Author Topic: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?  (Read 39093 times)

Cynewulf

  • Level 3
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #45 on: January 27, 2009, 10:05:10 PM »
In my opinion, ryanjm was not rude or insulting at all. Little-wilson was not, in fact, stating that she does not feel her "guy-friends" are "so extreme in their thoughts about wanting sex from an attractive woman they look at". She was categorically stating that she knows for a fact that they do not have sexual thoughts about girls they are attracted to. Which, clearly, is ridiculous. When someone is attracted to someone else, that attraction is inevitably sexual in nature. One cannot say that one finds someone "attractive but not sexually attractive" in the context discussed here. Merely noting that someone is pretty is sexually motivated. Still, to find someone attractive does not, like some Americans believe, equal to having a, tacit or otherwise, desire to immediately sodomize the person in question. I must say that I am surprised at the level to which some here associate sexuality with shame and sin.

It should also be pointed out that sexuality is not the same as participating in sexual acts. One can very well be sexually attracted to someone, and not have sex with them. In that vein, Joe Schmoe saying "huh, that girl is attractive" usually means "geeze, if conditions were right, I could definitely have sex with her". For some of you, that probably translates as "if I were married to her, I could definitely have sex with her".
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 10:09:30 PM by Cynewulf »

TMan

  • Level 2
  • **
  • Posts: 30
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
    • Lolchair
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #46 on: January 27, 2009, 10:17:46 PM »

I didn't think of every girl sexually, am i gonna get called a liar too? different people are different.  period.


Well, I never called anyone a liar and [..]

Neither did I, and that's the last I want to say about this topic, since I think it's a discussion that's would be hard enough with a group of people in real life, let alone on a forum on the interwebs. Oh, but cheers to bookstore guy for pointing out that the definition of "sex" is quite broad. And I do agree with cynewulf. Ah blast, maybe it's not the last I'm going to say about it anyway.

Back on topic, I personally really like the style of WoT on this, although I tend to have no problem with explicit descriptions of sex in books. It's part of a character description when you're in the mind of char A thinking something about char B, which can point out that char B has a sexual influence on members of the gender of char A. Or maybe just A personally.

In my mind, it's natural to do this. So yes, it is something I kinda missed in the mistborn novels. Still think they're great though :)

Peter Ahlstrom

  • Administrator
  • Level 59
  • *
  • Posts: 4902
  • Fell Points: 2
  • Assistant to Mr. Sanderson
    • View Profile
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #47 on: January 27, 2009, 10:29:15 PM »
Cynewulf, to say that all interpersonal attraction is inevitably sexual in nature shows that you have bought into the lies of today's society.
All Saiyuki fans should check out Dazzle! Emotionally wrenching action-adventure and quirky humor! (At least read chapter 6 and tell me if you're not hooked.) Volume 10 out now!

Cynewulf

  • Level 3
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #48 on: January 27, 2009, 10:35:13 PM »
If I have bough into anything, it is science, psychology and anthropology. Your views on today's society and its lies have little to do with it. What I can say I have not bought into, on the other hand, is the tenets and dogmae of two millennia ago.

Now, of course it is polemic on your hand to twist my argument like that, Ookla. I was of course referring to the context of the current discussion, which to my knowledge deals with romantic attraction. Unless you want to claim that it was fraternal or familial love between Elend and Vin?

jjb

  • Level 4
  • *
  • Posts: 96
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #49 on: January 27, 2009, 10:45:58 PM »
When someone is attracted to someone else, that attraction is inevitably sexual in nature. One cannot say that one finds someone "attractive but not sexually attractive" in the context discussed here. Merely noting that someone is pretty is sexually motivated.

Can't you think that members of your family are attractive? That doesn't mean you want to have sex with them. What if you think friends of your same sex are attractive? That doesn't mean you're homosexual. Don't you distinguish between cute kids and not so cute kids? Let's start calling everyone pedophiliacs.

Saying that someone is pretty isn't always sexually motivated.


That being said, I think the reason for Vin and Elend's lack of sexual thoughts are affected by their past experiences. When Elend's father tried to make him have sex with a skaa, that made sexual thoughts disgusting to him. Vin was beaten by her brother and probably many other male members of the thieving crews. When looking at a man, she is more likely to look at him as potential hurt than as a sex object.

That doesn't mean Elend and Vin won't have sexual feelings. It just means they only have them towards people that they love and they know loves them back. (Yes, loving someone can come before thinking of them sexually.)

We aren't in Elend and Vin's heads 24/7 so we aren't going to know every sexual thought they have. Most of the times we are in their heads, they are focused on the heist, the war, the mist spirit, and all the other problems of the world. Thinking about sex wasn't something they had time to do every day. They had the weight of the world on their shoulders and I'm sure that can take away some of the natural drives pretty quickly.

