Bujold was the guest of honor at a virtual SF conference I attended during Covid. She was asked about Bel, and she said that referring to them as “it” and using the term “hermaphrodite” was one of her greatest regrets about the series, and if “they” and “intersex” had been in common use when she created the character, she definitely would have used them. She was a wonderful speaker, by the way.
I don’t think Bel and Miles ever consummated their relationship, though.
Tunnel has a lot of religious diversity, too, introduced quite early - Rod is explicitly not Christian (or Jewish or Islamic) - he’s something closer to Zoroasterian
Doesn’t stay there. Particularly not in the later books; but also not all the way through that one. Cordelia defeats her enemies militarily, after all; and her competence and determination are what attracts Aral to her – though not at all in the fashion in which all competent women are attracted to Heinlein’s lead male characters. (Though I grant I’d have been a lot happier if she’d rescued herself from the rapist, instead of needing men to step in.)
ETA: Bujold was depicting a misogynist society, not agreeing with it.
I suspect you’re remembering a scene from Diplomatic Immunity, when Miles notes the signs of age on Bel’s body (as the Betan is being treated for exposure to a Cetagandan bioweapon) and briefly regrets all the opportunities he turned down when they were both younger.
And if I recall correctly, the only biologically unusual woman Miles ever had sex with was Taura; all the others - Ellie Quinn, Rowan Durona, and Ekaterin Vorvayne - were phenotypically and genetically cishet.
I think Taura was cishet also; or at least cisbi, I can’t remember whether she ever partnered with someone not male. She was just so heavily genetically modified that at first glance she looked like a different species. She wanted Miles to prove – with his body – that he recognized her as human; which struck me as a rather dubious technique, there being a lot of other reasons why human males might not be able to peform at a given moment, some of which pertained to that particular situation.
Miles managed it, though; and I believe repeated it from time to time in far less fraught circumstances.
Yeah, as I remember it Bel kept making passes at Miles (though not in a harassing manner) and Miles kept turning him down, but respectfully; and later regrets that, but by that point they’re both married.
Yeah, I didn’t phrase that as elegantly as I could have. I was trying to avoid the word “normal”; what I should have said was that Taura was Miles’ only phenotypically and genetically atypical lover.
I’m pretty sure I read The Warriors Apprentice first, and I survived. Generally I prefer to read things in published order, but I probably misinterpreted the publishing date of the omnibus Cordelia’s Honor for the publishing date of the stories in the book.
Reading in that order is probably a spoiler for Shards of Honor, but doesn’t ruin the story.
The haut-ladies bother me. They’re all supposed to be extraordinarily beautiful, as if that didn’t mean different things to different people; and “beautiful” also means “tall” as they’re all extremely tall and that keeps being commented on. I can’t think of any good genetic reasons to breed humans for unusual height – it’s as if they declared ‘there is one standard of beauty’ and then bred for that.
But it’s not presented as ‘they decided on this particular standard of beauty.’ It’s presented as ‘this is what human beauty is, universally acknowledged’.
IIRC, Earthsea was inspired by Polynesia. Most of the populace, including Ged, are red or brown-skinned, and IIRC one of his friends from wizard school is black. The only white people in the setting are the Kargads, the Viking-esque people from the east who don’t use true names and worship a nameless cthonic entity.
I recall reading an essay LeGuin wrote when the SyFy Earthsea miniseries came out where she railed against the producers for casting a white guy as Ged.
“What Were You Thinking?” With that title it could be about absolutely anything. What were you thinking using such a horribly non-descriptive thread name?
I was thinking of a name that reflected the threads intent: something you would say to a poster that hadn’t earned a dedicated Pit thread but went off the rails. And thus I laid out in the OP.
The fact it’s that title, but in the PIT (and I ran it by Miller to make sure it wouldn’t fall afoul of our back-link issues) I thought it would be useful when such back-links appear.
The title is actually fitting for what you wanted to get across, I think. I’m just against non-descriptive thread titles in general. They’re like when folks here post a response that is only a link to a video. Do not make me have to click on something just to know what they heck you (general you) are on about.
I’ve never understood why there isn’t more pushback here against all the posts that are only video links.
Eh, it’s always a challenge when it comes to the Pit. Most of my Pit threads that I’ve started have been super descriptive - this one was challenging, and I suggested it as a title in the Ur-Troll thread, as a way to keep rants directed at posters who weren’t trolls from taking over for days.
You’re correct in that it is my assumption that anyone who came -here- was already conversant with the expectations there, but -meh-. I accept your complaint about it as entirely appropriate for this thread.