Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The Imperial Creed is basically "worship the Emperor and don't worship Chaos."

It really does vary from planet to planet, sometimes drastically. Hell, some planets basically have pagan blood and murder rituals dedicated to Emperor worship. They make the Ecclesiarchy nervous, but as long as they worship the Emperor, the suspicion stays merely that, suspicion.

There's nothing wrong with cybernetics or cosmetics in 40k. Emperor knows how many people replace parts of their body with machines, and you know how much the Imperium doesn't trust machines.

Couple of fluff bits make me think the the IoM does not care if Big-E's subjects are fabulous. In one of the Gaunt books an inquisitor alleges that Gaunt *likes* to have Milo around in a NTTIAWWT kind of way. I think in Gun Heads some AdMech picked up that the ecclesiastic attachment to the mission liked him some solder boys, the AdMech did not care, but it was only slightly frowned on.

Of course, it would have been frowned on even if it was heterosexual.

Eumerin wrote:

EDIT: I believe slavery was an exception to this. The Imperium doesn't seem to tolerate it.

I don't know whether slavery itself is banned, but there are enough examples of "slavery in all but name" to make the point effectively moot.

Slavery is far from banned in the Imperium. They just tend not to do it to non-Mutants. Mutant slavery is the only way that mutants are allowed to actively survive in the Imperium.

It's why mutants tend to flock to Chaos, it promises them freedom over their Imperial overlords(and then turns around and just forces them into worse slavery under a different master at the cost of their souls).

I wouldn't say the joke has been retconned away...
Lion EL'Johnson Still is the Primarch of the Dark Angels
They still have a terrible Secret.

For those not in the know...linky

Platuan4th wrote:

Eumerin wrote:

EDIT: I believe slavery was an exception to this. The Imperium doesn't seem to tolerate it.

I don't know whether slavery itself is banned, but there are enough examples of "slavery in all but name" to make the point effectively moot.

Slavery is far from banned in the Imperium. They just tend not to do it to non-Mutants. Mutant slavery is the only way that mutants are allowed to actively survive in the Imperium.

It's why mutants tend to flock to Chaos, it promises them freedom over their Imperial overlords(and then turns around and just forces them into worse slavery under a different master at the cost of their souls).

Slavery itself is hardly banned, there's just not an interplanetary slave trade, or at least an open one. De facto slavery is fairly common, though more in a serfdom/"company town" manner. Mutants aren't necessarily slaves either; Eisenhorn has an agriworld where they're tolerated as cheap labor due to a lack of humans. Generally they're just exterminated, since they're universally tainted by Chaos and possessed of a violent hatred of humans.

PresidentOfAsia wrote:I'm just curious, what are LGBT laws in the Imperium?

Are there gay, lesbian or bi people?

As an IG you are out for pretty much your entire life most likely fighting beside men. Lots of men. You will eat breakfast, with men. You will tell stories of battle, with men. and especially maintain your "weapon"........ with men.

Our TG friends seem kinda Slaanashii to me. Does that make me a bigot?

xXSir MontyXx wrote:
As an IG you are out for pretty much your entire life most likely fighting beside men. Lots of men. You will eat breakfast, with men. You will tell stories of battle, with men. and especially maintain your "weapon"........ with men.

Of course camp followers, brothel workers,transport ship crews and overall population of imperial planets also consists from men only.



Most probably on most worlds same-sex orientation is considered sin (hey, it's surely in domain of Slaanesh), but either "Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi" or this considered as sin with only slight penance - as any cult needs some "forgivable" sins.

PS I was shocked to read that for russian Orthodox Church in middle ages adultery and homosexualism were more serious sins than witchery.

It's not LGBT that's associated with Slaanesh, but hermaphroditism.

chyron wrote:Most probably on most worlds same-sex orientation is considered sin

I've seen no real evidence of this. Pretty much all fluff that's ever mentioned homosexuality in 40k has basically been that it's acceptable and the Imperium doesn't care-- heck it doesn't even seem to make other people uncomfortable, so in a sense that may be one of the few areas where the Imperium is more progressive than modern societies.

I don't know.

In a Theocracy that thinks that throwing human lives at problems will make them go away it wouldn't be far fetched to think that being a "breeder" would be encouraged in particularly draconian fashion.

Still, I think that this would vary from world to world.

Medium of Death wrote:Lionel Johnson was a poet that repressed his homosexuality and wrote the poem 'The Dark Angel'

Johnson's homosexuality caused internal conflict with the catholicism he practised. It was his secret 'shame' that he had to bear alone.

Lion El'Jonson was the Primarch of the Dark Angels, who was betrayed by Luther.

The Dark Angels now alone bear the 'shame' of knowing their dark secret while still serving the imperium.

I think this is the correlation anyway.

Pretty much. Though there isn't any fluff that I know of that the Dark Angels know of that if that is the case. I think with their hatred of all things chaos they'd go on some massive repentence crusade in the eye of terror if they were to view it as slaaneshi.

I am pleasantly surprised about how polite and mature this discussion has been.

Good show, folks!

Melissia wrote:It's not LGBT that's associated with Slaanesh, but hermaphroditism.

Sex with not even nominal connection to reproduction?Hellooo???
Anyway i can't imagine something like "gay pride" event on Imperial worlds without some prometheum-hot reaction from Ecclesiarchy.

And iirc in fluff (in all cases i remember) homosexual orientation was something not shown openly for reasons i think obvious. At same time i can't remember any country from last two centuries where anti-gay law wasn't used very selectively ((iirc only Third Reich was really enforcing this policy, but with number of "special cases" and only toward aryans)

chyron wrote:Sex with not even nominal connection to reproduction?

