[accepted] No Sex Please, We're @@DEMONYM@@

[The Free Joy State]

As many issue-ers will know, the "No Sex" policy prohibits reproductive but not recreational sex. Anyway, I was rewatching the 1984 film of Nineteen-Eighty-Four, which features "the Junior Anti-Sex League" (which wants all children produced by artificial insemination and all people to be celibate).

I thought it might be fun to write an issue with the "Anti-Sex League" wanting to ban recreational sex in @@NAME@@ (seeing as there's already artificial insemination), and exploring some of the different weird and wonderful policies that can occur with the No Sex policy. A lot of options, but they're all fairly short, and not every country will be eligible for all of them (no less than 3 and no more than 5)

Draft 2: Minor text changes and new effect line for 6

[title]No Sex Please, We're @@DEMONYM@@

[validity] No Sex policy; adult only

[description] Since reproductive sex was banned, a vocal group of slightly twitchy people calling themselves the Anti-Sex League have attracted members from across society into their ranks, including one of your aunts, two uncles and three senior Ministers. The group has taken a lifelong vow of celibacy, claiming sex is a distraction.

[option] "Recreational intercourse is a waste of energy that @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ could spend productively," says @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, the League's red sash tightly wound around her hips and swishing as she jogs ceaselessly on the spot. "By routing the sex instinct, @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ would choose to attend community classes on practical skills, go on long community hikes and take part in nonstop energetic sports to burn off excess tens... just because they're fun."
[effect] couples never seem to learn to use a screwdriver at the ever-popular 'Manual Handling and Tools' class

[option validity = lower than average political freedom]
[option] "This crazy broad might be onto something," mutters your Minister of Propaganda and Leader-Love. "People's partners interfere with their love for you, which must be absolute and undying. Now we make infants in a vat, there's no need for pathetic private families. Break up every private family and crush all personal relationships. You ought not compete for the love of a single supplicant."
[effect] the word "partner" is an obscenity

[option validity = no contraception, no abortion, has human sacrifice]
[option] "Is that the best you can do?" cackles the Minister of Machiavellianism, twirling his rather stylish pencil moustache. "Puh-lease! I could have coughed that up before breakfast. Picture this: without contraception, all these women are getting sprogged-up. We need, ahem, willing sacrifices to the gods or whatever we're doing it for. Sure, some sad cows may not be happy when the squads take their babies away, but they knew what they were getting into when they did the four-legged foxtrot."
[effect] birth is the leading cause of death

[option validity = no contraception; no abortion; no human sacrifice]
[option] "Why ban something that helps couples bond and improves cohesion?" asks @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, your Minister of Misadventures, who looks a lot thicker at the waist than you remember. "Of course, no-one wants to bring children into the world viviparously. We're in love, not sick! We... general, nonspecific people want to have children as nature intended, in a governmental vat. By distributing free contraception to all and permitting abortion, you'd enable people to enjoy a positive relationship with their partner without breaking the law."
[effect] people singing on the way to work is a major contributor to noise pollution

[option] "@@LEADER@@, you're not gonna listen to those repressed nutters in the Anti-Sex League, are you?" groans @@RANDOMNAME@@, author of sex-positive encyclopaedia The Big Book of Bonking. "Regular safe sex lowers your blood pressure and reduces the risk of certain cancers. You should encourage @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ to adopt a healthy attitude. Perhaps you could even provide allotted breaks for couples who work different shifts. Nothing's too good for the nation's health."
[effect] it's said that @@LEADER@@ can turn every pleasure into a chore

[option] @@RANDOMNAME@@, of the Anti-Pleasure League, opens @@RANDOMFIRSTNAME_5@'s book and drops it with a shriek of alarm. "All these people show an unnatural desire for selfish indulgence. Vacuous pleasure brings societies to their knees. And the moral decay of @@NAME@@ began with the ban of reproductive coitus. Restore intercourse to its natural reproductive function, and teach @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ that it is a serious task for the perpetuation of the @@TYPE@@, not for fun!"
[effect] relationships counselling involves telling couples to "close their eyes and think of @@NAME@@"

[title]No Sex Please, We're @@DEMONYM@@

[validity] No Sex policy; adult only

[description] Since reproductive sex was banned, a group of vocal and slightly twitchy people calling themselves the Anti-Sex League have attracted members from across society into their ranks, including one of your aunts, two uncles and three senior Ministers. The group has taken a lifelong vow of celibacy, claiming sex is a distraction.

