Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Discussions about constructed worlds, cultures and any topics related to constructed societies.
HoskhMatriarch
roman
roman
Posts: 1517
Joined: 16 May 2015 18:48

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by HoskhMatriarch »

Thrice Xandvii wrote:Yeah, using "the gay" as a collective noun shorthand for "gay people" seems really weird. Also, you may come off sounding homophobic to boot.

I agree, Dormouse, I feel like an example like: "...and the gay all congregated in the parlor to partake of the Yule festivities" might work. But then it sounds marked and archaic.
It is weird, but it still sounds like a sentence of English and not gibberish.
No darkness can harm you if you are guided by your own inner light

User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2687
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Dormouse559 »

You can do a lot to a language before it sounds like gibberish, and native speakers can usually navigate those vaguer areas. But since this whole conversation is for the benefit of non-native speakers, who may not be able to, I think we should aim higher than "not gibberish".

User avatar
Thrice Xandvii
runic
runic
Posts: 2696
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:13
Location: Carnassus

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Thrice Xandvii »

HoskhMatriarch wrote:It is weird, but it still sounds like a sentence of English and not gibberish.
...

Well, yes, of course.

But our topic was one of politeness, not whether you can form non-gibberish sentences. Most utterances that are racist, sexist or homophobic are perfectly valid sentences from a grammar perspective, they're just ones you wouldn't say in polite company. Those things are really different.

And me trying to force a phrase into a usage that doesn't sound homophobic wasn't really moving toward the point of the discussion, so the above example is an aside anyway.
Image

HoskhMatriarch
roman
roman
Posts: 1517
Joined: 16 May 2015 18:48

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by HoskhMatriarch »

Thrice Xandvii wrote:
HoskhMatriarch wrote:It is weird, but it still sounds like a sentence of English and not gibberish.
...

Well, yes, of course.

But our topic was one of politeness, not whether you can form non-gibberish sentences. Most utterances that are racist, sexist or homophobic are perfectly valid sentences from a grammar perspective, they're just ones you wouldn't say in polite company. Those things are really different.

And me trying to force a phrase into a usage that doesn't sound homophobic wasn't really moving toward the point of the discussion, so the above example is an aside anyway.
OK. I thought the discussion had moved to whether was grammatical to use adjectives as nouns, not whether it was polite, but OK.
No darkness can harm you if you are guided by your own inner light

User avatar
Thrice Xandvii
runic
runic
Posts: 2696
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:13
Location: Carnassus

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Thrice Xandvii »

I think the discussion was always about how, despite being grammatical, it is impolite to use certain groups of adjectives as nouns for the benefit of Squall, who isn't a native English speaker. So, it was about the fact that there are subtleties that exist that lie outside the scope of grammar as he understood it.
Image

cntrational
greek
greek
Posts: 672
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 03:59

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by cntrational »

You can easily form sentences that people wouldn't normally say. The famous "Colorless green dreams sleep furiously" is an example of a semantically difficult sentence that's grammatically valid.

But here, it's subtle -- it's not semantic meaningless, it's pragmatic. Cultures restrict what you can say with arbitrary precision, extending beyond politeness.

"I stepped into the taxi. There was a driver in the front." is marked in English because you expect there to be a driver, so why are you mentioning it? All taxis in Anglophonia are driven by humans.

But forward a few decades, and "There was a driver in the front." becomes unusual because taxis -- cars in general! -- are not driven by human beings anymore! Probably! Then it's weird for the opposite reason.

But go in between, and "There was a driver in the front." is a normal thing to say because you can't assume that your taxi drives itself. Not all of them do.

These are all components of the language, integral to how it's actually spoken, but depend on the culture speaking them. And not separate cultures, but one culture changing. You gotta describe language in terms of culture, not separately.

User avatar
Chagen
runic
runic
Posts: 3381
Joined: 03 Sep 2011 05:14
Location: Texas

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Chagen »

The Vutras Empire formally defines marriage as the legal binding of two living people (no, you cannot marry a ghost, spirit, or God) who are 17 years or older, regardless of genders. Same-sex marriage is perfectly legal and widespread. Marriage of both kinds is secular and amounts to not much more than signing papers. Either member may file for divorce. The various states, empires, and dynasties of Tamaran are widely-spread, but the restriction of non-living and living is common and most places don't really give a shit about same-sex marriage.