Dangerbutton

  • Level 5
  • *
  • Posts: 122
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #50 on: January 27, 2009, 11:10:14 PM »
I would like to second everything jjb just said.

Cynewulf

  • Level 3
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #51 on: January 27, 2009, 11:18:36 PM »
And I would like to thank him for proving my point exactly. I am pressed for time at the moment, so I have to leave it at that, for now. A better response must wait for tomorrow, I think.

Let it just be said that he and others are again erroneously equating sexuality with sexual actions.

Peter Ahlstrom

  • Administrator
  • Level 59
  • *
  • Posts: 4902
  • Fell Points: 2
  • Assistant to Mr. Sanderson
    • View Profile
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #52 on: January 27, 2009, 11:28:48 PM »
Cynewulf, I'm not sure why you used the word polemic, as the dictionary definition doesn't seem to apply to this circumstance.

However, here's a small sampling of reasons people may find someone else attractive that are not directly related to sex. Likemindedness, shared experiences, shared goals, familiarity/similarity to one's own relatives, similarity to one's internal vision of an ideal partner, perception that the other person would fill a hole in one's life, safety/security, money, peer esteem, ability to care for children (who may or may not already exist)... Any one of these could provide initial impetus for a romantic attraction and could form the ultimate foundation of the relationship (some deeper than others). Your contention that every attraction is inevitably sexual in nature makes it sound like everything can be traced back to and stems from sex, and I would say that a lot of those criteria just don't trace back to sex. Whereas if you're simply saying that the sexual side of things is something that does without fail ("inevitably") get considered sometime in the development of the romantic relationship, that's not something I would dispute in most cases, though there are outlying individuals to whom sex is just not very important and is way, way down the list of factors to value in a relationship.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 11:45:23 PM by Ookla The Mok »
All Saiyuki fans should check out Dazzle! Emotionally wrenching action-adventure and quirky humor! (At least read chapter 6 and tell me if you're not hooked.) Volume 10 out now!

Shaggy

  • Level 32
  • *
  • Posts: 1886
  • Fell Points: 0
  • I advise you not to argue. We have chipmunks.
    • View Profile
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #53 on: January 28, 2009, 12:16:04 AM »
Quote
Cynewulf, to say that all interpersonal attraction is inevitably sexual in nature shows that you have bought into the lies of today's society.
Ookla, I totally get what you're saying. I actually mostly agree with you. But, just to play the devil's advocate here, can you really call them 'lies' of today's society? Isn't it just another, different way of life? What is a lie to you, may be a truth to the next man.
The Shag Dog Has Spoken

SniperCatBeliever

Bringer of Flames, Leader of Destruction, Head Chipmunk.

High Chipolata of C.F.N (Chipmunks For Nuts)

"You sound like a commercial."

{Pie-Lover Poster Boy}

OOP Member.

Reaves

  • Level 23
  • *
  • Posts: 1226
  • Fell Points: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #54 on: January 28, 2009, 12:51:00 AM »

"Hey guys, I'm not a doctor, and I never talk to other doctors, but I think we should amputate."  ???

Lets not bring amputation and sex into the same paragraph. Not even into the same room. It scares me. I don't want anything to get amputated.
Quote from: VegasDev
RJF: "AHA! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Cairhien, but only slightly less well-known is this: never go in against a warder when he is only the distraction! Get him Rand! Buzzzzzzz!

little wilson

  • Level 29
  • *
  • Posts: 1634
  • Fell Points: 0
  • Hero of Ages: Preservation
    • View Profile
    • My Myspace
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #55 on: January 28, 2009, 01:06:13 AM »
In my opinion, ryanjm was not rude or insulting at all. Little-wilson was not, in fact, stating that she does not feel her "guy-friends" are "so extreme in their thoughts about wanting sex from an attractive woman they look at". She was categorically stating that she knows for a fact that they do not have sexual thoughts about girls they are attracted to. Which, clearly, is ridiculous.

Actually, I wasn't. I did at first, but within that SAME post, I qualified it, and said they may have them occasionally, but far from every time they see the attractive girl in question....Since I'm not a guy, I can't say that I KNOW what they're (not) thinking.

Ryanjm, comparing my statement to that of an amputation is pretty idiotic. I associate with guys VERY regularly. I know quite a few of them well. I have 3 older brothers, all of whom I also know VERY well. Just because I don't talk to them about their sexual thoughts (seriously, if you were a girl would YOU talk to your guy-friends about how often they think sexual thoughts about a chick?...I doubt it), doesn't mean I don't have a pretty good idea about them. I know them well enough that I honestly don't think sex takes up that much of a portion of their thoughts. That's not saying they don't have sexual thoughts. Not at all. If there's anything I've learned about all the church lessons taught to females about modesty and guy's thoughts, it's that.
"You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain."

muboop

  • Level 2
  • **
  • Posts: 14
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #56 on: January 28, 2009, 01:10:30 AM »
Quote
Cynewulf, to say that all interpersonal attraction is inevitably sexual in nature shows that you have bought into the lies of today's society.
Ookla, I totally get what you're saying. I actually mostly agree with you. But, just to play the devil's advocate here, can you really call them 'lies' of today's society? Isn't it just another, different way of life? What is a lie to you, may be a truth to the next man.