[option] "Recreational intercourse is a waste of energy that @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ could spend productively," says @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, the League's red sash tightly wound around her hips and swishing as she jogs ceaselessly on the spot. "By routing the sex instinct, @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ would choose to attend community classes on practical skills, go on fun community hikes and take part in nonstop energetic sports to burn off excess tens... just because people like them."
[effect] couples flock to the ever-popular class 'Manual Handling and Tools Usage' but never learn to use a screwdriver

[option validity = lower than average political freedom]
[option] "This crazy broad might be onto something," mutters your Minister of Propaganda and Leader-Love. "If people have a partner, that interferes with their love for you, which must be absolute and undying. Now we make infants in a vat, there's no need for pathetic private families. Break up every private family and crush all personal relationships. You ought not compete for the love of a single supplicant."
[effect] the word "partner" is an obscenity

[option validity = no contraception, no abortion, has human sacrifice]
[option] "Is that the best you can do?" cackles the Minister of Machiavellianism, twirling his rather stylish pencil moustache. "Puh-lease! I could have coughed that up before breakfast. Picture this: without contraception all these women are getting sprogged-up. We need, ahem, willing sacrifices to the gods or whyever it is we're supposed to be doing human sacrifice this year. Put one and one together. Sure, some sad cows may not be happy when the squads take their babies away, but they should have thought of that beforehand."
[effect] birth is the leading cause of death

[option validity = no contraception; no abortion; no human sacrifice]
[option] "People would make love, even if you ban it," says @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, your Minister of Misadventures, who looks a lot thicker at the waist than you remember. "But why would a great leader ban a way to help couples bond? Of course, no-one wants to break the law and bring children into the world viviparously. We... general people, I mean, want to have children naturally, in a governmental vat. By legalising contraception and abortion, you'd enable people to enjoy a positive relationship with their partner without breaking the law."
[effect] the number of people singing on the way to work is a major contributor to noise pollution

[option] "@@LEADER@@, you're not gonna listen to those repressed nutters in the Anti-Sex League, are you?" groans @@RANDOMNAME@@, author of sex-positive encyclopaedia The Big Book of Bonking. "Regular safe sex lowers your blood pressure and reduces the risk of certain cancers. You should encourage @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ to adopt a healthy attitude. Perhaps you could even provide allotted breaks for couples who work different shifts. Nothing's too good for the nation's health."
[effect] it's said that @@LEADER@@ can turn every pleasure into a chore

[option] @@RANDOMNAME@@, of the Anti-Pleasure League, opens @@RANDOMFIRSTNAME_5@'s book and drops it with a shriek of alarm. "All these people show an unnatural desire for selfish indulgence. Vacuous pleasure brings societies to their knees. And the moral decay of @@NAME@@ began with the ban of reproductive coitus. Restore intercourse to its natural reproductive function, and teach @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ that it is a serious task for the perpetuation of the @@TYPE@@, not for fun!"
[effect] sex manuals resemble instructions for building a shelving unit

[title]No Sex Please, We're @@DEMONYM@@

[validity] No Sex policy; adult only

[description] Since reproductive sex was banned, a group of vocal and slightly twitchy people calling themselves the Anti-Sex League have attracted members from across society into their ranks, including one of your aunts, two uncles and three senior Ministers. The group has taken a lifelong vow of celibacy, claiming sex is a distraction.

[option] "Recreational intercourse is a waste of energy that @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ could use to better themselves," says @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, the League's red sash tightly wound around her hips and swishing as she jogs ceaselessly on the spot. "Rather than practise indoor wrestling, @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ could attend community classes on practical skills, go on fun community hikes and take part in nonstop energetic sports to burn off excess tens... just because people like them. Ban useless recreational intercourse and say 'yes' to real fun.”
[effect] couples flock to the ever-popular class 'Manual Handling and Tools Usage' but never learn to use a screwdriver

[option validity = lower than average political freedom]
[option] "This crazy broad might be onto something," mutters your Minister of Propaganda and Leader-Love. "If people have a partner, they are not paying enough attention to you. It should be only you they'd die for. Any other love competes with that rightful adoration. Now we can make infants in a vat, there's no need for pathetic private families. Break up every private family and crush all personal relationships. No single unit should compete with you for another unit's love."
[effect] the word "partner" is an obscenity

[option validity = no contraception, no abortion, has human sacrifice]
[option] "Is that the best you can do?" cackles the Minister of Machiavellianism, twirling his rather stylish pencil moustache. "Puh-lease! I could have coughed that up before breakfast. Picture this: without contraception all these women are getting sprogged-up. We need, ahem, willing sacrifices to the gods or whyever it is we're supposed to be doing human sacrifice this year. Put one and one together. Sure, some sad cows may not be happy when the squads take their babies away, but they should have thought of that beforehand."
[effect] birth is the leading cause of death

