'The Killer In Me'
[NAFDA] "There will be an occasional happy, so that it might be crushed under the boot of the writer." From Zorro to Angel (including Wonderfalls and The Inside), this is where Buffistas come to anoint themselves in the bloodbath.
Right-o. Also, I, as first wife, at a ripe and shapely 45 (hey, if this is my fantasy, I'm going with it) get first dibs on Tim, Mark, and Sean-if-it's-Bean.
Tim, Mark, and Sean would presumably not have signed on for the whole shebang if they couldn't stand the thought of bedding me.
Wow. RH needed some saltpeter.
And in TMisHM's Luna, women toally have the power when it comes to sex. There are so few of them, it's ladies-choice, all day, every day.
But grandpa still gets the droit de seigneur.
I understand the whole "propogation is the ultimate biological imperative" argument of RAH's, and for species survival, this is true. I'm just saying that there's more to marriage than biological imperative. And RAH just gets all end-all-and-be-all smug about "women breed, men protect, and if you don't belive this, you're an idiot."
Wow. you are making me hate Heinlein and I've never even read him.
I like lots of Heinlein, I really do, but a lot of things piss me off.
The thing is, Heinlein is a product of the turn of the 19th century trying to be sexually progressive. He thinks he's daring because women get to take the initiative and sleep around if they want to. That's racy stuff for 1950. It's just that the century zipped past him.
So, it's sort of a communal "it takes a village" approach with the word marriage and some seniority rules attached?
Does overpopulation as a potential threat to survival ever enter the equation?
(Stipulated: there are individuals, both sexes, who prefer to live alone. This is racially self-correcting.)
It's the word "racially" in this that confuses me. Was he attributing the preference to a racially genetic trait?
Aurelia, racially, I think is meant not as what race are you, but racially correcting, like correcting within the entire human race.
So, it's sort of a communal "it takes a village" approach with the word marriage and some seniority rules attached?
Right. It's a gedankenexperiment. What happens if you do Australia all over again, but this time without the Christianity and with women having the right of sexual refusal? Heinlein's thesis is that you come up with lots of alternate forms of marriage, most of them polygynous.
I think he meant racially as in "human race". But I'm guessing.