Neutrality

[Gypsy]

Neutrality is a state of mind, not putting something on to protect a person from attacks. Running your mouth from behind a pink shield isn't neutrality, and moreover neutrality is not non-violence. I disagree entirely with the concept of purchased neutrality because it doesn't actually promote the concept of neutrality - it's more like hiding.

This 1000%! I've seen so many claim neutrality whether by wearing a cloak or just words and will stir up more shit than anyone else. That is NOT neutrality.

A truly neutral person shouldn't necessarily need that protection. Also, a truly neutral person doesn't necessarily have to be non-violent. True neutrality often means taking a stand for neutrality, not simply sitting on the fence and watching the world flow by.

I agree that it does often mean taking a stand and refusing to be involved in a conflict because both sides are right and both are wrong. I've done it myself and it is hard to stay neutral and keep your emotions out of it but I do believe it can be done but it doesn't have to be 100% of the time. I think situations warrant going in and out of neutrality.

[Alex Ayres]

I disagree entirely with the concept of purchased neutrality because it doesn't actually promote the concept of neutrality - it's more like hiding.

Does purchased neutrality promote anything?

A hammer isn't promoted at a hardware store as a way to bludgeon someone to death, yet it is used as such by some people.

Purchased neutrality isn't the problem, it's the person who purchases the neutrality.

There will always be people who abuse something and don't use it for its intended purpose, that doesn't mean that thing is flawed.

For example, people abuse the system currently in place to stop someone from amassing coin via the use of employees or thralls. They have employees/thralls that launder money for them and amass coins this way. This doesn't mean that the system is flawed. It means that you have people who are nefarious and willing to get ahead using any means necessary, including cheating the system.

You have to have a population with disingenuous and nefarious intentions for neutrality and employees/thralls to be used disingenuously and nefariously.

[Vex]

You can argue that til the cows come home, but it won't get you anywhere; if you want to be neutral, be neutral. If you want to be a blood-loving coward, be a blood-loving coward (and purchase neutrality). I firmly believe the power of neutrality is poorly named: putting on a red suit doesn't make you Santa any more than putting on pink panties makes you neutral.

Could you potentially try to stay on topic for once in your life, Alex?

[Vulture]

Could you potentially try to stay on topic for once in your life, Alex?

That is asking far too much.

[Alex Ayres]

You can argue that til the cows come home, but it won't get you anywhere; if you want to be neutral, be neutral. If you want to be a blood-loving coward, be a blood-loving coward (and purchase neutrality). I firmly believe the power of neutrality is poorly named: putting on a red suit doesn't make you Santa any more than putting on pink panties makes you neutral.

Could you potentially try to stay on topic for once in your life, Alex?

I don't see how discussing the merits and demerits of neutrality vs. the merits and demerits of the person donning neutrality while using real life, current examples to support my statement is off topic.

Either way, I don't think we disagree on whether or not purchasing neutrality makes you neutral. You just seem to put the fault on purchased neutrality where as I put the fault on the individual purchasing the neutrality.

Neutrality can be used by someone who truly has the intentions of being neutral, just like it can be used by someone who intends to use it to hide behind while they verbally insult people or act like cowards.

It isn't the tool that's at fault, it's the person who mishandles it.

Purchased neutrality as a resource is in and of itself, neutral. It's the character of the person who purchases the neutrality that dictates whether the neutrality is used for neutral, cowardly, or nefarious means.

[DezMarie]

It took me a long time to choose to take on the power of Neutrality 3. I took time to reflect inwardly on my personal feelings on combat, struggled with the public opinion, discussed what it meant to myself and any expectations that may have come by taking the vows and donning it with my sire.

I was lucky to have one so open minded and willing to hear me out and encourage me to follow the path that I felt most comfortable with. Despite the negativity that seems to steep and be garnished around it, I have only been met with others showing acceptance of my decision, or even admiration for having the guts to do it.

I struggled- choosing to take it on meant few options left for me in ways in which to help my family. I will never dance the warrior's dance with vials. I could help sight, but I truly feel that is also breaking my vows I have taken. I cannot gift my coins. Forget the idea of any clan taking in a girl with the pink signifier of neutral vows.

So what help can I be of? I can continue to offer my love and boost my family's morale. I can still teach what I know about our City. I have never been faced with the option of being used as a negotiator but could it be foreseeable? Perhaps?

I am too young to know of Sun Clan's history, only that they were a clan of neutrality from what little I have heard. Someday I would like to know more. Someday I would like to see stigma dropped and neutrality viewed as other things can be, on the individual and their reasonings.

It, like all other things, has and will continue to have abusers. That makes it harder for those of us that take it for the publically accepted "right" reasons. Are there circumstances in which it can be used as a means of protection? Perhaps. There will always be the grey blurred lines to some and black and white to others. I feel my choice was justified and have tried to follow as closely to my views as I can.

I still debate on even robbing others, if that breaks my vows and have taken more to simply following a protocol of only feeding from humans and collecting what coin I may find in their pockets as robbing or biting can be considered an attack. I do not take stock to defend myself, and I pawn what weapons I find in the City, or leave them for others.

I do not intend on removing or renouncing the vows I took, I hope this has shed some perspective on the views of one that has the power.

[AdaMaS]

There seems to be a great many confusing neutrality with pacifism here. Neutrality is simply an un-biased state of being...the refusal to support a particular side. There have been a number of proclaimed neutral entities and the vast majority were simply that..."proclaimed". Perhaps one of the few examples of true neutrality were the Splinters, and they did so far more than the Sun Clan did. And you will note, none of them donned a pink suit.

[Alex Ayres]

There seems to be a great many confusing neutrality with pacifism here. Neutrality is simply an un-biased state of being...the refusal to support a particular side. There have been a number of proclaimed neutral entities and the vast majority were simply that..."proclaimed". Perhaps one of the few examples of true neutrality were the Splinters, and they did so far more than the Sun Clan did. And you will note, none of them donned a pink suit.

Truth, they aren't the same. I'm at fault for making that comparison.

Still don't see why people pass such harsh judgement or make rash generalizations about the people who choose to purchase neutrality, though. Most of us wouldn't do it for race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, etc. Why is it being done towards people who choose to take neutrality? Seems to me like it should be taken on a case by case basis, and decisions should be made based on how each individual person who purchases neutrality conducts themselves, not calling the lot of them "blood loving, pink panty/suit wearing cowards" (no one said this, I just put all the slurs together into one long slur).

[Amari]

Still don't see why people pass such harsh judgement or make rash generalizations about the people who choose to purchase neutrality, though.

I believe an Arabic proverb best answers this. (Note, though it should be obvious, this is merely an opinion.)

"A borrowed cloak does not keep one warm."

[Alex Ayres]

Still don't see why people pass such harsh judgement or make rash generalizations about the people who choose to purchase neutrality, though.

I believe an Arabic proverb best answers this. (Note, though it should be obvious, this is merely an opinion.)

"A borrowed cloak does not keep one warm."

If I understand correctly:

Because of the fact that someone who wears a neutrality isn't necessarily neutral, there is a problem with the neutrality cloak?

Is the solution renaming the cloak or getting rid of it entirely, if either of those things are options?