MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 1988 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: hero myth by Adrianne.Cook-+AT+-wiley.com 2) Re: various threads by Adrianne.Cook-+AT+-wiley.com 3) Re: King Daren?/Vans 3rd daughter by Paige 4) Re: Van and Rand with a few other things thrown in for intrest by Adrianne.Cook-+AT+-wiley.com 5) =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_King_Daren=3F=2FVans_3rd_daughter?= by Adrianne.Cook-+AT+-wiley.com 6) Re: King Daren?/Vans 3rd daughter by Kenneth Allen Hyde 7) OT:Bedlam Boys, the song by Alia Rose 8) Re: King Daren? - Reply by "Barbara Slater" 9) which Misty book I prefer by Kristy Lyseng 10) Re: King Daren? - Reply by ladyember-+AT+-email.com 11) replying to the LadyKnight of Fairgrove by nighteagle-+AT+-gci-net.com 12) Re: replying to the LadyKnight of Fairgrove by Kenneth Allen Hyde 13) Re: How tall is a companion? by Chris Robertson 14) Re: How tall is a companion? by Abigail Laughlin 15) Re: King Daren? - Reply by Eugene McDougall 16) Concordances & poem clarification by Dawn Woodard ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 7 Jun 99 09:41 EDT From: Adrianne.Cook-+AT+-wiley.com To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Re: hero myth Message-ID: <375bcd60Re: hero myth*-+AT+-m400gw.wiley.com> arrgh -- now i have to find another book!!! i find it interesting that a key element is the hero refusing the call -- i find those tales most interesting [easier to identify with them?]. somehow if someone came up to me & said i had to go on a quest, i'd spend lots of time asking why me & what do i get out of it -- not necessarily material gain, but if i'm "supposed" to risk life & limb, i'd want something in return (a nice medal maybe?). the reluctant hero came up very strongly in the first bedlam bard book (knight of ghosts & shadows, i think). "mercedes-lackey/-+AT+-herald.co.uk" on 06/05/99 12:16:19 AM To: adrianne cook-+AT+-wiley cc: Subject: hero myth Heyla, Thank you Shadowlight and Shadowblade; I absolutely died laughing on the LHM/SW posts. (I literally had a mini five minute laughing fit in front of my computer.) As for universal hero themes, I'll just copy the table my teacher gave us as structure for a hero story (taken from Joseph Campbell's The_Hero_With_a_Thousand_Faces) I. Departure a. The call to adventure b. refusal of the call c. supernatural aid d. the crossing of the first threshold e. the belly of the whale II. Initiation a. the road of trials b. the meeting with the goddess c. Woman as the temptress d. Atonement with the father e. Apotheosis f. The ultimate boon III. Return a. Refusal of the return b. The Magic flight c. Rescue from without d. The Crossing of the return threshold e. Master of the two worlds f. Freedom to live It's relatively easy to find all of these in both SW and LHM. Some of them can be taken loosely, not held to the exact wording in the chart (ie. the temptation is not always a woman). Sorry for the late response (exams), but, Sara, according to the definition of "myth" I received other fiction could not be myth because the supernatural is a fundamental part, and without it the "myth" is not so and is just a story. (So many kids in my class complained about having to write magic into their stories; I was delighted to have a teacher not only not forbid but require it.) The casting thread . . . can't contribute there, but that was quite a storm. Is it starting up again? Star Wars humming sheep to all, Ambermoon Singer of Fire Royal Defender of the Brat _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: 7 Jun 99 10:01 EDT From: Adrianne.Cook-+AT+-wiley.com To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Re: various threads Message-ID: <375bd242Re: various threads*-+AT+-m400gw.wiley.com> dianna wynne jones --> most of her books (over here) are in the childrens section (& yes the librarians look at you funny when you raid the childrens' section) -- i think that she's written approx. 15-20 books? favorite is (mind is now blank) the book about gwendolyn & chris (cat) chance. "mercedes-lackey/-+AT+-herald.co.uk" on 06/05/99 02:44:47 PM To: adrianne cook-+AT+-wiley cc: Subject: various threads Bright the day, just to add my $.02 . . . all the innacuracies in books made from movies annoy me to the point that I cannot watch them anymore. if I decide to see them anyway, I am not a good person to sit next to because I will glower and make outraged comments the whole way through. then I will simmer and rant whenever the opportunity presents itself. (case in point: "The Secret Garden". I'm convinced the makers of that film never even read the book. the only movies I've seen that have done justice to the books are the Jane Austen ones.) Kristy, I know just what you mean about people looking down on you for liking Star Wars/Star Trek. add to that almost never being seen without a fantasy/sci-fi book in my hands, and not watching any tv, soaps or otherwise .. . . . Someone mentioned Dianna Wynne Jones, some series by her? *Ambermoon perks up and looks around excitedly* What is this? The only books I've read by her are Witch_Week, A_Tale_of_Time_City, and Eight_Days_of_Luke, and I absolutely love them. Could someone please give me a list (in order would be nice) of this other thing that was mentioned? all right, all right, I concede the point on Kero and Eldan. that last will have to count as an obmisty, since I can't think of anything else. except, give Shadowblade nominations! chocolate mousse sheep, Ambermoon Singer of Fire Royal Defender of the Brat _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 10:43:44 -0400 From: Paige To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Re: King Daren?