Keeping harems is frowned upon in Vutras, though it's somewhat common amongst higher-ranking Wild Heroes. Gods also commonly have priests of either gender who may serve as theological concubines, though this is completely illegal and will bring the Harmony-Affirming Seneschals on your ass hard. In Tamaran kings/queens, emperors/empresses, etc. often keep harems of course.

Shamayim doesn't have anything resembling marriage--children are taken from their parents and raised communally by assigned caretakers. Every few years the Gemstone Constabulary calls together all of its Ordofices and pairs them up in male-female pairs and gives them about a month to conceive. Sorcery and Motifs are used to quicken conception and birth so that a child can be born within a few days (though it is somewhat painful for the woman). Each pair must concieve at least two children, preferably more. The pairs are assigned at complete random and everyone just has to make do with what they get. Any who refuse to do this are sentenced to death instantly.
Nūdenku waga honji ma naku honyasi ne ika-ika ichamase!
female-appearance=despite boy-voice=PAT hold boy-youth=TOP very be.cute-3PL
Honyasi zō honyasi ma naidasu.
boy-youth=AGT boy-youth=PAT love.romantically-3S

User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 5605
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by eldin raigmore »

Khemehekis wrote:Does your conworld have same-sex marriage,

Yes.
Every (or almost every) human is (usually and in most places) expected to have at least one marriage that might produce offspring.
But third marriages are usually contracted at an age where producing more children is not expected.
So the point of third marriages is thought to be companionship instead of sex.
So same-sex marriages are rare for first and second marriages, but same-sex marriages are frequent in third marriages, even when both spouses are "heterosexual" by our terms.
(So same-sex third marriages are actually significantly less rare than homosexuality.)
But some people will have a same-sex first marriage or a same-sex second marriage, particularly when the planet's population is close to its carrying capacity.
In other words, in the pioneering phase of Adpihi history, same-sex first-or-second marriages will be stigmatized, but in Reptigan, it won't be as stigmatized. (Although even then having both first and second marriages be same-sex marriage will raise eyebrows.)
But even in Adpihi, same-sex third marriages won't be stigmatized.
Khemehekis wrote:polygamy,

Yes. A person is allowed to have up to three spouses at a time. It's polite to get one's current spouse(s) to approve of any new spouse.
Most people are their first spouse's second spouse, and their second spouse's first spouse, and their third spouse's third spouse.
A first marriage is usually to someone older; a second marriage is usually to someone younger.
Divorce is uncommon, but moving out of the dwelling of your more senior spouse, into a dwelling shared with your most recent spouse, is not uncommon.
If a marriage ends by either death or divorce, there is little stigma to undertaking a fourth marriage; a modicum of stigma to undertaking a fifth; and considerable stigma to undertaking a sixth marriage.
There would be so much stigma to undertaking a seventh marriage that it (might as well) never happen(s).
Khemehekis wrote:child marriage,

No; both parties must be adults. What that means varies from time to time and from place to place, and probably from species to species.
Khemehekis wrote:interspecies marriage,

Adpihi doesn't, because humans are the only known intelligent species for them. Reptigan, the successor culture to Adpihi, might; I haven't decided yet.
Khemehekis wrote:necrophiliac marriage,

No; both parties must be alive.
The "rules" for third marriages, if one's first two marriages both produced offspring, are much more relaxed; I suppose inter-species marriage is likely to start with third marriages, and may not ever extend to first or second marriages.
Perhaps marriage between a biological sapient person, and an AI, might also be allowed in third marriages. If so, the definition of "alive" used for AIs for the purpose of regulating third marriages, will perhaps be a little looser.
Khemehekis wrote:interracial

I don't even know what "race" is going to mean in Adpihi.
They probably won't have such a concept, at least not one that could translate into English *here* and *now* in RL.
It might be represented by "that person looks like s/he (or his/her ancestors) came from (the north of or the south of or the coast of or the interior of) Continent X".
It won't have any significant sociological baggage.
Khemehekis wrote: or intercaste marriage banned?
No. There won't be castes in Adpihi, nor in Reptigan; at least not among the sapient biologicals. I suppose the AIs might have castes, but I don't think they'll have marriage.
Last edited by eldin raigmore on 27 Oct 2015 19:46, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Egerius
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1633
Joined: 12 Sep 2013 21:29
Location: Not Rodentèrra
Contact:

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Egerius »

Khemehekis wrote:Does your conworld have same-sex marriage, polygamy, child marriage, interspecies marriage, necrophiliac marriage, etc.? Is interracial or intercaste marriage banned?
A text from a Buonavallese schoolbook on Social Studies, written from a historical perspective*:
*It's fictional, of course.
Spoiler:
Marriages have had different faces in Buonavalle and the today's neighboring counties that once have been under the rule of the Res Publica Rumana, and later, by the church: During the Ancient Republic, marriages were common as soon as the betrothed were sixteen or eighteen years old. Child marriages were relatively common for the aristocracy, but they had no legal effect until both parties ended formal education, or successfully ended an apprenticeship – for their parents, secure income was as equally important as powerful links, as no welfare existed in the modern sense.