Yes, because that's why teens and college kids are having the sex.

Not because it's, y'know, FUN or an expression of emotional attachment.

chyron wrote:Sex with not even nominal connection to reproduction?Hellooo???

So? Taht just means that their industrial/military/whatever efficiency doesn't go down despite their relationship-- it would if one of them became pregnant.

Slaanesh isn't the god of sex. S/he's the god of excess.

Honestly, I think it's vague for the whole "were not going near that with a 10ft pole" stance from GW.

IMO, or how I think/like it to work, seems to be the consensus. Do your duty, pay your taxes and die when told to, what you do with your sexual organs (as long as it does not interfere with previous) is a waste of time and effort on the administration.

And of course there is that whole, spend 20 years not seeing a man/woman thing throughout history. Hell, some people don't make it a year now, most of the rape cases we had in Iraq (coalition forces) were male on male. Though, rape =/= sex (sorta) so that may be a mute point.

I just see it that with all the rest of the problems rampaging around their galaxy, sexual orientation is a old hat. Your not going to care what the Jones are doing in their bedroom, your going to care if the Jones sprout horns and open a deamon portal. Or where your going to get your next meal from, ect ect.

And while alot of folks may see being LGBT as being fairly Slaaneshy, maybe if it was done only for sex, and not in a relationship type situation. Being LGBT doesn't mean their running around in huge drug soaked orgies, just having a lifemate of the possibly same/different gender.

Given the Emperor's views on promoting the growth of Mankind, I would think he'd frown on homosexuality as an evolutionary cul-de-sac.

Why does everyone assume that every imperial would shout "SLAANESH!" the moment they witnesses homosexuality

Unless they're an inquisitor or a grey knight they will have never heard of Slaanesh or anything to do with chaos. Most imperial citizens aren't activley looking for heresy, why infact only the Inquisition, the Arbites, Astartes and commissariat make any effort to root out heresy.

Dr. Lemonade wrote:Given the Emperor's views on promoting the growth of Mankind, I would think he'd frown on homosexuality as an evolutionary cul-de-sac.

That presumes there's no evolutionary reason for the existence of homosexuality (there are many proposed reasons for gene-caused homosexual preferences).

Monster Rain wrote:I don't know.

In a Theocracy that thinks that throwing human lives at problems will make them go away it wouldn't be far fetched to think that being a "breeder" would be encouraged in particularly draconian fashion.

Still, I think that this would vary from world to world.

The "drown it in bodies" solution is mostly a product of having such a massive population that billions of lives could be thrown away every year and it wouldn't begin to slow population growth. The Imperial military makes up less than a thousandth of its population, most of which comes from hiveworlds where one thousandth of the population is greater than the current population of the US.

But yeah, definitely a "varies from world to world" sort of thing, just like any cultural element, since the Imperium's only universal policy is "recognize that the emperor is awesome (and is actually whatever god you already worship, just fyi), don't consort with xenos (because they want to eat you), don't tolerate mutants (because they want to eat you), and don't worship the ruinous powers (because they will summon daemons, who want to eat you)".

Melissia wrote:

Slaanesh isn't the god of sex. S/he's the god of excess.

Slaanesh is also associated with deviancy in any form. Some might claim that sex for purposes other than procreation is a form of deviancy and that sex with a same sex partner would also fall under that category.

I'd like to ask the OP why this topic was even breached? When I read the first post I thought, "Oh my God, start the flame wars." Luckily that never happened and the discussion has really moved in a good direction, but really who cares what the fictional plastic men do while they're tucked away in their nice foam houses?

augustus5 wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Slaanesh isn't the god of sex. S/he's the god of excess.

Slaanesh is also associated with deviancy in any form.

That's not true, or Slaanesh would also rule over the other gods.

Because BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD is certainly deviant. So is a living person having rotting flesh. Or a sorcerer forcing lots of mutations on others.

Slaanesh is the god of excess, hedonism, the desire for perfection, etc.

Homosexuality has nothing to do with any of these. Being homosexual does not mean that one is doing anything in excess any more than is normal for a person-- being excessive does not mean that one is homosexual. Being homosexual does not mean that one is being hedonistic any more than is normal for a person-- being hedonistic does nto mean that one is being homosexual. Being homosexual does nto mean that one desires for perfection any more than any normal person-- and I think you get my point.

Even by your definition that Slaanesh is the God of excess and not deviancy; some would say that sex for any purpose other than procreation is sex in excess. So a practicing homosexual would be having sex in excess.

augustus5 wrote:some would say that sex for any purpose other than procreation is sex in excess.

This opinion is not that of the Ecclesiarchy.

Melissia wrote:

augustus5 wrote:some would say that sex for any purpose other than procreation is sex in excess.

This opinion is not that of the Ecclesiarchy.

There does appear to be some frowning upon promiscuity, or idealizing chastity at least, though I have never seen it connected to the matter of procreation specifically.

Even chastity isn't really itself valued, but rather, being so dedicated to your job that you are effectively chaste is.

I doubt anyone would care as long as it doesnt transfer over to worship of salaanesh and they do their planetary duties.

While Slaanesh does embody the deviant powers... homosexuality is not considered a deviancy in the Imperium. It's something people do, and that alone does not make them Chaos Cultists or heretics.

Melissia wrote:Even chastity isn't really itself valued, but rather, being so dedicated to your job that you are effectively chaste is.

Yup. And as noted earlier, homosexual attachments can actually be more compatible with dedication to a job. No inherent conflict with pregnancy.