/Vans 3rd daughter Message-ID: <375BDAA0.4445825E-+AT+-sympatico.ca> Chris wrote: > > Lady Jennifer says: > >Also, the marriage was between two allies of two free standing countries, > >so there was no need to make Daren a co-ruler. It was done because of > >their lifebond. That brings up another question...in all the books, it > >always says "Prince Daren". If he's married to the Queen, doesn't that > >make him the King? Or because it's her second marriage and she's already > >on the throne when they meet, he stays a prince? Or is because he was > >never King in his own country? Or does Daren not really fill the title of > >"ruler", more of ambassador and liasion? > > All that stuff depends on the local laws. Examples: years and > years ago Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain married Philip Montbatten. > He became HRH the Duke of Edinburgh, not King - under British law you don't > become King by marrying the Queen. > The only example that comes to mind, offhand, of someone marrying > the Queen and becoming King was Henry, a Tudor, who married Mary Queen of > Scots in order to bring about an England-Scotland detente. Unfortunately, > Henry was killed under dubious circumstances and Mary was forced to flee > into exile... thus the problems inherent with marriage creating a ruler. > I'm sure there are better examples, though. I doubt that there are many (if any) examples of someone marrying a Queen and becoming King. I haven't seen this said anywhere on the list so sorry if I'm repeating, but there is a reason for this Queen/Price business. It's called "rank". A King has a higher rank (thus more authority) than a Queen. Therefore, if a Prince marries a Queen and becomes King, HE rules the land, not her. However, if the process is reversed and a Princess marries a King it is safe for her to become Queen as she will never have more authority than he does. One day, perhaps when the oldest CHILD will succeed (as opposed to the SON) a King and Queen will be on equal footing, but I don't see that happening in my day :-) Adrianne.Cook-+AT+-wiley.com wrote: > > i think we'll have to ask people who actually have monarchs, or else go & > research the darn stuff ... > > i'm just punting here, but i'd say that daren isn't king because he isn't the > ruler. thanel wasn't king either. selenay is queen because her father was > the king, but was her mother the queen, or consort? Just thought I'd answer this too. As you can see from above, if her father was King her mother would be Queen. However, it's possible that she wasn't Chosen (the time-line only says "Reign of Sendar") so perhaps in Valdemar, if the husband/wife of the ruler isn't a herald (thus not a co-consort) he/she only get the title Prince(ess) but has no authority with it. Jennifer Slusher wrote: > Adrianne wrote: > >anyone else curious about van's other daughter? not featherfire or jisa, but > >the one that went south w/ 2 of lissa's shaych guardswomen. granted, she was > >only mentioned in magic's promise (magic's price, van told stef that he had > >fathered 3 children), but still ... > > I think Van had four...doesn't featherfire have a twin? I always wondered what happened to the south bound child too. If Van's mage gift showed up in her, she should show up somewhere. At least, I think it would be neat if she did show up. Van did have four children - Featherfire was Brightstars twin, Jissa was Shavris and the 3rd girl is the one that was born to Lisa's guards. IIRC there is a point when he omits the third daughter from mention when he's talking about his children, that may be when he's telling Stef about them (thus telling Stef he has three children). I too would like to know what became of her. We know that she isn't Gifted, but I still think her life should have been pretty interesting. -- Paige Proud to be Outlandish Royal Defender of The Brat ------------------------------ Date: 7 Jun 99 10:23 EDT From: Adrianne.Cook-+AT+-wiley.com To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Van and Rand with a few other things thrown in for intrest Message-ID: <375bd76eRe: Van and Rand with a few other things thrown in fo...