CG Midlander

[Catapult]

7. When did Eorzeans start using the Garlean term of "beastmen" that allowed it to become a perfectly acceptable term attracting absolutely no backlash by the time we start playing the game? And if this term could be so well engrained, why aren't we calling the primals "eikons" with equal willingness? It seems a bit of a contradiction.

It depends on who you ask. The people of Ul’dah, who have branded the beast tribes as an ultimate threat (as their presence infringes on profits) are more likely to side with the Empire’s take on the issue, and resort to racial epithets conveniently provided by the empire via propaganda (fliers from the sky, hired rabble rousers, etc). On the other hand, there are those (like Minfilia and others on the Path, or the Ashcrown Consortium) who seek peaceful relations with the tribes. These are more likely to use terms such as primal over eikon. And then there are those who float about in the middle, and simply haven’t given it much thought—kind of like my grandfather who probably wasn’t what I’d call a ‘racist,’ but ended up using terms (that we now deem racist) throughout his life just because that’s what the people around him used.

I've been pondering over this a little more, Ferne, but I'm only half convinced. A quote for you from Toll of the Warden:

Troxia: If one knows what a beastman wants, negotiation is simple.

That's a Sylph itself referring to members of the tribes as beastmen. A Sylph using a term designed by Garleans to demonise them and promote their own destruction. I don't buy it.

...unless of course the echo is translating meaning directly into my mind and it's actually ME using the term. But then there is this:

Nananoby: You had best not speak that name around the beast tribes, lest you incur their wrath. “Eikon” is a derogatory term used by the Garleans to reflect their belief that the primals are not true gods, but mere beasts which the ignorant tribes mistakenly worship.

And then this:

Hedyn: Welcome back, Thal. Nananoby was kind enough to provide a full account of your dealings with the beast tribes.

"Beast" tribes. It's still bugging me. For people who have the highest level of diplomatic relations with the tribes to be welcome to use such a racist Garlean term, I find it very surprising, cultural slurs or no. It stands in stark contrast to the term "eikon" which supposedly draws much ire from the tribes, yet the term exists in conjunction with the denomination "beast."

So yeah, it's still bugging me.