little Garou 'huh?'
Monday, 30 September 2002 01:17 pmJust out of interest, with reference to events in Oxford Garou this weekend, what *is* the justification for the idea that same-sex activity between two Garou is a Litany breach? I mean, thou shalt not mate with another Garou, but this isn't *mating*, i mean, they're not going to *breed*...
Conversely, what would be the attitude to same-sex activity with a Kinfolk?
Just interested.
Conversely, what would be the attitude to same-sex activity with a Kinfolk?
Just interested.
no subject
Date: Monday, 30 September 2002 05:37 am (UTC)Same sex Garou relationships may bring no Metis but they're still icky as they're spending time they have to spread the seed of Gaia.
*re reads that*
God that sounds SO bad.
no subject
Date: Monday, 30 September 2002 06:05 am (UTC)Three reasons:
(1) Potential birth of metis. Metis are walking veil breaches until they can change out of crinos form (about 8 years), and likely to still be risk after that - for example, if they're killed, their body will rvert to breed form (ie crinos). Additional issue that the mother frequently dies in childbirth, and even if she doesn't, may be barren thereafter. Metises themselves are sterile.
(2) Lack of kinfolk/fertile garou being produced. In my mind, not so much of an issue, since the majority ofthe time, garou don't get the time to sprog anyway. Cass and Songbird certainly weren't expected to at the time, because Cat's is planning a litter - and that's quite enough for any sept to deal with.
(3) Close attachment. You are going to see fellows fall in battle - if one of those is a mate, it's likely to at very least distract you at the time, if not send you into Harano. Somebody ceasing to follow a battle plan (ha!) could change the course of the battle....
This last one makes sense - except that packmates are often as close, and get fun things like visions/feelings of their packmates final moments...
Of course, the real reason is that it's an archaeic society, and a dying race, and when the rules were thought up, nobody considered purely pleasure rather than reproduction type relationships - remember garou society is massively based on wolfpack ideas...
no subject
Date: Monday, 30 September 2002 06:18 am (UTC)And so a same sex mating (which carries its own taboo) would be just as threatening and horrifying, if not more so, than an opposing gender mating.
The reasons...
Date: Monday, 30 September 2002 07:43 am (UTC)It exists because the smallest unit of garou society should be the pack, not the couple. It is distracting to fight a war with your significant other at your side. The other stuff about not breedingf tru are all well and good, but not really relevant, since the Garou are quite OK with a Garou who has same sex kinfolk partners (as a recently deceased Silver fang elder did) as long as they do attempt to fulfill their duty by breeding as well.
It's like the army not allowing women in front-line combat positions because they distract the men (and vice versa). Imagine a sept where the hormones could run rampant, there'd be deaths every day as Garou dueled out their honour and showed off to the others. Let's face it, your average Garou PC has over 10 social traits, add pure-breed on to that and the dating game would be madness!
-Ben Pascoe, Garou Anthropologist
no subject
Date: Monday, 30 September 2002 08:50 am (UTC)The Children of Gaia don't seem to have any problems, nor, *generally*, do the Fianna. Glasswalkers tend to be pragmatic ("Just as long as you make babies now and again - one way or another, you could always be a sperm donor - who cares?" seems to be the worst attitude I've ever got off them). The Black Furies - *grin* they're cool as well.
Like I really care what the Get or the Fangs think anyway :)
no subject
Date: Monday, 30 September 2002 09:15 am (UTC)Wow, I thought it was a coincidence that *Linette* was a cammie :)
Lucy, very surprised
Re: The reasons...
Date: Monday, 30 September 2002 02:16 pm (UTC)Isn't it more like, er, not allowing gays?
jdcxxx
So out of interest...
Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2002 09:54 am (UTC)...would a sexual orgy between all the members of a single-sex pack be OK? ;)
no subject
Date: Friday, 4 October 2002 11:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: Friday, 4 October 2002 11:34 am (UTC);)'