(inspired by the 'handedness index' -- submitted without prejudice :)
How moral are you? What is your attitude to morals, sex and honesty?
A Sydney marriage expert who is a qualified psychologist wrote this personality test. It began as a dinner party conversation gimmick, but it has been prepared in this form for readers to test themselves.
To do the "test" you must give your honest opinion about morals and honesty of the four characters in our story of Sherwood Forest. Forget any preconceived ideas you may about them - this is a different sort of story from all the others.
----------- TEST ------------
"The Sheriff of Nottingham captured Little John and Robin Hood and imprisoned them in his maximum-security dungeon. Maid Marion begged the Sheriff for their release, pleading her love for Robin. The Sheriff agreed to release them only if Maid Marion spent the night with him. To this she agreed. The next morning the Sheriff released his prisoners.
Robin at once demanded that Marion tell him how she persuaded the Sheriff to let them go free. Marion confessed the truth, and was bewildered when Robin abused her, calling her a slut, and saying that he never wanted to see her again. At this Little John defended her, inviting her to leave Sherwood with him and promising life-long devotion. She accepted and they rode away together."
---
Now in terms of realistic every-day standards of behaviour, put Robin, Marion, Little John and the Sheriff in the order in which you consider they showed the most morality and honesty.
There is no "right" answer, and the following is the psychologist's estimate of you for each of the 24 arrangements.
I scored Little John first, Robin and Marion equal second, and the Sherriff fourth. This did not appear to be catered for by the good professor's table. The two possibles (JRMS & JMRS) have rather different interpretations, so I'm not sure if either of them fits... (Maybe it's just that I've been hurt by a man? [trying to bat eyelashes and hide beard emoticon])
Don't tell Marian, you bitch! But do you not reckon LJ has betrayed his first oath to Robin - so what will his honeyed words to Marian mean in time...?
I scored the Sheriff first-- i didn't really like his proposal-- but he made it, and honored it.
and put Robin last ... and as the test results say..(bold area a truism)
You claim to be a realist or even a cynic, but you are more emotional and romantic and truthful. (Women) You have been hurt in the past by men, or perhaps a particular man - and will probably let it happen again
I put Marian first, because she was willing to suffer in a worthy cause.I put John second, because he did not compromise his principles in any way, and had compassion for Marian. I put Robin third because he was unwilling to accept Marian's sacrifice on his behalf and made her suffering worse by rejecting her. I put the Sheriff last for dishonoring his oath of office and using his power to violate Marian.
My result: Maid (sacrificed for another), John (defended another), Sheriff (kept his bargain, although nothing in the circumstance suggests he could have been made to), and Robin (judgmental prig who hurt the one who sacrificed for him)
The test says: You are essentially a contented person, even if you consider yourself a little superior. You are moral by your own standards, for you believe that morality is what best suits the occasion. (Men) You are sexually uninhibited, more romantic than you may appear, and more dependent on the approval of others than you care to admit. (Women) You like being a woman, you understand what love is, and frankly enjoy sex.
It doth appear you are a worthy judge; You know the law; your exposition Hath been most sound; I charge you by the law, Wherof you are a well-deserving pillar, Proceed to judgment.
I love the idea, and it was a fun exercise, but some of the estimates seem perhaps a bit too critical, and I sympathize with shanks -- I was torn between LJ-S-M-R and LJ-M-S-R.
Also, for those who felt Little John was not behaving morally, what do you base that on? If we are to disregard what we know of the story, John has no reason to be loyal to Robin. Is it the fact that he took advantage of Marian when she was "on the rebound"?
On the positive side my choices indicated I am truthfull, so rather than lie about my order of choices I will leave now. wow
I came back to edit this post because I discovered there was more to paragraph one than showed up on my screen ... ooops. Off again to re-take the test. (To anyone who cares : stand by.) wow
----------- TEST ------------ "The Sheriff of Nottingham captured Little John and Robin Hood and imprisoned them in his maximum-security dungeon. Maid
Marion confessed the truth, and was bewildered when Robin abused her, calling her a slut, and saying that he never wanted to see her again. At this, Little John defended her, inviting her to leave Sherwood with him and promising long devotion. She accepted and they rode away together.
