Jᴀᴄᴜʀᴜᴛᴜ - Tʜᴇ Cᴀsᴛ Oᴜᴛ

Tleszer wrote:Huh? Where did that come from?

Left-field ya there, Sunshine?

http://img106.imageshack.us/img106/3025 ... ogiefh.jpg

Look for it.

needs more labels of "raging queer"

SandChigger wrote:

Tleszer wrote:Huh? Where did that come from?

Left-field ya there, Sunshine?

http://img106.imageshack.us/img106/3025 ... ogiefh.jpg

Look for it.

Sunshine?

Interesting chart. Didn't realize Margaux is only 2 years older than me. Somehow I thought she was older...

Heather's on Facebook. Their surname makes me wonder if there isn't an ex-husband in the mix somewhere. You know the story, married woman facing middle-age, gets fed up with and throws off the yoke of male authority, gets back in touch with her powerful femininity (or at the very least starts touching herself there) and finds a younger 'bian lover.

See it all the time. What would be interesting to know (and yes, this is pure, unadulterated voyeurism) is how Papa BoBo handled it. Did he again try to "play Frank Herbert" and react the way FH did to Bruce's homosexuality? Or was he the kinder, gentler, more-understanding-of-diversity wimp he appears to be? (My vote!)

Time to pull out and pore over Dreamer of Dune again?

Baraka Bryan wrote:sure looks that way... and they have 2 daughters to indoctrinate too

Kinky!

-ThePanopticTleszer

Holy ...

Brian Herbert is a great-grandfather?

Am I reading that chart correctly?

Scary, isn't it?

Baraka Bryan wrote:

TheDukester wrote:Holy ...

Brian Herbert is a great-grandfather?

Am I reading that chart correctly?

geneaologically, yes.
qualitatively... TBD

ZING

SandChigger wrote:Heather's on Facebook. Their surname makes me wonder if there isn't an ex-husband in the mix somewhere. You know the story, married woman facing middle-age, gets fed up with and throws off the yoke of male authority, gets back in touch with her powerful femininity (or at the very least starts touching herself there) and finds a younger 'bian lover.

See it all the time. What would be interesting to know (and yes, this is pure, unadulterated voyeurism) is how Papa BoBo handled it. Did he again try to "play Frank Herbert" and react the way FH did to Bruce's homosexuality? Or was he the kinder, gentler, more-understanding-of-diversity wimp he appears to be? (My vote!)

He probably asked her what a lesbian is. I've not heard the word 'bian before, mostly the term used is lezzie or lezzer. There's even a website for them called Lezza. I like the ghetto spelling.

Bian is what one of my friends calls them in Japanese. Fresher and less offensive to the ear than rezu.

Heather has two mommies?

SandChigger wrote:Bian is what one of my friends calls them in Japanese. Fresher and less offensive to the ear than rezu.

Rezu! Isn't there a native Japanese word for a lez?

None that I've ever come across.

There's a whole book of native words dealing with male homosexuality, though.

Maybe it was like Victorian England and female homosexuality didn't exist.

SandChigger wrote:Maybe it was like Victorian England and female homosexuality didn't exist.

Urban myth, I believe. But nice reference, anyway.

HBJ,
pedant.

Really? Oh well. I've been trying to remember where I heard/read that....

Anyway, I did remember something and confirmed it with a friend.

Gay men (especially effeminate, cross-dressing ones) are sometimes referred to as o-kama, originally a term for a "rice cooker" (as in the somewhat obsolete denki-gama "electric rice cooker"). I don't know how or where this cookware terminology originated, but there is a corresponding term for lesbians: o-nabe, or "pots". You don't hear it as often, so it took me a while to think of it.

Something that has always amused me is the term o-koge, which is the burnt rice stuck to the bottom of the cooker you sometime got with the traditional stove-top or early electric versions. Can anyone guess what group of people it's used to refer to?

And finally, I remembered a topical palindrome:

Rezu wa mata tama-hazure.

Something like "blue-balled by a 'bian again"...

