Page 287.
Added 2025-04-24 15:42:34 +0000 UTCSorry about the wait on this page, it took me a hot second to get back into the swing of things with producing actual comic book pages again. I’ve been so used to working on infographics lately and formatting volume 2. Speaking of which, I received the physical copies the other day, I’ve included some photos of that in this post, I’m honestly so pleased with them. I have noticed a few things that need to be touched up here and there though, so I’m going to make those corrections before working on the next page. I appreciate your patience and support, things will be back to normal again when the second volume is out.
Comments
That’s a really insightful question, and I want to answer it carefully. Attraction isn’t just about intelligence or friendship. Romantic and sexual attraction depends on very deep, pre-rational instincts, and factors such as body shape, smell, chemical cues, movement styles, vocalisations, emotional expressions, and mating displays all play a role. When two species have evolved in completely different environments, with radically different anatomies, life cycles, sensory perceptions, and emotional structures, there is simply no biological framework with which to generate mutual attraction. In the universe of Humanity Lost, while close friendships and alliances between species, such as Losté and Skiv, are absolutely possible, romantic or intimate relationships between different species are not. Even on Earth, humans do not find even closely related species like chimpanzees attractive, let alone creatures as different as octopuses or crows. Our sense of attraction is deeply tied to biological compatibility, shared social cues, and an instinctive drive towards reproduction. Gestures, facial expressions, sounds — even the very concept of “beauty” — would be alien across species. Beauty standards would vary enormously, and even if a member of one species did experience a zoophilic-like attraction towards another, the chances of that feeling being mutual would be astronomically low. Frankly, most species would likely find one another grotesque or incomprehensible (such as the Gord). Many would not even recognise facial expressions as communicative tools. These barriers go far beyond culture; they are hardwired into biology. Moreover, what “love” means would vary radically between species. Some species might not pair-bond at all. Others, like the Chantauri, are eusocial, operating more like ant colonies. Some have seasonal mating behaviours, or reproduce through purely mechanical or non-emotional means. The very concept of intimacy, as humans understand it, would be totally foreign to many alien species. Sexuality evolved primarily for reproduction. Even when reproduction is not the immediate goal, as in same-sex relationships, the underlying instincts and cues still evolved around mating within the same species. Between radically different species, there is no biological “script” to repurpose for romance or sexual bonding. You may point out that same-sex relationships are not based on reproduction either, so why could cross-species attraction not similarly develop? It’s a fair question, but there is an important difference: humans are naturally wired to recognise and respond to other humans — individuals who share the same physiology, communication styles, emotional expressions, and social instincts. Even in same-sex relationships, attraction is rooted in shared species-specific cues that are deeply embedded in how humans experience connection and intimacy. In Humanity Lost, cross-species sexual relationships are viewed much as bestiality is viewed in our world. Though not illegal in Conglomerate space, owing to how socially liberal the state is, such relationships are incredibly rare for the biological and psychological reasons outlined above. When they do occur, the individuals involved are typically subject to extreme social ostracism. However, among a tiny minority of cosmopolitan outcasts, individuals who are unusually emotionally flexible and culturally adventurous — cross-species relationships may be viewed with fascination, artistic reverence, or even romanticised.