I was ready to post a scathing reply that y'all were assuming a reason for their release.
Something wrong with my download... but when I copied it to quote it, the rest of your "assumptions" were proven
I scored Little John first, Robin and Marion equal second, and the Sherriff fourth.
I was rather flummoxed by the lack of data given upon which to make any judgment. What did she confess? That aside, shanks' ranking is basically mine own. The one thing I did learn from the exercise is the extent to which shrinks hate the idea that someone might be reasonably well-adjusted.
With the full first graph of the anecdote in hand, I re-took the test. The test maintains I am : happy, well-balanced ..like people .. question if many conventional views on morality are valid under all circumstances. (Women) You will expect high standards form the men to whom you give your love.
You betcha' boots ... and not just the form, the substance and application as well! wow
I tried editing my post, but got an "internal server error." Here is what I wanted to add:
I ranked them only on the snippet that tsuwm posted. After reading the whole test, I was more confused than ever. If personal morality is important, it seems that only Little John followed Shakespeare's advice, "to thine own self be true." Robin comes across as an unforgiving, overly judgmental B'stard, while Marion's behaviour suggests morality is subordinate to expediency, and so I would score them LJ 1st, all others last equal.
Tsuwm, what I believe to be the entire text of the story appears in your first post about it, and has since you first posted it. The problem is somewhere along network lines, and seems to be limited to certain users.
Max, can you explain to me how your view of Marion's behavior is different than Robin's?
Would you "forgive her?" (but not forget?) Or do you agree with Robin-- only you wouldn't have called her a slut to her face (just behind her back?)
Marion had a chance to make a difference-- at personal cost--she put her companions comfort and freedom above herself-- she didn't sleep with the sheriff to get herself out -- but to get Robin and John out too.
If i could save the world by lieing down with the devil-- what would be the right thing to do? Value myself more than the world? -- Is that moral?
Personally, I think that Marion's lack of morality lies (lays) in the fact that she was willing to sleep with the Sheriff despite her love for Robin. To my way of thinking, she has violated their trust, even if she has no feelings for the Sheriff. It's like the argument posed in that movie with Demi Moore and Robert Redford for a few years back: is it OK to sleep with someone for a million dollars as long as you don't "mean it"? Of course Robin's reaction makes him even less "morally correct" than Marion in the end.
and as i recall the offer was made to the husband-- in which case he is selling something he doesn't "own" -- that is use of his wifes body--- and even if it was made to Demi-- she again is selling something-- Either the husband was a pimp, or she was a whore-- the transaction was exclusively about money for sex--
Marion was sacrificing something for a greater good-- (Robin and John freedom)
So i see i difference between just selling something, and making an effort for a better good-. Schindler (of Schinders List) made money using jewish slave labor-- but what redeemed his behavior was his real effort to save the live of the jews who had been made into slaves.
He could have taken a "high" road--- and never used the slaves (and many more might have been killed) he could have taken the "low" road-- and just use the jews as slaves... He did his best to save lifes-- which meant he used slaves.. but he also worked to save the live of everyone who worked for him.
I think Marion's decision was similar.. Not perfect-- but the best she (or anyone) could do, in the circumstances.
It would be interesting to know how the evaluations of the different choices were arrived at, and this is not a gripe at the interpretation offered for my rankings.
My assessment is based on an assumption, but one that is unconnected with gender. I am assuming that Marion's own code of morality included a belief that sleeping with someone other than her life partner was wrong. On that basis, Marion violated her own morality, albeit for the noblest of reasons. If the tables had been turned, I would have concluded the same thing about Robin. My own personal code of morality makes no allowance for judging the actions of others, but to the core of my being I hope that if ever I were presented with a choice like Marion's I would not violate that personal morality, whatever the cost. You asked If i could save the world by lieing down with the devil-- what would be the right thing to do? Value myself more than the world? -- Is that moral? and I would never presume to answer that question for anyone other than myself. For myself, lying down with the devil is out of the question, under any circumstances.