*-+AT+-m400gw.wiley.com> gee, this is great! when i first mentioned van/rand i saw lots of parallels, then when i had to explain what i meant i wasn't so sure, but now ... thanks guys! until it was pointed out, i didn't see the parallels in love lives. lifebonds -- are these instantaneous (sp?) or gradual? w/ daren & selenay it seemed instan .. insta.. right that moment. van & tylendel / van & stef -- were these gradual or were they (esp. van) denying it? what about moondance & starwind? thoughts? >>Concordances! Of course! How could I have forgotten? >>There's the Arrows of the Queen Concordance. It's like a dictionary and >>covers all (or most of) the stuff from the Talia books. It even has all the >>names of the mentioned Heralds and Trainees and Courtiers and everything. >>And the LHM concordance is out now too. sniff. sniff. when were these published, by who (whom?), where are they available? gotta gotta gotta have velgarth -- this confused me a bit, so this past weekend i sat down w/ the valdemar books & looked until i found this ref (arrows part 3, prologue) -- > you can tell that the arrows books don't rank on my top 20 to re-re-re-read. ok, velgarth it is. ------------------------------ Date: 7 Jun 99 11:19 EDT From: Adrianne.Cook-+AT+-wiley.com To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_King_Daren=3F=2FVans_3rd_daughter?= Message-ID: <375be451Re: King Daren?/Vans 3rd daughter*-+AT+-m400gw.wiley.com> we know that van's third daughter wasn't gifted, but since his siblings were producing heralds & bards, i have a suspicion that this girl probably passed some sort of gifts on to her children (if she had any). c'mon misty, there's a something here. if you've officially retired van, then tell us about his kids (throw us a bone) ... puh-leeze? "mercedes-lackey/-+AT+-herald.co.uk" on 06/07/99 11:16:40 AM To: adrianne cook-+AT+-wiley cc: Subject: Re: King Daren?/Vans 3rd daughter Chris wrote: > > Lady Jennifer says: > >Also, the marriage was between two allies of two free standing countries, > >so there was no need to make Daren a co-ruler. It was done because of > >their lifebond. That brings up another question...in all the books, it > >always says "Prince Daren". If he's married to the Queen, doesn't that > >make him the King? Or because it's her second marriage and she's already > >on the throne when they meet, he stays a prince? Or is because he was > >never King in his own country? Or does Daren not really fill the title of > >"ruler", more of ambassador and liasion? > > All that stuff depends on the local laws. Examples: years and > years ago Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain married Philip Montbatten. > He became HRH the Duke of Edinburgh, not King - under British law you don't > become King by marrying the Queen. > The only example that comes to mind, offhand, of someone marrying > the Queen and becoming King was Henry, a Tudor, who married Mary Queen of > Scots in order to bring about an England-Scotland detente. Unfortunately, > Henry was killed under dubious circumstances and Mary was forced to flee > into exile... thus the problems inherent with marriage creating a ruler. > I'm sure there are better examples, though. I doubt that there are many (if any) examples of someone marrying a Queen and becoming King. I haven't seen this said anywhere on the list so sorry if I'm repeating, but there is a reason for this Queen/Price business. It's called "rank". A King has a higher rank (thus more authority) than a Queen. Therefore, if a Prince marries a Queen and becomes King, HE rules the land, not her. However, if the process is reversed and a Princess marries a King it is safe for her to become Queen as she will never have more authority than he does. One day, perhaps when the oldest CHILD will succeed (as opposed to the SON) a King and Queen will be on equal footing, but I don't see that happening in my day :-) Adrianne.Cook-+AT+-wiley.com wrote: > > i think we'll have to ask people who actually have monarchs, or else go & > research the darn stuff ... > > i'm just punting here, but i'd say that daren isn't king because he isn't the > ruler. thanel wasn't king either. selenay is queen because her father was > the king, but was her mother the queen, or consort? Just thought I'd answer this too. As you can see from above, if her father was King her mother would be Queen. However, it's possible that she wasn't Chosen (the time-line only says "Reign of Sendar") so perhaps in Valdemar, if the husband/wife of the ruler isn't a herald (thus not a co-consort) he/she only get the title Prince(ess) but has no authority with it. Jennifer Slusher wrote: > Adrianne wrote: > >anyone else curious about van's other daughter? not featherfire or jisa, but > >the one that went south w/ 2 of lissa's shaych guardswomen. granted, she was > >only mentioned in magic's promise (magic's price, van told stef that he had > >fathered 3 children), but still ... > > I think Van had four...doesn't featherfire have a twin? I always wondered what happened to the south bound child too. If Van's mage gift showed up in her, she should show up somewhere. At least, I think it would be neat if she did show up. Van did have four children - Featherfire was Brightstars twin, Jissa was Shavris and the 3rd girl is the one that was born to Lisa's guards. IIRC there is a point when he omits the third daughter from mention when he's talking about his children, that may be when he's telling Stef about them (thus telling Stef he has three children). I too would like to know what became of her. We know that she isn't Gifted, but I still think her life should have been pretty interesting. -- Paige Proud to be Outlandish Royal Defender of The Brat ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 13:06:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Kenneth Allen Hyde To: Misty Lackey List Subject: Re: King Daren?