I've actually been doing these posts to encourage a spectrum of roleplay and tribal values. I was arguing that there should be a spectrum of acceptable roleplay for Miqo'te from lost Amazon tribe to big city socialite, which is why some of my suggested challenges are brutal and some involve little to no bloodshed. This would affect every level, from individual Seeker up to the tribe level. For example, if the raptor tribe became a civilized tribe, they might dominate the goldsmithing and gemcutting trade due to fine eyesight, extra patience, and an attention to minute detail (assuming by "raptor" they mean birds of prey like hawks and owls). This would lead to a very high standard of living. Perhaps in that refined city culture, their means of challenging the Nunh would involve crafting skills or business acumen rather than combat skills. My point being that culture is learned and readily transferable. A Miqo'te as a sentient creature would be the product of their environment and education as readily as any human is.
I read Kyatai's quote completely differently. To me it had literally nothing to do with tribal versus city culture. The problem I ran into occurred when I suggested a behavior that was feline or animal in nature based on a different natural history from that of primates. It tended to get a bad reaction. As if somehow the only possible distinctions were human behaviors and less than human behaviors.
Though I didn't lay it out specifically in the other thread, my perspective is that Miqo'te are derived from predators. They may be omnivores now, but my assumption is that they would be predator turned omnivore which is likely to have a very different outlook from herbivore turned omnivore. The notion that this difference in natural history would lead to some potentially different values (namely the value of life) and different behaviors just seemed to rub some of the readers the wrong way. Thus my own exasperation with the notion of Miqo'te as "humans with fluffy ears and tails" came from a biological perspective, not a cultural one. I personally feel that when comparing the two species, Miqo'te would be more confident, aggressive, and predatory (though there would obviously be individual variation). I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that my view on this point is very unique given my scientific background, and that I shouldn't expect it to be reflected in the community at large. I do, however, enjoy educating others and engaging in healthy debate.
[Incidentally, the primary reason scientists believe all feline species are predatory and that none branched out to eat plants has to do with their taste receptors. The entire cat family, from house cats to tigers, lacks an essential protein for building the sweetness taste receptors. No feline is capable of recognizing the sugar content of its food, thus there is no gustatory attraction to sweet foods (like fruits and vegetables). Only salty, fatty, and umami flavors would be attractive to a feline, leading us as humans to consider them 'finicky.' If that were also the case in Miqo'te, they'd remain staunch predators, and any attraction to sweet treats like cakes, pies, etc. would likely be an appreciation for the fat content or flavoring agents like chocolate, not the sugar.]
I read Kyatai's quote completely differently. To me it had literally nothing to do with tribal versus city culture. The problem I ran into occurred when I suggested a behavior that was feline or animal in nature based on a different natural history from that of primates. It tended to get a bad reaction. As if somehow the only possible distinctions were human behaviors and less than human behaviors.
Though I didn't lay it out specifically in the other thread, my perspective is that Miqo'te are derived from predators. They may be omnivores now, but my assumption is that they would be predator turned omnivore which is likely to have a very different outlook from herbivore turned omnivore. The notion that this difference in natural history would lead to some potentially different values (namely the value of life) and different behaviors just seemed to rub some of the readers the wrong way. Thus my own exasperation with the notion of Miqo'te as "humans with fluffy ears and tails" came from a biological perspective, not a cultural one. I personally feel that when comparing the two species, Miqo'te would be more confident, aggressive, and predatory (though there would obviously be individual variation). I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that my view on this point is very unique given my scientific background, and that I shouldn't expect it to be reflected in the community at large. I do, however, enjoy educating others and engaging in healthy debate.
[Incidentally, the primary reason scientists believe all feline species are predatory and that none branched out to eat plants has to do with their taste receptors. The entire cat family, from house cats to tigers, lacks an essential protein for building the sweetness taste receptors. No feline is capable of recognizing the sugar content of its food, thus there is no gustatory attraction to sweet foods (like fruits and vegetables). Only salty, fatty, and umami flavors would be attractive to a feline, leading us as humans to consider them 'finicky.' If that were also the case in Miqo'te, they'd remain staunch predators, and any attraction to sweet treats like cakes, pies, etc. would likely be an appreciation for the fat content or flavoring agents like chocolate, not the sugar.]
I'm a tinker! Tinkerer? Hrm.... I'm an artificer! - Myxie Tryxle | Impressions and Memories