Those who wanted a partner for marriage had to watch out that they better get someone from their own estate, or class. Both women and men were likely to lose their status if they married to a peasant, for example – a limitation that was true until about three to four centuries ago.

Polygamy was frowned upon even then, but this didn't keep some of the higher-ranked members of society to have the one or the other mistress – if they didn't prefer brothels with some of the semi-intelligent species, like the canes or their slaves (who mostly were from a semi-intelligent species).

Same-sex marriage was unknown, instead, every member of society was expected to marry a member of the opposite sex – but this did not mean that a child had to be conceived. Some graffiti point to homosexuals or zoophile individuals who preferred the brothel (or their slaves) to their wives.
In other regions, namely Laconia and its colonies, homosexuality was slightly less of a negative thing than in the Ruman republic; and even popular during military service.

During the Middle Ages, when the church's power grew, the sin of sodomy was harshly persecuted with a death sentence – if it was done with a member of the same species, otherwise, the punishment was a fine, or jail.
Homosexual intercourse was a reason for excommunication and exile, even in once-tolerant Laconia, as plagues raided the continent.

Child marriages became a bit more common, more so in the north, in Wineland and the Tolkish kingdoms and duchess, than in Saselva, Ladroma and Argemont, the Caletan regions or the southern Slavic kingdoms. A Laconian law codex from the twenty-third century declares child-marriages immoral.

From about 2600 we findings of secularisation – the blessing of the church is a popular even today, but law only explicitly requires a marriage in front of a registrar, a tendency that was approved by legislature in 2672. And as the medieval estate-based system broke away, "inter-class" marriage became more and more common – today, when someone says "class", the economic power of an individual is meant. From that moment on, education was highlighted as a distinctive social trait, which prompted the emergence of state schools.

During that time, homosexuality was discovered as a distinct preference, rather than being a sign of excessive, harmful lust, in both, men and women.
Now, there was a consciousness of paraphilia and non-heterosexual relations, which were both considered unacceptable and "treated" with psychological experiments, as psychology was a popular subject during the Industrialisation (2700 A.U.C).

The Electric Age, about 2800 A.U.C., saw little change to the prude attitudes towards non-heterosexual relations in law, but a more tolerant behaviour among the working class, which slowly spread upwards, at least when the lovers were from the same species.
The church did not change its views considerably, but excommunication was no longer a punishment – a confession to the fallacies among the clerics.

At the dawn of Socialism, Nationalism and during the Diplomatic Ice Age, inter-species lovers and homosexuals once again were subject to suppression by police in many countries, especially in times of economic crisis. The Laconian Republic again was a stronghold of tolerance, allowing intra-species homosexual relationships to be recognised as early as 2966.

In the last twenty-five years, many countries recognised same-sex, same-species marriage – even the church has very recently allowed these couples to celebrate their marriages inside holy halls, although only after introducing special terminology: di-patric matrimony (two-father marriage) and di-matric matrimony (two-mother marriage), marriages which are not recognised everywhere. Bisexual relationships have to oblige the same limitations as any other relationship: monogamy, the limitation to only one sexual partner at a time (occasional visits to brothels are excluded).

Still, inter-racial marriage is not recognised, either by the church, nor by law in many countries (for example, zoophilia is seen as animal abuse in Buonavallese law).
Other recognised paraphilias, like necrophilia and pedophilia are also punished by law.
Languages of Rodentèrra: Buonavallese, Saselvan Argemontese; Wīlandisċ Taulkeisch; More on the road.
Conlang embryo of TELES: Proto-Avesto-Umbric ~> Proto-Umbric
New blog: http://argentiusbonavalensis.tumblr.com

Khemehekis
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2360
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Khemehekis »

All right, here's my maritogram for Imgur:

Image
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!

User avatar
Thrice Xandvii
runic
runic
Posts: 2696
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:13
Location: Carnassus

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Thrice Xandvii »

...a what now?

Did a Google search to find the first page of this thread... (the only other place on the 'net the term is used it seems) to find out what it means.

So, why a chart?