I like this line...

Hey firstly id like to say 1st post! :P
Big fan who reads these forums alot, but never posted, but this thread got to me!

Can you realy say thousands years of conditioning to seek out partners and procreate is part of todays society?

Its not at all, the only difference is now it is done in a more casual way, due to ability to prevent procreation, yet still satisfy the physical drive.

Im not terribly religious but come form a family that is, father trained to be a priest etc...

I dont understant the way people on this forum seem to treat "sex" do, it isnt a sin, its 100% natural. to assume that vin and elend wouldnt likely of slept together... well actually its believeable in their case because they are above the norm, but in a society where sex clearly has no value...

There is no church that vin knows of bar through sazed, and elends own "god" was ok with raping skaa once they were murdered after...

To assume it wasnt a pretty common thing in such a society is imo rediculous, in fact, i dont recall anywhere where Elend sys he regrets sleeping wiht her because he had sex wiht her, but rather it seems its only because she was killed for such an act(this might say he wudnt be to rushed into it again but the norm wudnt feel this way or of been exposed to it so).

The lack of attraction to me always bugged me, it seemed so... unreal! Now i rarely focused on it, but when its pointed out to em like in this thread its hard to ignore how outside the norm this all is!

My girlfriend who i love to bits etc,, i would almost think be offended if thought i wudnt think of her sexually, i damn well would be annoyed if she wasnt attracted to me that way!

Its not like one day you get married and discover all these sexual feelings, they are there all along, you can deny that you felt them for randomers all you want(i wont believe you), but to imply that you only have had sexual feelings for your partner and only since married is a blatant lie. You can even develop these feelings over time with an appreciation of a persons personality, but as we all know the more you "care" for someone the better they look in our eyes, again leading onto sexuality for those who think that way.

I myself dont look at girls and always thing "daaamn"
But id be talling lies to say i never have, and to deny such thoughts is to deny instints etc... after all thats more or less what religion teaches us, to control such instincts, not to deny we have them.

That we now believe sex to be so terrible is in itself a conditioning of todays society!
Jesus was born in the time of the romans, do you know what the romans got up to?
hell, go back to the renaissance, what happened there?

That sex is a sin is wrong i think, that it shouldnt be had frequently with randomers etc is again a conditioning!
(one i believe btw) but conditioning all the same!

We are all the product of some society, so who are you to realy judge any other? born dif place, diff timeyou wouldnt be the same person.

in summary, i think some people need to get over the idea that these thoughts are unnatural, else we wudnt be having them...
reality check states that vin and elend likely had these thoughts, or at least other characters would of! Even Sazed has a level of more attraction shown then Vin or Elend, and he cant have sex! their relationship is lacking!

That aside, i love this book, read the trilogy about 8 times so far, and even ordered all the books from america(cant buy them where im from)

muboop


little wilson

  • Level 29
  • *
  • Posts: 1634
  • Fell Points: 0
  • Hero of Ages: Preservation
    • View Profile
    • My Myspace
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #57 on: January 28, 2009, 01:25:35 AM »
I doubt that anyone was saying that sex itself is a sin. It's not. Immorality is the sin, and immorality is the improper use of sex.

But this brings religion into the argument. Although, I personally don't think you can really talk about sex, and sexual thoughts without having religion brought up eventually....
"You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain."

muboop

  • Level 2
  • **
  • Posts: 14
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #58 on: January 28, 2009, 01:50:08 AM »
I doubt that anyone was saying that sex itself is a sin. It's not. Immorality is the sin, and immorality is the improper use of sex.

But this brings religion into the argument. Although, I personally don't think you can really talk about sex, and sexual thoughts without having religion brought up eventually....

i know i wrote the most on sex etc, however it was not my main point. I think they should of had some form of attraction sexualy towards eachother, They never had to act on it or we didnt have to hear about the sex scenes etc...
i just thought i would of liked something to shw a physical attraction other then a few what i felt to be impersonal and generalised remarks by Elend about her beauty or Vin when in MB3, mentions hse liked Elend before he was handsome and warriors body or something like that.

All i would of needed was a single thought, not inheritantly didty, something about as simple as the beauty of her eyes that i felt was believeable! This wasnt provided to me i feel!