In addition, I do not think that Marion's actions made her a slut. Assuming that she had violated her own code of ethics, she would need support, loyalty and consolation, not abuse or condemnation. Her noble motives also must be taken into account. I know of people who have betrayed their own morality under immense pressure and who were helped to recover from doing so by the compassion and understanding of those around them.
I am a lazy sod, and I like living my life by a simple set of values. I have no interest in expecting others to live by my values, or in condemning them for not doing so. I also know that I have never yet been placed in the sort of situation under discussion, where personal morality would be sorely tried. I am, however, proud to know several people who have had their personal morality grievously tested, and who passed those tests. I can but hope that I would do as they did.
>is there something missing or malformatted in the "test" as pasted? if so, I can go back and try to fix....
Yes some crucial parts were missing for me, I recaptured them all by highlighting the whole post and copying into Word. The missing bits magically re-appeared!
Bill, I'm with you on this one. I think the Sheriff has to be at the bottom, he abused his power. Marion, did her best in the circumstances, I'd throw Robin to the lions!
I think we should be setting aside funding for Marion and Little John to receive post tramuatic counselling, can't imagine how anyone got by without it! Perhaps we could have a chat with Father Steve about the legal case, it would have to be worth a bob or two.
Helen - the film Robert Redford, Demi Moore was called "Indecent Proposal" (I'm still not convinced that any woman could have turned down Robert Redford in his earlier years, unless you had to choose between him and Paul Newman!)
Marion, did her best in the circumstances, I'd throw Robin to the lions!
Marion did make a difficult choice for reasons that seemed best to her. The issue of whether the Sheriff had done anything wrong in arresting a known thief and his accomplices seems relevant here. Robin would have had no right to criticise Marion's flexible ethics, given that he justified actions that were illegal, and no doubt considered immoral by some, on the basis of "the greater good." Where does one draw the line? I have heard that good intentions can make dangerous paving stones.
I found a whole separate site by typing into Yahoo search box just "Robin Hood, Maid Marion" and scrolling down a bit. Easier to read also. Forgive repetition, I would like to know how the thing was judged by the people that set it up.
I put Little John, the Sheriff and the newly made Marian on a par with LJ just a smidgeon ahead. Not catered for in the evaluation. I just love opportunists and idealists, especially when they meet!
I ranked them the same as Sparteye. As the header to the story says, you must forget any prejudgment of the characters in order to be able to see their actions in an objective way and assign moral worth to them. This may be done with characters who are only names on a screen (though we do know just how much of the stories we know about them we must forget). But, as I see it, it's impossible to take such an objective view of real people's actions, especially when they are people we care about...
I suspect that each of us approach this test differently. Here's one take (and not even my first, or second).
1. Why has the Sherriff imprisoned R and LJ? Since we are only to assume what's in the anecdote (rather than our sentimental appreciation of the many Robin-the-Yorkshireman stories), we need to assume that it was legitimately done. So the Sherriff is twice-damned - for bargaining for sex, and for letting out presumably dangerous criminals.
2. What is Robin's moral universe? He appears to be priggish, this is true, but if he values sexual fidelity highly - and has he or has he not communicated this to Marion? - then perhaps he would rather have languished in the dungeon than have Marion use her body to provide the Sherriff with sexual favours. So his language may have been intemperate, but his actions may have been perfectly consistent with his morality.
3. Would LJ have wanted to be set free if he knew that Marion would have to sleep with S to do achieve this? Would Robin? Was Marion deciding to sleep with the S without reference to Robin's or LJ's feelings? How moral, or true to her relationship with Robin is that? The sacrifice was not just of her body, but also of her relationship, it seems to me. If she didn't take that into account, or thought of it then dismissed it, I do not consider her actions to be perfectly moral. Of course, we know nothing of this, but it would appear, from the fact that she didn't tell R about it in the first place, that she knew it was not something he would have wanted. Ergo, she was playing god, following her desires, to give R and LJ something they did not want at that price. Hmmmm... Self sacrificing for certain, but not very thoughtful about others' feelings?