Couldn't you just list the people and say who they are all married to? Or can someone marry a person and the second person not be married to the first? Cuz otherwise, one of those rows is always going to mirror another one along that line of "V"s.
Image

Khemehekis
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2360
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Khemehekis »

Well, I suppose you could always make a "half-chart" that looked something like a right triangle . . .
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!

User avatar
Thrice Xandvii
runic
runic
Posts: 2696
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:13
Location: Carnassus

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Thrice Xandvii »

I meant a list. Seems the most practical solution.
Image

Khemehekis
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2360
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Khemehekis »

Thrice Xandvii wrote:I meant a list. Seems the most practical solution.
You mean like this?

Odra Fl Sia: Dafe Mg Tom, Pena N Danny, Toan Zn Dark
Dafe Mg Tom: Odra Fl Sia
Pena N Danny: Odra Fl Sia, Iasa Er Dzhusinda, Toan Zn Dark
Iasa Er Dzhusinda: Pena N Danny, Toan Zn Dark, Pashou Li Nanda
Toan Zn Dark: Odra Fl Sia, Pena N Danny, Iasa Er Dzhusinda
Pashou Li Nanda: Iasa Er Dzhusinda

It could be done, but a chart it what the Kankonians came up with when they first allowed polygynous-polyandrous marriages in the new one-world government of Kankonia.
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!

User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2759
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by sangi39 »

Right, so I thought I'd get round to answering this OP. I think for the moment I can only really answer it regards to the laws of the Kusan Empire, since that's the only conculture I've really worked on for Yantas (despite it existing several thousand years after the time period I'm dealing with on the linguistic side of things for this conworld).

The legal system of the Kusan Empire recognises three different states of "marriage", 1) "primary marriage", 2) "secondary marriage" and 3) "slave marriage".

Primary marriage exists solely between one man and one woman, and was largely tied up with inheritance and the idea of citizenship and tribalism. A child inherited the tribal identity of their father, and was considered a citizen of the Kusan Empire if both parents were also citizens. Wealth was inherited in different ways, depending on what was being inherited. Land, livestock and secular titles, for example, were inherited from the father while religious duties were inherited from the mother (worship of certain deities or spirits was determined by the mother's religious background and various feasts and sacrifices which had to be held/made were also determined by that background). A man or a woman pushing for a divorce in a primary marriage was fairly secure, economically, taking with them any land, wealth or titles that they may have brought with them to the marriage.

Secondary marriages allowed for a man to marry multiple other women, but women were not allowed to take on a secondary husband. Children born of secondary marriages inherited their tribal identity from their father, and their religious identity from their mother, as children of primary marriages did, but they did not inherit any sense of citizenship, nor did they inherit any land or titles. Instead, children of secondary marriages inherited the right to reside on land inherited by their (primary marriage) siblings, and the portion of wealth they inherited was much smaller. Women entering secondary marriages were to be housed and taken care of, as if they were a man's primary wife, and she could put forward reasons for divorce and claim protection from violence under the law, but the economic downside of a woman leaving a secondary marriage were fairly harsh, with women entering into secondary marriages immediately transferring any inherited or inheritable wealth and land to their husband while simultaneously severing the right to any of their children from inheriting any of it from their father.

Slave marriages were more of a social/cultural obligation than anything else. If a man killed another man (in a way that was deemed acceptable, e.g. in war or trial by combat), who happened to be married and/or had children, then that man became economically responsible for the well-being of that woman. No land, wealth or titles could be transferred from the woman to the man in this scenario, but the man could claim the right to seize any of it as part of his killing her now dead husband. Any children from this marriage (or from the preceding marriage), were exempt from any inheritance of any kind from the father, including tribal association (meaning that for children born after the slave marriage began were effectively without a tribe, which in itself results in almost no protection under the law).

The legal system of the Kusan Empire, therefore, did recognise a form of polygyny, albeit a graded system, but recognised no forms of polyandry.



Same-sex marriage was completely unrecognised as being the same as any of the three kinds of marriage described above, but homosexual relationships were accepted, and sometimes praised in both poetry and myth in the same way that heterosexual relationships were. However, homosexual relationships entailed no access to any legal rights, e.g. upon the death of one man in a homosexual relationship with another man, all of his wealth, titles, land, etc. transfers backwards through his family and is transferred to the "head of the family", rather than being transferred to the other man.

On the other hand, while love within a homosexual relationship was largely praised, it was still considered a bad thing for a man to not take a wife, a result of this being that a number of married men would also have entered into sexual and even romantic relationships with other men.