As for what thsi topic has trned into, sex. I dont think religion has to be brought into it at all! i realise it will however.

nature dictates we have a mate, its rare in any life form for it to be totaly monogomous(sp?). (although i will admit in certain animals etc it is such)
It is even rare today in christian world to find people who in their whole lives have only slept wiht their husband or wife. Assuming they believe in such a marriage in first place!
 
i think that the reaso religion put out that this is a suposed sin was to stop the fighting between people. after all what is religions main purpose but to teach tolerance and give everyone a better and more fair life(opinion dont debate me on this).

Animals fight and kill over mates, even when they have others to "spare". so would man, as so many other religions practice!

Monogomy is something that although is main stream today wasnt always so!
The biggest and strongest person always got the girl as he would provide the better sons for the DNA to be passed on to put it bluntly!

The church imo say a need to stop the fighting and end bloodshed. This is why it became a sin. After all it isnt even in the ten commandments. a mix of that and the need to end the gluttonous lifestyle people had as it was getting out of control.

So its immoral to sleep with soemone to whom you are not wed? i disagree! I personally dont sleep around etc, however i have slept with past girl friends! does this make me immoral? even do i loved them?

My belief in the sancaty(sp?) of sex doesnt lie in religious belief or whether god will punish me etc(btw i do believe in god just amnt great at practing christian views)  my belife in this sancatity is more down to me thinking its something unique, and that i only want to share it with people i love!

but thats me! people who dont think like me, who am i to judge or say they have sinned?
nobody! as are you, the bibel was written with the sole reason to make god seem divine and tok all humanity out of it. do you think jesus never had sexual thoughts?

it also says nowhere if he had sex or not!
never once is he or his father called a virgin!
so christs father was a sinner? sure...
so christ was a potential sinner?
no!

he was after all human and as likely to give into urges as any of us!

my2cents





little wilson

  • Level 29
  • *
  • Posts: 1634
  • Fell Points: 0
  • Hero of Ages: Preservation
    • View Profile
    • My Myspace
Re: Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?
« Reply #59 on: January 28, 2009, 02:22:31 AM »
Quote
It is even rare today in christian world to find people who in their whole lives have only slept wiht their husband or wife. Assuming they believe in such a marriage in first place!

Really? Hmm. Now, this is another thing I don't talk about with the people I know who are married (many friends, my parents, 2 of my brothers, etc), but I'm pretty sure none of them (male or female) have slept with anyone other than their spouse. After they were married. (that's not saying they slept with people beforehand. That's saying they didn't have sex until after they were married and only with their spouse)

Quote

i think that the reaso religion put out that this is a suposed sin was to stop the fighting between people.
 after all what is religions main purpose but to teach tolerance and give everyone a better and more fair life(opinion dont debate me on this).

The only beef I have with this is that I don't believe that ANY religion preaches that sex is a sin. I could be wrong about that. I do believe that many religions, like I've already stated, preach that immorality is a sin.

Quote
After all it isnt even in the ten commandments. a mix of that and the need to end the gluttonous lifestyle people had as it was getting out of control.

Whoa. It's not in the 10 commandments? Really? What about 7? Thou shalt not commit adultery?....

Quote
So its immoral to sleep with soemone to whom you are not wed? i disagree! I personally dont sleep around etc, however i have slept with past girl friends! does this make me immoral? even do i loved them?

In my opinion, yes, it's immoral. Sex is supposed to be about procreation. Not about fulfilling your wants/desires/passions/whatever. Sex isn't the only way to show your love.

Quote
the bibel was written with the sole reason to make god seem divine and tok all humanity out of it.

God seem divine? God IS divine. He's God. God=divine. You seem to be under the impression that the Bible is just a story. I think differently. Yes, there are stories IN it (parables), but not everything is story. Moses, Abraham, Joseph (sold into Egypt), Christ. All real people.

Quote
do you think jesus never had sexual thoughts?

I believe Christ was perfect. "Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her in his heart." (Matthew 5:28). Since I believe adultery was already stated in the 10 Commandments, and I really don't think Christ broke those, basically, no. I don't think Christ had sexual thoughts.

Quote
it also says nowhere if he had sex or not!

If he did, they were only with his wife....assuming he was married (I'm inclined to believe he was, and I know I'm not alone in this line of thought, but there's no proof of it)

Quote
never once is he or his father called a virgin!
so christs father was a sinner? sure...

was it really necessary to the story of the Bible for them to be labelled as virgins? No. And by "father" I'm assuming you mean Joseph (although, technically, God is Christ's father). Joseph was married. To Mary. So I'm pretty darn sure he wasn't a virgin.....

Quote
he was after all human and as likely to give into urges as any of us!

Um....Human, yes. Mortal? Half. Yes, he had urges that come with being mortal. He suppressed them. Hence why he is perfect.
"You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain."