Subspecies: Humans

Published on 23.05.2017

The mystical forces of the universe have a direct influence on the human genome. Humans born in the presence of a mystic field, which before the invention of mystic field generators meant those born on a planet with a mystic cycle, sometimes belong to a subspecies.

In the Equinox Universe, many different subspecies have arisen and become extinct over the course of history. This article series features the accounts of members of the various subspecies, each discussing his own people. Naturally subjective and colored by individual experience, we picked those holding true to the most common opinion.

The Humans

—Jedah Torvus, Anthropologist

It is difficult to define humans in generalizations and broad strokes. Perhaps it is best to say that humans defy definition. They have a need to form social groups, whether it is based on personal or business relationships, and associate loyalty to said groups. These social groups include family, ship crews, and military organizations, to name a few. Humans easily adopt cultural practices of other social groups and subspecies, as well as creating their own unique practices. In fact, humans display a wider variety of cultural practices than any other subspecies.

“How fitting that their former home world is a nexus world. This versatility might be a trait inherited by Earth itself. I wonder what species of other nexus worlds are like?”

—Kirash Thorn, Equilibrility

Unfortunately, humans are also prone to intolerance, bigotry, and racism as a species. This is evident when humans deal with other subspecies, mainly because humans are usually the dominant species within the various systems. Even the term subspecies is a bit of a slight towards the other inhabitants of those systems. Although it has been scientifically proven that other species evolve from human DNA, there is a general feeling that humans have inherited the universe. After all, where would the other subspecies be without humans? Would they even exist without us? These are the questions that are usually asked, but I believe these are the wrong questions. What we should be asking is this: would other subspecies be better off without humans?

“Things get a bit sketchy when we apply the same standards of measurement we apply to other subspecies to humans. Yes, all in all, the subspecies “human” follows a greater blend of traditions and has a wider array of cultural practices. However, much of the perceived human variety stems from the lack of cultural variety of other subspecies. Haryani and hokai live within Haryan society, kiruan within Zehelan society, Yol within Yolusturian society, and so on. If we throw all the humans from these societies together, then yes, they display more variety than is found among haryani, among kiruan, and so on again. But if we were to take each of these human subcultures and assumed they were separate subspecies, we’d see almost as many differences between a haryan human and a zehelan human as between a hokai and a kiruan. A haryan human may have more in common with a haryani than with a zehelan human. Physically, they are very similar, but socially, they are a product of their member world and the long separation that preceded the rise of the Consortium.”

—Doc Bonebreaker, Phobos Rising

“We see them as we call them. Subspecies spawned from humans, so humans are the standard for comparison; everyone else is some sort of specialty life form. Then, we decide that humans are just a subspecies themselves. Now we have the human species, with subspecies such as yol, hokai, and … humans. I wonder if it was a deliberate decision to avoid more precise terms, or rather, have them fall out of use. If humans are humans, then yol aren’t humans…”

—Thunk Tenna, Hokai Philosopher