were often thought of as semi-divine, somewhat supernatural beings, themselves, with direct physical ties to the well-being of their people and the fertility of the lands they lorded over. So it atleast makes some amount of sense to me that some form of fertility ceremony connected to weddings probably did occur at some point in time, where the king (or what have you) got first crack at the bride on her wedding night.

It might not be proven fact, but it atleast makes some amount of sense that people back then would think in those ways.

The Children's Cruisade has been debunked to my satisfaction though, so thanks for that. You're welcome to switch it out and replace it with the Jonestown Massacre-when it comes to children enslaved and murdered, as a result of an innocent spiritual purpose, that's a comparably ugly story, I would say.

[JimMorrison]

I really don't think we have to dig too deeply to find rampant evidence of the iniquity of man, from first record, to present. O.o

Though I do think it's funny that people say "power corrupts", when ultimately most powerful people were corrupt to begin with. Thousands of years of people scratching their heads over things like "gee, the king's eldest son died, everyone loved him, did he have ANY enemies? oh well, his younger brother will suffice I suppose, though he's a bit shady".

Some people do extraordinary things to survive. Others, do extraordinarily awful things in order to survive. And yet others are artificially conditioned to think that their survival depends on attainment of more wealth and power, and continually do extraordinarily awful things to that end.

A critical look at the people wielding great power throughout history, will show a handful of admirable and worthy leaders. It will show another handle of mediocre but just and kind rulers. And it will provide seemingly endless lists of the worst kind of scum the world has seen. Not because they commit atrocious acts in person necessarily, but enact policies and send orders that cause incredible suffering to countless citizens whose voice will never be heard crying out in pain across history. Such is the nature of humanity, and of power. For every wrongdoing we discover, there were 10 that were successfully buried, and many of those were the worst.

At least here it's just pixels. Sometimes I shoot pixels in the groin, and then I laugh. I can't allow myself to feel sympathy, because when I hit Exit, they all die anyways.

[capnq]

JimMorrison said: I do think it's funny that people say "power corrupts", when ultimately most powerful people were corrupt to begin with.

(Somewhere in the Dune books) Frank Herbert said: Power attracts the corruptible, absolute power attracts the absolutely corruptible.