Is Trill society screwed up?

[Fashion Victim]

This thread is somewhat inspired by Joel Kirk's last thread, which got me remembering some questions I've always had about the trill attitudes when it comes to various matter regarding the relationship between host and symbiont.

1. Do you think the punishment for a joined Trill that pursues a relationship with a partner from their past lives, where said Trill is exiled in order to prevent the symbiont from joining again, and as a consequence dying with the host, is a little harsh? Perhaps you do agree otherwise joined Trills can turn into a upper caste an aristocratic guild of sorts?

2. Do you think they should always always give the symbiont the priority, or should they try as hard as they can first to save both host and symbiont?

3. What if the host is a pregnant female?

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

This thread is somewhat inspired by Joel Kirk's last thread, which got me remembering some questions I've always had about the trill attitudes when it comes to various matter regarding the relationship between host and symbiont.

1. Do you think the punishment for a joined Trill that pursues a relationship with a partner from their past lives, where said Trill is exiled in order to prevent the symbiont from joining again, and as a consequence dying with the host, is a little harsh? Perhaps you do agree otherwise joined Trills can turn into a upper caste an aristocratic guild of sorts?

I think the punishment is a little excessive given the rarity of symbionts (not enough to satisfy the demand) one would think they would be a little less trigger happy about eliminating them. Surely there must be punishments less drastic than that for that infraction. Besides Ezri didn't seem too concerned about that when she slept with Worf. Not very consistent if you ask me.

2. Do you think they should always always give the symbiont the priority, or should they try as hard as they can first to save both host and symbiont?

Without the symbiont the host will die anyway so it makes sense to prioritize the life of the symbiont.

3. What if the host is a pregnant female?

So? We know for sure that it happened a few times with Dax. What of it?

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Putting aside the question of whether the punishment fits the crime, I don't find it harsh in and of itself. It is exile, a punishment that has been historically an alternative to the death penalty and life imprisonment. In the context of the show, I would think that various societies would not themselves be party to the shunning of the offending trill. The exiled Trill would be denied services of his or her world, but that is not in and of itself the imposition of a death penalty. It is a denial of reproductive services, a passive decision that has consequences for those who seek those services, but it does not bring that beings life to an immediate end.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

Putting aside the question of whether the punishment fits the crime, I don't find it harsh in and of itself. It is exile, a punishment that has been historically an alternative to the death penalty and life imprisonment. In the context of the show, I would think that various societies would not themselves be party to the shunning of the offending trill. The exiled Trill would be denied services of his or her world, but that is not in and of itself the imposition of a death penalty. It is a denial of reproductive services, a passive decision that has consequences for those who seek those services, but it does not bring that beings life to an immediate end.

I am sorry but given that a symbiont can live many hosts lives, it is in fact no better than a death penalty. It's comparable to refusing insulin to a diabetic, slightly less bad in practice than putting a bullet in his/her head and morally exactly the same.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Putting aside the question of whether the punishment fits the crime, I don't find it harsh in and of itself. It is exile, a punishment that has been historically an alternative to the death penalty and life imprisonment. In the context of the show, I would think that various societies would not themselves be party to the shunning of the offending trill. The exiled Trill would be denied services of his or her world, but that is not in and of itself the imposition of a death penalty. It is a denial of reproductive services, a passive decision that has consequences for those who seek those services, but it does not bring that beings life to an immediate end.

I am sorry but given that a symbiont can live many hosts lives, it is in fact no better than a death penalty. It's comparable to refusing insulin to a diabetic, slightly less bad in practice than putting a bullet in his/her head and morally exactly the same.

Not to be indifferent or to open up a political debate, but in American society, health care decisions are often made on grounds that have far fewer moral implications than what happens in Rejoined: simply on the inability to pay.

 

[Orphalesion]

As a 21st century human I have to admit I find the very act of joining host at the same time fascinating and yet mildly off-putting.

I agree the law is very excessive, in my opinion a prohibition for joined Trill to enter a relationship with another joined Trill would be sufficient to prevent the formation of an "Joined Trill Caste".