SandChigger wrote:Really? Oh well. I've been trying to remember where I heard/read that....

Anyway, I did remember something and confirmed it with a friend.

Gay men (especially effeminate, cross-dressing ones) are sometimes referred to as o-kama, originally a term for a "rice cooker" (as in the somewhat obsolete denki-gama "electric rice cooker"). I don't know how or where this cookware terminology originated, but there is a corresponding term for lesbians: o-nabe, or "pots". You don't hear it as often, so it took me a while to think of it.

Something that has always amused me is the term o-koge, which is the burnt rice stuck to the bottom of the cooker you sometime got with the traditional stove-top or early electric versions. Can anyone guess what group of people it's used to refer to?

No, you'll have to give me a clue.

OK. If the rice cookers are gay men, what would the hard, pretty much inedible, usually burnt (or about to get burned?) rice that sticks to them correspond to?

Hair gel?

SandChigger wrote:None that I've ever come across.

There's a whole book of native words dealing with male homosexuality, though.

Maybe it was like Victorian England and female homosexuality didn't exist.

The story goes, Queen Victoria found it inconcievable "women don't do that sort of thing", therefore male homosexuality was made illegal, but female homosexuality wasn't made illegal.

There is speculation about how it actually went, the Queen can't make new laws, although she does open parliment and gives a speech about the key issues which will be debated. She is also informed about new legislation, although she cannot influence it.

Therefore, she couldn't stop an anit-lesbian bill passing, but it is possible that any references to women were removed to "protect" HRH... Whatever, male homosexuality was made illegal, lesbianism was left untouched.

lesbianism was left untouched.

No, but really, you make to easy.

big_D wrote:The story goes, Queen Victoria found it inconcievable "women don't do that sort of thing", therefore male homosexuality was made illegal, but female homosexuality wasn't made illegal.

Yep, that's the same story I read somewhere. Urbane legend, huh? Oh well.

chanilover wrote:Hair gel?

What?! No! It's a group of people. Do I have to pull out the Sandworms Rabbi quote? "Think! You can think, can't you?!"

SandChigger wrote:

big_D wrote:The story goes, Queen Victoria found it inconcievable "women don't do that sort of thing", therefore male homosexuality was made illegal, but female homosexuality wasn't made illegal.

Yep, that's the same story I read somewhere. Urbane legend, huh? Oh well.

chanilover wrote:Hair gel?

What?! No! It's a group of people. Do I have to pull out the Sandworms Rabbi quote? "Think! You can think, can't you?!"

Fag hags?

The story of Queen Victoria refusing to believe women could be so depraved as to be queer is a myth, as Big D posted. Sex offences in England tend to focus on penetration with a penis, which is why lesbianism fell outside the definitions of sexual offences. Sodomy was a crime even for heteros, and until recently a man who had anal sex with his wife in private was committing a crime, as the Sex Offences Act had only decriminalised sodomy between two men in private. Queen Victoria would have had no influence on legislation. Although a Bill needs Royal Assent to become law, the granting of Royal Assent is just a formality and Assent hasn't been refused since the time of Queen Anne.

By the way, as you're a bit of cunning linguist, you might like the know that Royal Assent is still read out in Parliament in Norman French - 'la reyne le veult' is what they say.

Georgia law prohibits (repealed in 1998) sodomy — defined as "any sexual act involving the sex organs of one person and the mouth or anus of another" — regardless of the gender of the participants.

I think you had to do it missionary style with your pants around your ankles, too.

chanilover wrote:Sodomy was a crime even for heteros, and until recently a man who had anal sex with his wife in private was committing a crime, as the Sex Offences Act had only decriminalised sodomy between two men in private.

A man having anal sex with his wife is a "myth," not a "crime."

Baraka Bryan wrote:

Omphalos wrote:

chanilover wrote:Sodomy was a crime even for heteros, and until recently a man who had anal sex with his wife in private was committing a crime, as the Sex Offences Act had only decriminalised sodomy between two men in private.

A man having anal sex with his wife is a "myth," not a "crime."

That's not true, it sometimes happens "accidentally".