[option validity = no contraception; no abortion; no human sacrifice]
[option] "Okay, we're getting a little coo-coo here," says @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, your Minister of Misadventures, who looks a lot thicker at the waist than you remember. "People would make love, even if you ban it. And you really shouldn't ban it; it’s a wonderful way to bond couples together. Of course, no-one wants to break the law and bring children into the world viviparously. We... people in general, I mean, want to have children the natural way, in a governmental vat. By legalising contraception and abortion, you would enable people to enjoy a positive physical relationship with their partner without breaking the law."
[effect] the number of people singing on the way to work is a major contributor to noise pollution

[option] "@@LEADER@@, you're not gonna listen to those repressed nutters in the Anti-Sex League, are you?" groans @@RANDOMNAME@@, author of sex-positive encyclopaedia The Big Book of Bonking. "Regular safe sex lowers your blood pressure and reduces the risk of certain cancers. You should encourage @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ to adopt a more healthy attitude. Perhaps you could even provide allotted breaks for couples who work different shifts. Nothing's too good for the nation's health."
[effect] it's said that @@LEADER@@ can turn every pleasure into a chore

[option] @@RANDOMNAME@@, of the Anti-Pleasure League, opens @@RANDOMFIRSTNAME_5@'s book and drops it with a shriek of alarm. "All these people show an unnatural desire for selfish indulgence. Vacuous pleasure brings societies to their knees. And the moral decay of @@NAME@@ began with the ban of reproductive coitus. Restore intercourse to its natural reproductive function, and teach @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ that it is a serious task for the perpetuation of the @@TYPE@@, not for fun!"
[effect] sex manuals resemble instructions for building a shelving unit

[The Marsupial Illuminati]

A lot of options, but they're all fairly short,

I haven't read the rest of your draft, but I just want to say that these are regular-length options. They just look short to you because you usually write paragraphs for your options.

[The Free Joy State]

A lot of options, but they're all fairly short,

I haven't read the rest of your draft, but I just want to say that these are regular-length options. They just look short to you because you usually write paragraphs for your options.

What can I say... I tried.

[Jutsa]

Yes, it's definitely very long, but I personally enjoyed it quite a lot.

(I quite like the guy with the twirling moustache)

Only thing it could use is maybe a little shrinking. Also, Option 6 feels a little unnecessary, although I also enjoy there being another no-sex reversal.

Minister of Propaganda and Leader-Love.

[Trotterdam]

I thought it might be fun to write an issue with the "Anti-Sex League" wanting to ban recreational sex in @@NAME@@ (seeing as there's already artificial insemination),

#364 allows this. It doesn't set the No Sex policy because it doesn't use vats. (From a biological standpoint, artificial insemination is reproductive sex.)

The fact that your draft is specifically for nations where reproductive sex is already banned clearly distinguishes it from that issue, though.

Also note that some options for instituting vats already imply a desire to prevent recreational sex (#486 talks about "asexual grunts", and #358, which talks about "neutering", which normally means castration/spaying rather than just sterilization). In fact, only the original #123 uses language ("sterilize") that implies that non-reproductive sex remains possible. Well, that and #1028, which doesn't even make it clear that it's going to ban reproductive sex, only supplement it.

[option validity = no contraception, no abortion, has human sacrifice]

[option validity = no contraception; no abortion; no human sacrifice]

As noted, all ways to implement No Sex other than #1028 use language that makes it clear the vat-grown citizens will be sterilized to begin with, one way or another. It's iffy what the No Contraception policy would mean under such circumstances (you shouldn't really need a pill if you've already been surgically sterilized, or were vat-grown without functioning reproductive organs to begin with), and, but I think we should be going off narrative rather than game mechanics that I have already highlighted as needing review, meaning that these situations should not occur.

[The Free Joy State]

Yes, it's definitely very long, but I personally enjoyed it quite a lot.

Thank you.

(I quite like the guy with the twirling moustache)

I quite like the Minister of Machiavellianism myself.

Only thing it could use is maybe a little shrinking. Also, Option 6 feels a little unnecessary, although I also enjoy there being another no-sex reversal.

I'll look into making some cuts, but I'm not tempted to lose #6. Not only because it's nice to have more than one reversal, but because it fits thematically and because otherwise some nations would only have two options.

Two option issues are not generally popular with some members of the team.

I thought it might be fun to write an issue with the "Anti-Sex League" wanting to ban recreational sex in @@NAME@@ (seeing as there's already artificial insemination),

#364 allows this. It doesn't set the No Sex policy because it doesn't use vats. (From a biological standpoint, artificial insemination is reproductive sex.)

The fact that your draft is specifically for nations where reproductive sex is already banned clearly distinguishes it from that issue, though.