Callum Diggle
2025-04-28 18:38:38 +0000 UTCThis might be an inappropriate question, but are love relationships between sapient species a thing in Humanity Lost? We see friendships throughout the story, best demonstrated by Losté and Skiv, so intimate relations don't seem all that far-fetched. If it is, how would different cultures and societies view it? I'd imagine Conglomerate territory would be more accepting, even if certain groups and areas would shun it. On the other side, the Kolaxans would burn any such "freaks" at the stake if I had to guess. Unless it's something commonly accepted across the galaxy, it could be a same-sex relation emancipation situation, like what we have with the mod-culture on Earth during the time of the UE. (The question came to me when Jandua was talking about his family)
Tim Stauffacher
2025-04-27 14:16:57 +0000 UTCThanks Erika! 🙏🏻 That’s a great question! They only did so when they knew without a shadow of doubt that their success was a forgone conclusion, there’s this funny thing about power, it wants to be seen. The official foundation of the UE was met with thunderous applause, as the end of all wars and the beginning of the long peace, the foundation of the UE was seen as both necessary and an inevitability by many because of centuries of Predictive programming. Predictive programming serves as a form of social engineering, allowing those in power to influence public perception and behavior. By subtly introducing certain ideas or events through popular media, they can shape the collective consciousness and steer society in a desired direction. before the actual foundation of the UE, the Earth had been split into two camps, the East and the West, the UE was thought of as being the organisation which would herald in an brighter future of peace and cooperation. I’m no expert on life support by any stretch of the imagination haha, but I image they would use methods similar to what we use now on the ISS, perhaps some advanced form of closed loop bio-generative life support systems like aquaponics would be employed. They’d likely use a plethora of methods. I do like the idea of that, but wasn’t the biosphere project a massive failure? financialization was the method used to seize control and to create a centralised global command economy, but money is only a tool to gain power, power is the goal, not money. The UE isn’t evil, it’s just a total state interested in maintaining its control over the earth, some of the no-go zones are genuinely there to protect large swaths of wilderness, others act as peacekeeping buffer zones between states with territorial disputes. As with almost all things, there is nuance there. C.S. Lewis captured it perfectly when he wrote, “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.” That’s the paradox at the heart of the UE’s rule: it doesn’t present itself as a tyrant. It claims to be a custodian of peace, progress, and sustainability. Its control is framed as care, its surveillance as security, its restrictions as acts of compassion. But this is precisely what makes it so dangerous to freedom. The UE positions itself as the rational alternative to chaos, offering its citizens safety from war, scarcity, and environmental collapse—but always at a cost. Dissent is rebranded as disinformation. Autonomy is replaced with guided compliance. Personal risk is outlawed in the name of public health. You’re free, but only to make approved choices. You can speak, but only within prescribed narratives. You can move, but only along sanctioned paths. This is how the UE justifies oppression: not as cruelty, but as care. Its reach extends into every sphere of life, economic, environmental, biological through the use of BMIs, through advanced surveillance, predictive analytics, and centralised governance. But the more it shields its citizens from the “dangers” of a free world, the more it removes their capacity to shape their own destinies. The result is a society that is deeply anaesthetised, its people pacified by bread and circus’, security, and the illusion of choice. In this way, freedom didn’t disappear with the stomping of jackboots, it eroded, slowly, under the watchful eye of a state that told them it knows what’s best and that “this is all for your own good”.
Callum Diggle
2025-04-25 11:09:24 +0000 UTCHaha that’s one way to put it, thanks!
Callum Diggle
2025-04-25 10:14:36 +0000 UTCAmazing work! One question I have regarding the U.E. is that if the people who were in control before the U.E.s founding had all the real power, why officially create the U.E.? How did pre-Imperium human ships and colonies do life support? Was there some sort of internal ecological system with plants and other things to produce oxygen, recycle water and provide food? There was a big attempt at a closed ecological system called Biosphere 2, it's a pretty interesting story. Why are there parts of Earth that the U.E. left as environmental no go zones? If the U.E. was created by financial elites why didn't they cut down all the forests, melt the glaciers, pollute the planet etc? There are a lot of powerful people in my country who are very shortsighted and whom are already destroying the planet and some of them work in finance. I sort of doubt they created those zones out of the kindness of their hearts.
Erika Spooner
2025-04-24 19:59:11 +0000 UTCThat’s a pretty cute small human. your womb world is clearly operating well.
Oliver Hill
2025-04-24 15:55:13 +0000 UTCExquisite work mate, as always you keep us engaged and thrilled
Fernando Ruiz
2025-04-24 15:53:58 +0000 UTCWow, amazing updates. Thanks for your hard work, I enjoy everything you do.
Dexter
2025-04-24 15:44:48 +0000 UTC