/Vans 3rd daughter Message-ID: On Mon, 7 Jun 1999, Paige wrote: > I doubt that there are many (if any) examples of someone marrying a > Queen and becoming King. I haven't seen this said anywhere on the list > so sorry if I'm repeating, but there is a reason for this Queen/Price > business. It's called "rank". A King has a higher rank (thus more > authority) than a Queen. Not really. A queen regnant has exactly the same rank as a king regnant. The confusion comes about because we also use (due to historical reasons) the plain form "queen" for two very different roles: queen regnant (who is not outranked by anyone, if the country is a true monarchy) and queen consort (who is the wife of a king regnant). On the surface, it seems like we should be able to make the words exactly parellel and have a king consort who would be exactly equivalent to a queen consort. However, the reason that this doesn't work has nothing to do with "rank" (which is simply the system of assymetrical power that structures hierarchical relationships in a dynamic socio-cultural system--*pant, pant* let me catch my breath after saying that). A ruling queen would have the same "rank," whether she was called a "queen," a "princess," an "empress," or a "scullery maid." The word does not confer power, it labels it. And if a country wishes to call it's ruler a "private citizen" or a "monarch," the person in question still has the rank of "first." The reason that it is unlikely that we will ever have the husband of a queen regnant given the title of king (consort) has to do with a fundamental gender bias that is built into human language (as far as I know, there is no language that doesn't have this gender bias). In English, like most languages, the masculine gender is the unmarked value for words which can possibly be coded for gender. One of the characteristics of unmarked terms is that they are usually encoded as the "high" end of the continuum for whatever they measure. As such, it is difficult to lower their meaning. In order to have a "king consort" married to a queen regnant, we would have to change our social values to the point where it would be emotionally plausible (on a social, not individual level) to have the masculine term of a matched pair ranked below the feminine term. We're on our way, perhaps, but we aren't there yet. May the seas be your solace and the forests a refuge for your spirit, Cennydd Councilor of Mist Kenneth Allen Hyde | No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife Univ. of Delaware | between the shoulder blades will seriously Dept. of Linguistics | cramp his style -- Old Jhereg proverb kenny-+AT+-Udel.Edu | A mind is a terrible toy to waste! -- Me //www.ling.udel.edu/hyde/prof/ken.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 10:18:27 PDT From: Alia Rose To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: OT:Bedlam Boys, the song Message-ID: <19990607171828.95291.qmail-+AT+-hotmail.com> I happen to know this song, but i didnt have all the verses. ive heard it sung by Double Indemnity, a band that plays the ren faires. as far as i know, it is a scottish/irish/celtic folk song. the version i have is a little different, and the title is Tom O'Bedlam, or Mad Merry Maudlin. sorry for the almost identicle post, heres the version i know. its shorter: >------------- >For to find my Tom of Bedlam, >ten thousand miles I'll travel. >Mad Maudlin goes on dirty toes >for to save me shoes from gravel. > >Still I sing bonny boys, bonny mad boys: >Bedlam boys are bonny, >for they all go bare and they live by the air >and they want no drink nor money. > I now repent that ever For Tom was so disdain-ed Me wits are tossed since him I crossed Which makes me thus go chain-ed Still I sing...etc >I went down to Pluto's Kitchen >for to beg some food one morning, >and there I got so spiking hot , >while on the spit a-turning. Still i sing... There I took up a cauldrin, Where i boiled 10 thousand harlots, Those still aflame, i drank the same with a health to all such varlots Still i sing... >Me staff has murdered giants; >me bag a long knife carries >for to cut mince-pies from children's thighs >with which to feed the fairies. >Still I sing.... No gypsy, slut, or doxy shall win me mad Tom from me I'll (something) all night with the stars ill fight the fray shall well become me Still i sing... So drink to Tom O' bedlam Fill all the seas and barrels Ill drink it all well brewed with gall and maudlin drunk ill quarrel. Still I sing bonny boys, bonny mad boys, bedlam boys are bonny, for they all go bare and they live by the air and they want no drink or money --------------- just thought that might interest you, as i had never heard the other verses until you posted. i have the "bedlam boyz" book, and every time i looked at it, i started to hum this song, its funny to think i was right! obmisty: umm.....errr.....ive been rereading all my misty