The No Sex policy is specifically reproductive sex. So, sticking within that policy, no overlap could ever occur (well, someone could always write another in a similar milieu for people with the policy, but mentioning sex does not an overlap make)

Also note that some options for instituting vats already imply a desire to prevent recreational sex (#486 talks about "asexual grunts", and #358, which talks about "neutering", which normally means castration/spaying rather than just sterilization). In fact, only the original #123 uses language ("sterilize") that implies that non-reproductive sex remains possible. Well, that and #1028, which doesn't even make it clear that it's going to ban reproductive sex, only supplement it.

No mechanism to actually ban recreational sex exists within issues. So that's alright.

[option validity = no contraception, no abortion, has human sacrifice]

[option validity = no contraception; no abortion; no human sacrifice]

As noted, all ways to implement No Sex other than #1028 use language that makes it clear the vat-grown citizens will be sterilized to begin with, one way or another. It's iffy what the No Contraception policy would mean under such circumstances (you shouldn't really need a pill if you've already been surgically sterilized, or were vat-grown without functioning reproductive organs to begin with), and, but I think we should be going off narrative rather than game mechanics that I have already highlighted as needing review, meaning that these situations should not occur.

Yeah, we discussed No Sex policy (and its interaction with abortion, contraception and human sacrifice) backstage, ages ago.

We prefer not to interfere with players' gameplay choices on this particular facet.

EDIT: Anyway, as in Brave New World, a percentage of people would have to be grown fertile. Otherwise, where would the genetic material -- the raw ova and sperm -- come from to supply the vats and grow the next generation? For example, in Brave New World, there were men, women and freemartins (sterile women). Without regulation contraceptives, the fertile women could still conceive.

[Jutsa]

and because otherwise some nations would only have two options.

Wow, I completely missed that one.

Yeah, definitely keep 6 then.

[Trotterdam]

EDIT: Anyway, as in Brave New World, a percentage of people would have to be grown fertile. Otherwise, where would the genetic material -- the raw ova and sperm -- come from to supply the vats and grow the next generation?

Cloning, possibly with artificial genetic recombination (or tweaking)?

That at least removes the need for sperm. From what I'm reading on Wikipedia current cloning techniques do require a proper egg to implant the genes in, but it's conceivable that a nation with the technology for vat growth would have figured out some way to use cell cultures for that purpose, or you could at least render the egg-donors naturally infertile through techniques like hysterectomy or tubal ligation that don't interfere with egg production but do prevent conception. In fact, newborn girls already have ova, so you could just surgically extract those and then sterilize them by the time they hit puberty. These ova aren't fully usable yet, but you can probably mature them to fertility through the same techniques that make vat growth from that point onward possible.

[The Free Joy State]

EDIT: Anyway, as in Brave New World, a percentage of people would have to be grown fertile. Otherwise, where would the genetic material -- the raw ova and sperm -- come from to supply the vats and grow the next generation?

Cloning, possibly with artificial genetic recombination (or tweaking)?

That at least removes the need for sperm. From what I'm reading on Wikipedia current cloning techniques do require a proper egg to implant the genes in, but it's conceivable that a nation with the technology for vat growth would have figured out some way to use cell cultures for that purpose, or you could at least render the egg-donors naturally infertile through techniques like hysterectomy or tubal ligation that don't interfere with egg production but do prevent conception. In fact, newborn girls already have ova, so you could just surgically extract those and then sterilize them by the time they hit puberty. These ova aren't fully usable yet, but you can probably mature them to fertility through the same techniques that make vat growth from that point onward possible.

It's assuming a lot about a nation's technology and systems, isn't it?

Which is exactly why we'd already decided not to link contraception and abortion with the No Sex policy.

[Jutsa]

Come to think of it, nations without contraceptives and especially without abortion would also have the problem of encountering accidental reproduction.

[Krogon]

As someone who accidentally put the No Sex policy in because I didn't read an option right, I feel this is a must have.

[Sanctaria]

Just popping in here to say very quickly any concerns about overlap are unnecessary, and it's up to the Editors as a team to decide what level of overlap disqualifies the issue, not any other user.

[Krogon]

?

[Australian rePublic]

Can you use the word "sex" in an issue title

[Jutsa]

Can confim, it's been done 2-4 times, depending if you count intersex and transexual.

[The Free Joy State]

Can confim, it's been done 2-4 times, depending if you count intersex and transexual.

I was only counting the two times it's appeared as a separate word.

New draft up. Some changes and a new effect line.

[Stoklomolvi]

I think this issue is good for clarifying what the policy actually refers to (i.e. not banning recreational sex); so I also think this issue is important to have.