What I find a bit inconsistent with the Trill is how the Host-Symbiont relationship is handled.
In some Episodes it seems like the symbiont is just a sort of "memory jar" and Jadzia herself and Sisko (possibly others as well) make a clear difference in dialogue between Jadzia and Dax.
In other episodes its handled akin to a fusion of the two beings with Sisko calling Jadzia "old man" and dialogue from Jadzia indicating that she is Jadzia and Curzon at the same time.
It would be really interesting to get an explanation how the symbiosis between the Trill and the symbionts evolved and developed.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

Putting aside the question of whether the punishment fits the crime, I don't find it harsh in and of itself. It is exile, a punishment that has been historically an alternative to the death penalty and life imprisonment. In the context of the show, I would think that various societies would not themselves be party to the shunning of the offending trill. The exiled Trill would be denied services of his or her world, but that is not in and of itself the imposition of a death penalty. It is a denial of reproductive services, a passive decision that has consequences for those who seek those services, but it does not bring that beings life to an immediate end.

I am sorry but given that a symbiont can live many hosts lives, it is in fact no better than a death penalty. It's comparable to refusing insulin to a diabetic, slightly less bad in practice than putting a bullet in his/her head and morally exactly the same.

Not to be indifferent or to open up a political debate, but in American society, health care decisions are often made on grounds that have far fewer moral implications than what happens in Rejoined: simply on the inability to pay.

The inability to pay is not even in question here. This is like refusing insulin to a diabetic that can pay as a punishment, IE the same as a death penalty with maybe a layer or two of hypocrisy to boot.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

I seem to remember the transfer of the worm to be more invasive than just a shot. Anyway ...

Let me pose this differently: what if all the potential hosts refused to accept the Dax symbiot because of reassociation?

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

1. Do you think the punishment for a joined Trill that pursues a relationship with a partner from their past lives, where said Trill is exiled in order to prevent the symbiont from joining again, and as a consequence dying with the host, is a little harsh? Perhaps you do agree otherwise joined Trills can turn into a upper caste an aristocratic guild of sorts?

Exile does seem a little harsh, but each Trill who is given the privilege of being Joined knows the responsibilities they have, to give the Symbiont as much new experiences and memories as they can give it. The punishment needs to be severe, to ensure that it doesn't happen very often.

2. Do you think they should always always give the symbiont the priority, or should they try as hard as they can first to save both host and symbiont?

Trill doctors have been shown to do what they can for the host, but they themselves would be the first to offer up their lives for the good of the Symbiont--it's what they've been trained to do, especially after years of nurturing and protecting it within themselves.

3. What if the host is a pregnant female?

Just because Trills are humanoid doesn't mean their wombs are in their bellies. Maybe like the Ocampa they have a birthing sack on their back. Dax birthed many children when in a female host without issues.

In short, no I don't think Trill society is screwed up, its delightfully alien, with its own sense of priorities and cultural norms.

 

[Leviathan]

It seems perfectly normal to them but then again 'Screwed up' is in the eye of the beholder.

That said a quick jaunt through the browser history of most folks would remove their right to assign the label 'screwed up'...

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

I seem to remember the transfer of the worm to be more invasive than just a shot. Anyway ...

Let me pose this differently: what if all the potential hosts refused to accept the Dax symbiot because of reassociation?

That's never going to happen, for one thing you'll have your pick among all of those that were rejected by the "unblemished" symbionts or their keepers. Surely they won't care that the symbiont committed what's not even a crime but more of a violation of a custom. And that means many, most of whom only got rejected because of a shortage of symbionts and not because they were unworthy.

Plus you're assured to get a host that's more open-minded than most and that means that both hosts and symbionts will be the happier for it.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

Let's not forget that one of the hosts of Dax committed a triple murder. That's way worse than re-association, no matter how you look at it. So if you're going to condemn a symbiont to death for the latter then why the hell not for the former???

 

[trekshark]

seeing that transferring a symbiont isn't that hard (crusher did it with no previous knowledge of trills) and the demand exceeding supply I'd think it'd be pretty easy for an exiled trill to find an unjoined trill to accept the symbiont when the host got old. Like a black market arrangement for joinings

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

seeing that transferring a symbiont isn't that hard (crusher did it with no previous knowledge of trills) and the demand exceeding supply I'd think it'd be pretty easy for an exiled trill to find an unjoined trill to accept the symbiont when the host got old. Like a black market arrangement for joinings

True enough, on Gaia they must have transferred the Dax symbiont at least three or four times with apparently no problem and in people that were only part Trill, a very small part I am guessing for the last one, after all those mixed marriages.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Let's not forget that one of the hosts of Dax committed a triple murder. That's way worse than re-association, no matter how you look at it. So if you're going to condemn a symbiont to death for the latter then why the hell not for the former???