books, so im curently almost done with "the lark and the wren" and "winds of fate". actually, im not overly fond of the "bedlam boyz" or whatever there called. i have the 2 books in one and thats what its called. i dont knnow why, but please no flaming sheep aimed in my direction, i just dont really like her characters in these. stuffed animal sheep in ewok pajamas for everyone! ************************************* Alianora Rose Royal Defender of the Brat ICQ # 1372207 ************************************* Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup. -Jade _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 15:27:11 -0400 From: "Barbara Slater" To: Subject: Re: King Daren? - Reply Message-ID: I'm popping out of the Lurker Woods for this one.... Our most erudite Mage of Green Silences scribed: The reason that it is unlikely that we will ever have the husband of a queen regnant given the title of king (consort) has to do with a fundamental gender bias that is built into human language (as far as I know, there is no language that doesn't have this gender bias). In English, like most languages, the masculine gender is the unmarked value for words which can possibly be coded for gender. One of the characteristics of unmarked terms is that they are usually encoded as the "high" end of the continuum for whatever they measure. As such, it is difficult to lower their meaning. In order to have a "king consort" married to a queen regnant, we would have to change our social values to the point where it would be emotionally plausible (on a social, not individual level) to have the masculine term of a matched pair ranked below the feminine term. We're on our way, perhaps, but we aren't there yet. My .02 on the subject: I agree with you on this, and would add that there seems to be a homophobic bias in English as well, in that the ruling pair is assumed to be male+female. There seems to be no provision for same-gender rulers...granted, if the rule is passed by primogeniture or some other sort of 'in the blood' inheritance, this scheme for preserving the local power structures is deep-sixed by same-gender associations, because parentage cannot be easily proven if an infant is adopted to be raised in a family structure that accepts same-gender pairings *and* child-rearing. Now *there'd* be a *real* SF/F story - what happens when Earth-humans come across such a society? Better yet, what circumstances would generate such a society, if it began from an Earth-human base? ObMisty: Even in Misty's work, she holds to the hetero-pairing ruler pattern, AFAIK. Does anybody know of any examples of same-gender pairings that were involved in 'ruling' an area? Lani Hunter Murphy's Monster LadyKnight of Fairgrove ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 12:53:42 PDT From: Kristy Lyseng To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: which Misty book I prefer Message-ID: <19990607195343.27953.qmail-+AT+-hotmail.com> Heyla, all! Well, it's me again and someone (I believe Alexia?) asked which Misty book we prefer. Well, I have a bunch of them. I think my favourite in the Valdemar series is the White Gryphon, By the Sword, and the Winds of Fate, and then the Black Gryphon. Outside of the Valdemar series I like Jinx High, Burning Water (I love any book that has the Aztecs mentioned), and The FireRose. Actually, that was shorter than I thought. Hey, does anybody read anything by Diane Duane and does she have a discussion list? (Before anyone asks, my favourite books by her are So You Want To Be A Wizard, High Wizardry, and A Wizard Abroad (sp?)). Love, Light and Laughter, Kristy ------------------------ What the lion cannot manage to do the fox can.--German Proverb ------------------------ ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 16:43:29 -0400 (EDT) From: ladyember-+AT+-email.com To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Re: King Daren? - Reply Message-ID: <99060716432949.17632-+AT+-www5.iname.net> heyla list! just a quick message: Lani wrote: > ObMisty: Even in Misty's work, she holds to the hetero-pairing > ruler pattern, AFAIK. Does anybody know of any examples of > same-gender pairings that were involved in 'ruling' an area? I do! It's not from a Misty book, but in the book "Sing the Four Quarters" by Tanya Huff. In the beginning the princess who became a bard (I forget her name) mentioned a favourite uncle who refused to "marry" a man he did not love because it would be a good political alliance, he "married" for love. since he was the brother of the king, I would assume some kind of ruling would have been implyed. also: ON THE GRYPHON THING- All right! You are right! I forgot about the people involved with the x-wing fighters and the intellegance tooo... =) ON THE WRITING ABOUT WHAT YOU KNOW- You're all right, okay? Or, let me rephrase that. *you* are right, everyone with a conflicting opinion is wrong! (it's the easiest way to settle disputes !!!! ) ON CASTING - If there ever needed to be a teenage Firesong, my friend Josh would have to play the part! I just realised today how much he reminds me of Firesong! Well, I must go and study for my school finals. =( Hello