Child marriage, again, wasn't a legally recognised thing in the Kusan Empire. Marriages arranged during the childhood of one or both people going into the marriage were quite common, but the marriage itself wasn't legally recognised until both people were over the age of 16 (I might change this age. Not sure whether to lower it or not). Before that point, the couple is considered to be engaged, and time spent between them would be encouraged by their respective families. However, it was perfectly possible to break these engagements and should either person die before the marriage became official, the engagement was broken off.

Sexual relationships with people under the age of 16, especially outside of an engagement, were considered immoral, and legal punishments could be sought. Sexual relationships with prepubescent children, on the other hand, were completely against the law, whether the two people were engaged or not, and punishments for carrying out such a relationship were often quite harsh, although not set in law.



"Marriage to the dead" was common in the Kusan Empire, with marriage considered perpetual until divorce. The result of this was that a man and a woman in either a primary or secondary marriage (but not a slave marriage) could not remarry after the death of their spouse without pushing for a divorce. The results of such a divorce would have several different effects.

Men could form as many secondary marriages as they wanted, so upon the death of a secondary wife he could remarry as soon as he wanted (although he would still be financially responsible for his children). Since primary marriages, however, were considered singular, should a man's primary wife die before him a divorce was legally required before another primary marriage could form. Doing so, however, would lead to all of the land and wealth she would have inherited from her family transferring back to them, rather than to her husband. Since secondary marriages were allowed, post-mortem divorce was usually not sought out.

Women who wanted to remarry after the death of her husband were treated differently depending on their status. A primary wife could divorce, and she would keep all of her land a titles and would take them into a new marriage with her. Secondary wives, however, would leave a divorce with nothing. Her children would still inherit land a titles from her late husband, but since all of her inherited wealth, land and titles passed to her husband upon their marriage starting, she wouldn't be able to take anything into any new marriages and her children from her previous marriage wouldn't be considered step-children of her new husband.

Actually entering into a marriage with the dead was not legally recognised and, as with sexual relationships with children, sexual relationships with the dead were punishable under the law, again, with punishments varying from region to region.



Interspecies marriage was completely illegal, but certain rituals including a simulated sexual act with an animal did exist within certain sects throughout the Empire. Actual sexual acts with animals, on the other hand, were hardly tolerated, although there were no punishments for such acts, as long as the animal was owned by the person in question (should someone else own the animal then you could probably be punished for trespassing or even theft).



Interracial marriage was tolerated quite widely, although outside of urban areas, due to population movements in that direction, it wasn't particularly common. Rural areas, especially in the fringes of the Empire, were usually between locals and other locals (the same was true in urban areas amongst the non-elite, but there was a greater deal of racial diversity in urban areas).



Caste/class was much more important than race within the Empire and outside of slave marriages, men and women were largely expected to marry within their own socio-economic groups. Members of priestly families, for example, were expected to marry members of other priestly families, while those descended from the military elite were mostly restricted to marrying within the military elite. I haven't quite worked out how the population of the Empire might have been divided, but I did want a kind of three-way division amongst the elite between the military elite, the religious elite and the secular elite.

There weren't really any legal punishments for marrying outside of one's own caste, but the family or the tribe as a whole could prevent any claims to inheritance, effectively disowning that person for marrying outside of their caste and in some cases the family could attempt to end the marriage through the legal system. Citizenship and membership to the tribe would still be inherited by any children of surviving inter-caste marriages, since these traits are considered to be intrinsic aspects of the individual and thus not subject to measures preventing inheritance, but the lives of those children might not be an easy one.



EDIT: "slave marriage" probably isn't the best term I could have used. It implies that the woman has become a slave, whie the original intent was to show that each participant was enslaved by cultural tradition to enter into the marriage.

"War marriage" or "debt marriage" might be better terms to use. As I mentioned above, they typically arise when a man kills another woman's husband, typically during a time of war or even just through plain old murder. The man becomes financially responsible for the woman, but the woman gives up her right to marry again.

This is the one aspect of Kusan culture, in terms of marriage, that I'm still trying to sort out properly. It's almost like an extreme version of the weregild of our world. A man is found guilty of a crime affecting an entire family, and therefore must pay them some form of restitution should they wish to avoid a harsher sentence like the death penalty, but the woman also loses some rights, since in accepting this restitution, she is protecting the life of a known murderer. In the case of killing during war, the woman is seeking out restitution for murder, but is recognised as the wife of the enemy ("this man was defending us from people like your husband") so she's forced to give up certain rights as well.