4. About LJ, seeing as he seemed to want to make the best of a bad situation, nothing but mild praise.
My result: Maid (sacrificed for another), John (defended another), Sheriff (kept his bargain, although nothing in the circumstance suggests he could have been made to), and Robin (judgmental prig who hurt the one who sacrificed for him)
Same as Sparteye. Am I alone in believing that there's nothing morally wrong with prostitution? It's the moral equivalent of doctoring, music-making or accounting -- it's all about selling your abilities. To me, the immorality (or at least hypocrisy) is that it's illegal.
I put the Sheriff last for dishonoring his oath of office and using his power to violate Marian.
Yipes! I didn't even think of this! Shows how cynical I am, I guess. Have I become a moral relativist?
Am I alone in believing that there's nothing morally wrong with prostitution?
Hey Blanche
I've been there and through to the other side. Whilst I do not believe there is anything 'morally' wrong with the act of selling your body/sexual favours, I have two reservations about it:
1. Like the porn industry, it seems to be inevitably exploitative, primarily of women.
2. In the context of this anecdote, the issue was also (IMO) the relationship she had with Robin, and the responsibility she owed it.
If there had been no indication in the anecdote that she was in a relationship with Robin then I would have scored it: 1 Marion (taking a difficult decision and sticking to it), 2 Little John (showing compassion) 3 Robin (intemperate and judgemental prig) 4 Sherriff (exploitative and corrupt)
max- I like your answer! I don't agree-- but I don't think i could have expressed my self as clearly or concisely-- I didn't mean to but you on the spot-- In many ways the test is simplistic-- but obviously-- we have reacted to it!
I guess my own person "hot button" got pushed-- (see my post quoting the assestment-- I tend to act emotionaly, and i have been hurt by "double standards"--
2. In the context of this anecdote, the issue was also (IMO) the relationship she had with Robin, and the responsibility she owed it.
I didn't think of it from this angle (tho' my post about the immorality of prostitution had more to do, I guess, with other posters judgment about it).
Your thought about Marion's responsibility to the relationship reminds me of a Victorian era argument used to explain why men are superior to women -- because men's morals were based on absolute values but women's morals were seen to change, depending on people and circumstances. (I don't know if I am describing this very well, hope you get my gist.) In this circumstance, Marion felt her first priority was freeing Robin, but (you're saying, I think) that the higher plane would have been to consider the abstract construct of the relationship. I don't know, does it fit?
>Now suppose the Sheriff is a woman and Marion is a man and it is Marion's two friends in the dungeon.... How does that affect your morality perceptions of the tale?
The Sheriff says SHE will let them all go if Male Marion has sex with her.
Excellent suggestion. Were I Male Marion, in a relationship with Robyn, I would be very, very wary of sleeping with the Sherriff. Why would Robyn feel sympathetic towards my "but darling, it didn't mean anything to me" argument? How do I know Robyn would rather I slept with the Sherriff than spend another night in gaol?
These, for me, are the issue. So responding to Blanche at the same time I say: Marion might be considered to be demonstrating a form of selfishness, inasmuch as she didn't consider what Robin's feelings would be, but only her desire to have him back with her. Of course, given the sketchy nature of the anecdote, all of this is speculation, but I based my judgement on the idea of making what seemed like the most reasonable assumptions.
Am still, as always, on the side of people's rights to be paid for sex if they so choose.
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site.
Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to
hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.
But do you not reckon LJ has betrayed his first oath to Robin - so what will his honeyed words to Marian mean in time...?
) in the fact that she was willing to sleep with the Sheriff despite her love for Robin. To my way of thinking, she has violated their trust, even if she has no feelings for the Sheriff. It's like the argument posed in that movie with Demi Moore and Robert Redford for a few years back: is it OK to sleep with someone for a million dollars as long as you don't "mean it"? Of course Robin's reaction makes him even less "morally correct" than Marion in the end.