and welcome to all the newbies...I am one myself =) Pink sheep to all! wind to thy wings, Lady Ember Echosinger, the choreographically challenged Singer of Fire (yay!) {Jedi Knight in training} ----------------------------------------------- FREE! The World's Best Email Address -+AT+-email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 15:13:46 -0700 From: nighteagle-+AT+-gci-net.com To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: replying to the LadyKnight of Fairgrove Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.19990608151346.0079b330-+AT+-gci-net.com> NightEagle slowly rises from her seat while reading this remarkable and long in coming statement ......Brava!!!!!!!!!!!! "My .02 on the subject: I agree with you on this, and would add that there seems to be a homophobic bias in English as well, in that the ruling pair is assumed to be male+female. There seems to be no provision for same-gender rulers...granted, if the rule is passed by primogeniture or some other sort of 'in the blood' inheritance, this scheme for preserving the local power structures is deep-sixed by same-gender associations, because parentage cannot be easily proven if an infant is adopted to be raised in a family structure that accepts same-gender pairings *and* child-rearing. Now *there'd* be a *real* SF/F story - what happens when Earth-humans come across such a society? Better yet, what circumstances would generate such a society, if it began from an Earth-human base?" Thank you very much, I don't think I could have said that any better. I have, for some time now, resented the heterosexual 'standards' of the general population. Many say it is because it is "right" or "the way it is supposed to be." That's a load of sheep dung! I feel that society chooses to ignore thier own statistics that over 98% of the reported cases of abuse and violence (sexual, domestic violence, rape and murder, etc.) are committed by heterosexuals and that heterosexual couples rear over 90% of the children who are victims of 1st and 2nd generational incest. Now, can the powers that be please tell me why it is such a horrendous thing for two people of the same gender to be recognized as parents, heads of a family or even as a 'ruling pair.' What if the sexuality/sexual preference and practices of everyone in this world were posted on thier foreheads like many wear thier religion or wedding rings; what if it were even more prevelant like a race/nationality and it could not be hidden? Would there be such a stigma then? Would all of the forms we fill out on a regular basis have spaces for "husband and wife" only? Would the insurance tight-ties deny insurance to a "family" comprised of two women and thier 3 children because they marked out "husband" and wrote in domestic partner when it was obvious that he, himself, was bi-sexual and was having an extra-marital affair with a man? What if Bill Clinton's affair had been with a man instead of Monica? It all seemed to blow over- even though there was an uproar over 'adultery' but because he was with a woman it was accepted and he was allowed to remain President. I firmly believe that if he had been with a man he would have been thrown out- and there would have been no Democratic Party to defend him... they would have yelled 'off with his head' as loud as everyone else. What's the problem? Am I not human? Are we not human? What if heterosexuals were discriminated against? Rocks thrown at them, raped, beaten, dragged behind pick-up trucks because every homosexual assumed they were going to make a pass at them... What if heterosexuals had to live in fear? Afraid to show affection out side of thier homes, afraid of loosing thier jobs... yadda yadda... Im sure my point is clear.. NightEagle sighs as she gently plops down off of her soap box onto the floor.... ..... The voice of the Great Spirit is heard in the twittering of birds, the rippling of mighty waters, and the sweet breathing of flowers. If this is Paganism, then at present, at least, I am a Pagan. (Gertrude Simmons Bonnin (Zitkala-Sa) (1876-1938): Dakota Sioux) http://www.gci-net.com/users/n/nighteagle ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 19:53:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Kenneth Allen Hyde To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Re: replying to the LadyKnight of Fairgrove Message-ID: The Ladyknight wrote: > granted, if the rule is passed by primogeniture or some other sort of > 'in the blood' inheritance, this scheme for preserving the local power > structures is deep-sixed by same-gender associations, because > parentage cannot be easily proven if an infant is adopted to be raised > in a family structure that accepts same-gender pairings *and* > child-rearing. On Mon, 7 Jun 1999 nighteagle-+AT+-gci-net.com wrote: > Now, can the powers that be please tell me why it is such a horrendous > thing for two people of the same gender to be recognized as parents, > heads of a family or even as a 'ruling pair.' Actually, Ladyknight mentioned it obliquely in the quote above. The best explanation that I have heard for the nearly universal dispreference of homosexuality comes from