I'll likely end up splitting these two situations up. Marriage through war-time killings are likely to be extremely rare, especially since it's difficult to prove what actually happened, while marriage through murder might be relatively more common. Marriage through war also has a different set of implications regarding the actions of the man and the woman than those of marriage through murder, so the rights of women in terms of inheritance might be different. We'll see.
Last edited by sangi39 on 19 Nov 2015 17:59, edited 1 time in total.
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.

User avatar
valiums
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 36
Joined: 21 Mar 2011 18:48

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by valiums »

There are varying degrees of romantic and sexual entanglement in Lom, but no marriage.


Wow, that must be the longest essay I've ever written on any consubject. :roll:

Firebird766
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 166
Joined: 14 Oct 2014 02:13

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Firebird766 »

Let's make things simple and only go over this for the mostly-human cultures, not the alien species ones.

Kyskin has exclusively heterosexual marriages, by two members of the same social class, who are within 10 years of age of each other, and if both members are over the age of 14. Slaves can marry only with permission of their owner. Marriage itself is mostly for legal reasons, especially those reasons that involve inheritance and whatnot. Slaves can't inherit or leave behind property, of course, but if a pair of slaves are married and their owner dies, the courts are far more likely to send them to the same inheritor than if they weren't married.

Naqil's requirements are a lot less stringent. Marriage between social classes is common- and is pretty much the only way a commoner can join a noble House as a freeman. Slaves, on the other hand, can't marry at all. The age of majority, which is when marriage becomes allowed, is 17, but the courtship preceeding this can start as soon as the members go through puberty. Naqil doesn't have any laws against homosexual marriage, but in practice Houses are more likely to accept a new member by marriage if that new member is likely to produce children, and there's really not a whole lot of opportunity for people who decide to elope and go off on their own. There's also a strong tradition of extramarital paramours, especially among the noble Houses, which may come from outside the House or could be taken from among the household slaves, and as with most Naqilo traditions there are layers and layers of complexity as to what's considered appropriate and what isn't.

Jorian marriage is based heavily on omens and augery. If someone wants to get married, they visit a seer who reads the signs and tells them their destined match. Sometimes the signs aren't what one would expect, and sometimes someone ends up marrying a bull. Or a sailing ship. Or the sky. But usually a living person who hasn't already married. Jor also has a strong tradition of extramarital affairs, but they're a lot less formal and complex than in Naqil.

The Utuihol Huilai have informal marriage with no real rules to it. Basically, a couple decides they're going to be exclusive and then bam they're married. That's really about it.

User avatar
alynnidalar
greek
greek
Posts: 723
Joined: 17 Aug 2014 03:22
Location: Michigan, USA

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by alynnidalar »

Firebird766 wrote:Sometimes the signs aren't what one would expect, and sometimes someone ends up marrying a bull. Or a sailing ship. Or the sky.
Oh, I like this. In such a case, dare I ask what the "marriage" actually consists of? Please tell me it's just a legal thing in these cases...

Firebird766
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 166
Joined: 14 Oct 2014 02:13

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Firebird766 »

alynnidalar wrote: Oh, I like this. In such a case, dare I ask what the "marriage" actually consists of? Please tell me it's just a legal thing in these cases...
It's legal, spiritual, and religious. The married pair lives together in the same house, though the meaning of that can be stretched a bit. Someone who marries a sailing ship would more or less live on that ship, someone who marries a bull would have a stable attached to his or her house (which might require moving to the outskirts where there's more room to build- the center of Jor is pretty crowded). Sex is not required, but if either of the members births a child, that child is considered to be of the married pair. Even if one of the members is inanimate or there is otherwise some biological impossibility going on.

There's a tale where a man married the sky, and then a rain of frogs happened because hello tornadic waterspout. The man made a point of gathering as many of them as he could, naming them, and raising them like children.

User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2687
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

Re: Gay marriage, polygamy, etc.

Post by Dormouse559 »

Firebird766 wrote:There's a tale where a man married the sky, and then a rain of frogs happened because hello tornadic waterspout. The man made a point of gathering as many of them as he could, naming them, and raising them like children.
Do they also compare certain parts of his anatomy to a tornado? [>:D]

More seriously, do the omens ever point to anyone/thing having more than one spouse? Like can more than one person be married to the sky? Also, is remarriage a thing for inanimate objects (especially celestial or otherwise unreachable ones), since they're likely to outlive their spouse.

Post Reply