Which would make Trill society hypocritical, if the murders had been public knowledge.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

I seem to remember the transfer of the worm to be more invasive than just a shot. Anyway ...

Let me pose this differently: what if all the potential hosts refused to accept the Dax symbiot because of reassociation?

That's never going to happen, for one thing you'll have your pick among all of those that were rejected by the "unblemished" symbionts or their keepers. Surely they won't care that the symbiont committed what's not even a crime but more of a violation of a custom. And that means many, most of whom only got rejected because of a shortage of symbionts and not because they were unworthy.

Plus you're assured to get a host that's more open-minded than most and that means that both hosts and symbionts will be the happier for it.

Perhaps some sort of market-driven demand will overcome the results of exile, but it would have to take place outside of Trill society ... in exile. It would depend on individuals being willing to overcome the taboos of Trill society and risk that they might, too, be banished should they be discovered.

Let's make this clear: exile is the punishement; the end of the symbiot, an inaction on the part of Trill society, is a consequence.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

Let's not forget that one of the hosts of Dax committed a triple murder. That's way worse than re-association, no matter how you look at it. So if you're going to condemn a symbiont to death for the latter then why the hell not for the former???

Which would make Trill society hypocritical, if the murders had been public knowledge.

They were known by the symbiont committee or whatever they call themselves.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

I seem to remember the transfer of the worm to be more invasive than just a shot. Anyway ...

Let me pose this differently: what if all the potential hosts refused to accept the Dax symbiot because of reassociation?

That's never going to happen, for one thing you'll have your pick among all of those that were rejected by the "unblemished" symbionts or their keepers. Surely they won't care that the symbiont committed what's not even a crime but more of a violation of a custom. And that means many, most of whom only got rejected because of a shortage of symbionts and not because they were unworthy.

Plus you're assured to get a host that's more open-minded than most and that means that both hosts and symbionts will be the happier for it.

Perhaps some sort of market-driven demand will overcome the results of exile, but it would have to take place outside of Trill society ... in exile. It would depend on individuals being willing to overcome the taboos of Trill society and risk that they might, too, be banished should they be discovered.

Let's make this clear: exile is the punishement; the end of the symbiot, an inaction on the part of Trill society, is a consequence.

That's like saying: "Dropping the ten ton rock on you" is the punishment, "you being crushed to a bloody pulp" is only a consequence.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

That's never going to happen, for one thing you'll have your pick among all of those that were rejected by the "unblemished" symbionts or their keepers. Surely they won't care that the symbiont committed what's not even a crime but more of a violation of a custom. And that means many, most of whom only got rejected because of a shortage of symbionts and not because they were unworthy.

Plus you're assured to get a host that's more open-minded than most and that means that both hosts and symbionts will be the happier for it.

Perhaps some sort of market-driven demand will overcome the results of exile, but it would have to take place outside of Trill society ... in exile. It would depend on individuals being willing to overcome the taboos of Trill society and risk that they might, too, be banished should they be discovered.

Let's make this clear: exile is the punishement; the end of the symbiot, an inaction on the part of Trill society, is a consequence.

That's like saying: "Dropping the ten ton rock on you" is the punishment, "you being crushed to a bloody pulp" is only a consequence.

No, not really. No one is actively killing the symbiot. Period.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

Perhaps some sort of market-driven demand will overcome the results of exile, but it would have to take place outside of Trill society ... in exile. It would depend on individuals being willing to overcome the taboos of Trill society and risk that they might, too, be banished should they be discovered.

Let's make this clear: exile is the punishement; the end of the symbiot, an inaction on the part of Trill society, is a consequence.

That's like saying: "Dropping the ten ton rock on you" is the punishment, "you being crushed to a bloody pulp" is only a consequence.

No, not really. No one is actively killing the symbiot. Period.

I beg to differ, if someone happens to be tied to a chair bolted to the ground and you drop a rock on them, technically you're not responsible for their death, gravity is. So blame it on Newton's law of attraction if you will but not on the person that dropped the rock. I am just following your logic here, nothing more, nothing less.