a functional anthropological framework. Essentially, in a patriarchal (and crucially patrilineal) society, homosexuality represents a threat to the economic system. Almost every culture started out as patriarchal, if not patrilineal, as far as we know. In a pre-industrial, feudal patriarchy, the economy of the society is very firmly based on the transfer of economic goods along the male line (which is what patrilineal means, after all). In order for this to be done in a orderly fashion (assuming that it is "important" in the culture that only legitimate heirs inherit), patrilineal societies must have extremely rigid and rigorous controls placed on procreation and sexual fidelity in order to function (the same is not necessarily true for matrilineal societies, since it's obvious who the mother of a child is). Homosexual males are a threat to the smooth transfer of property from one generation to the other, since they would not produce natural heirs if they were strictly homosexual. This means that exclusively homosexual pairs would result in a lack of heirs for given property. Even in the case that they were not exclusively homosexual, and one member of the pair fathered a child, the question of who gets what would still be messy. Does the child inherit from both fathers (concentrating two lines of wealth) or does each partner father his own heir (in which case, how do you decide what property from the union goes to which heir). With lesbians, the problem is less threatening, but still present, since it would still complicate the orderly transmission of property. In a matrilineal society, btw, the same problems would arise with some variation. Obviously, in such an economic system, same-sex marriages will need to be prevented somehow. Unfortunately, the most effective way of preventing people from doing something is to demonize it, labeling it "evil" or "unnatural" etc. and thereby licensing punishment of the threatening behavior. So, for thousands of years of human history, especially in patriarchal societies, homosexuality has been considered wrong. BTW, it's interesting to note that the moral code (the Bible) which formed the basis of Feudal and Modern Western morality was just as concerned, if not more so, with sexual fidelity of heterosexual alliances (the same is true for Qur'an). This is why the Catholic Church, Judaism, and Islam, among others, still find themselves at a loss to deal with homosexuality from a textual basis: all the texts class homosexual unions as "adulterous" since they take place outside marriage, and like all adulterous unions, they are condemned as abominations (the underlying reason being that adultery makes positive identification of paternity almost impossible without a DNA test). It is only in a system of inheritance that is bilineal and which does not place much importance on "blood" relationship that homosexuality does not constitute a threat to the economy. However, it is important to remember that this pattern of economy has really only been around for the last 60 years or so. For that matter, it's only in a fairly developed industrial society that bilineal (or even non-lineal) inheritance is really practical. In a non-industrial agrarian society, inheritance by primogeniture through one line only is necessarily a major control in the economy and provides stability and safety by reducing the break-up of economic goods and bases. So, in a sense, since the birth of LGB rights, we have been trying to overcome the inertia of thousands of years where homosexuality really was a threat to the stability of society in a few decades. Fortunately we are trying during a period when homosexuality is not actually a threat to economic stability (at least not in First World nations). My personal feeling is that, if we were trying to do the same thing 500 years ago, it would not have even the slightest chance of succeeding. That being said, I'm glad I live now, where I have a chance of seeing LGB identity accepted as normal and unremarkable in my lifetime. Quite frankly, the change in acceptance in just the last 10 years has been amazing. Given the rate of increase of LGB acceptance, I feel confident that within two generations, America (I don't really have any data that would lead me to a prediction about any other nation) will have a generation who doesn't even understand what all the fuss was about. May the seas be your solace and the forests a refuge for your spirit, Cennydd Councilor of Mist Kenneth Allen Hyde | No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife Univ. of Delaware | between the shoulder blades will seriously Dept. of Linguistics | cramp his style -- Old Jhereg proverb kenny-+AT+-Udel.Edu | A mind is a terrible toy to waste! -- Me //www.ling.udel.edu/hyde/prof/ken.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 17:20:42 PDT From: Chris Robertson To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Re: How tall is a companion? Message-ID: <19990608002043.20574.qmail-+AT+-hotmail.com> Heyla, Adrianne said: size-wise, i guess they'd be comparable to >horses of the time --> anyone know how hands translate to feet or meters? One hand is four inches. To get centimetres out of inches multiply by 2.54 I never really thought about it until it was brought up on-list, but how come there are never any problems with size discrepancies between a Companion and their Chosen? Like, Talia is small [so it does not make me happy when the cover art has her looking about six feet long and skinny - that's as bad as casting someone who doesn't look right] and Rolan is a Grove-born stallion, thus presumably large. It's _hard_ to ride horses that are too big for you, especially when you have to perform incredible feats of riding skill as Heralds occasionally do. The monarch-title thing - on Earth while a male consort is only a prince, if a country has a king, his spouse gets to be called a queen. Does it work like that in Velgarth? May the sun shine warm upon your face, and sheep in jedi robes appear before you, Shadowlight Absentee naiad of a small, sun-dappled and sadly-missed stream Harassed by armies of paper ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 21:19:32 PDT From: Abigail Laughlin To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Re: How tall is a companion? Message-ID: <19990608041933.34492.qmail-+AT+-hotmail.com> Sorana heckled: <> Gah. You know what I meant. :P <> Honestly, having ridden a wide range of horses, from small ponies to a half Percheron that weighed a quarter of a ton, I've never had much of a problem with horses that were too big for me--and I'm not a large girl by any stretch of the imagination. I've had *saddles* that were too big for me and were thus awkward and uncomfy, but the only problems I ever had with large horses was that, at least until I got older and more skilled, I didn't have enough muscle to make them listen to me--and that's not a problem with Companions. Zha'hai'allav'a, Raven Darkblade and Mor the raven, Holy Hand of the Goddess of Elves, Member of the Mistic Circle, Webmaster of the Circle of Stone, Knight and Founding Member of the Order of Unsung Heroes; http://www.angelfire.com/ky/Ashke/ - The Labyrinth _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 21:27:02 -0700 From: Eugene McDougall To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Re: King Daren? - Reply Message-ID: <375C9B96.3DBA8FCF-+AT+-noao.edu> Hello all, I think I may qualify as a newbie again since I haven't contributed anything in oh...2-3 years. Anyway, couldn't let this one go by... Barbara Slater wrote: > > I'm popping out of the Lurker Woods for this one.... > > Our most erudite Mage of Green Silences scribed: > > The reason that it is unlikely that we will ever have the husband of a > queen regnant given the title of king (consort) has to do with a > fundamental gender bias that is built into human language (as far as I > know, there is no language that doesn't have this gender bias). > > My .02 on the subject: > I agree with you on this, and would add that there seems to be a > homophobic bias in English as well, in that the ruling pair is assumed > to be male+female. > ObMisty: Even in Misty's work, she holds to the hetero-pairing > ruler pattern, AFAIK. Does anybody know of any examples of > same-gender pairings that were involved in 'ruling' an area? How about Moondance and Starwind? I know it's more guardianship rather than ruling, but... WTTW, Gene ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 21:55:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Dawn Woodard To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Concordances & poem clarification Message-ID: <19990608045513.20555.rocketmail-+AT+-web209.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrianne.Cook-+AT+-wiley.com wrote: > (about the concordances) > sniff. sniff. when were these published, by who > (whom?), where are they > available? gotta gotta gotta have You can order the concordances and a lot of other ML related items through the Firebird Arts web site. http://www.firebirdarts.com Also to clarify my question from earlier about the lines of poetry that the Urban Fantasy titles come from, this is an older poem. I thought at first it might be verses from "Childe Roland", but I read the poem again and it is not. But it is from a *popular* (IIRC) author in the past. It has been probably 6 or 7 years since I read the poem. I would imagine that the lyricist who wrote the words to the song supplied by ? (sorry, I can't remember who -- was it Sorana Stargem) pulled them from the poem. I'm not sure, but considering all the copywrite infringement issues, I would assume this was a pretty old poem on which the copywrite had expired. Well it's late and I am very tired. Since I am retyping more than I am typing, it is time to head for bed. Goodnight to all. Hot chocolate with sheep-shaped marshmallows to all. -------------------------------------------------- Jadzia Because I could not stop for Death He kindly stopped for me-- The Carriage held but just Ourselves-- And Immortality. --Emily Dickinson Time and Eternity _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free -+AT+-yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ End of MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 1988 **********************************