Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
#1
Old 03-04-2011, 04:19 PM
Guest
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Charleston
Posts: 672
Fatherless daughter term?

I promise I Googled first -but while a fatherless Son is called a "bastard" What is a fatherless daughter? Or to match the relationship in this question What is a motherless daughter called? Are there any o0ther terms to fit the various missing parent circumstances?
#2
Old 03-04-2011, 04:30 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 96
Bastards aren't fatherless. They are born out of wedlock.

A 'Bastard Child' can be male or female.

Perhaps 'Bastardette' fits?
#3
Old 03-04-2011, 04:31 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Newcastle NSW
Posts: 12,878
A bastard can be a son or a daughter, and it does not mean "fatherless" -- it means that the mother is unmarried. For example, William the Bastard (King William I of England and Duke of Normandy) did have a father (Robert, Duke of Normandy), and his father made William his heir, but his parents were not married to each other.
#4
Old 03-04-2011, 04:31 PM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thinktank View Post
I promise I Googled first -but while a fatherless Son is called a "bastard" What is a fatherless daughter? Or to match the relationship in this question What is a motherless daughter called? Are there any o0ther terms to fit the various missing parent circumstances?
It's probably true that we hear "bastard son" much more than "bastard daughter", but the dictionary definition makes no gender distinction, so the latter is just as valid as the former.

ETA: what Deflagration and Giles said.

Last edited by Dahnlor; 03-04-2011 at 04:33 PM.
#5
Old 03-04-2011, 04:34 PM
Guest
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 36,675
The title character of the movie Bastard Out Of Carolina is a girl.
#6
Old 03-04-2011, 05:08 PM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Missoula, Montana, USA
Posts: 20,501
Back in the old days, a child who had lost one parent but not both was a 'half-orphan' (and may well have been sent away somewhere to live in an asylum). The term wasn't gendered.
#7
Old 03-04-2011, 08:17 PM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,705
Just to clarify - Bastard is a term indicating that the child in question (male or female) is illegitimate, either born out of wedlock, born to a mistress, or born to a morganatic wife. The term indicates that the child has a lesser social standing than the father (who is usually the only one who mattered). Sometimes this was simply a matter of inheritance law, sometimes it was a crippling social stigma. It varied.

Bastardy isn't generally a term used in matrilineal societies - most mothers know who their daughter is, as they were there for the event. Adoptioned, step-mother/step-daughter, and orphan are terms which cover the exceptions, and disinheriting or shunning covers the casting off of existing daughters by a mother who doesn't want her.

It was usually less noted or significant to have bastard daughters than bastard sons, as daughters couldn't inherit most times anyway. Sometimes it was useful - a bastard daughter couldn't expect to need the same level of dowry - or unfortunate - a bastard daughter couldn't be used as a social token for the family's advancement through her marriage - for individual families however, so the term did apply to both sons and daughters.

In contrast, a half-orphan was any child, male or female, with only one parent. In times and places where widows had truly limited choices, a child without a father was considered about the same as a true orphan, and were sometimes considered even worse off than total orphans, because he/she had the mother to support rather than only themselves.

A child could also be a half-orphan or an orphan and still stand in line for inheritance, or could be a bastard. The terms weren't exclusive.
#8
Old 03-04-2011, 08:24 PM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,705
damnit - dinner made me miss edit window.

Adotioned = adopted.
#9
Old 03-04-2011, 08:34 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Away for a while
Posts: 6,680
So, when did bastard become a term of insult, irrespective of birth, primarily for males? One seldom calls a woman 'bastard' as an insult, just as one formerly seldom called a male 'bitchy'.

(I have noticed that 'bitch' as a verb is used perjoratively about as frequently for men as women, but that 'bitch' used as a noun frequently is used as a compliment for both men and women when refering to a 'big dog' or someone who plays 'hard ball' - I don't know if that is ironic or an accident of the language.)
#10
Old 03-05-2011, 09:57 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Newcastle NSW
Posts: 12,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by j66 View Post
So, when did bastard become a term of insult, irrespective of birth, primarily for males?
OED's earliest cite is 1830, but since it's in a glossary, the term must have been in spoken use earlier -- possibly much earlier.
#11
Old 03-05-2011, 12:21 PM
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northern USA
Posts: 1,943
Over all, bastards get less attention from their fathers. Their mothers may also be disadvantaged and have a history of poor decisions. Thus, bastards are a product of their upbringing and reflect it.
#12
Old 03-05-2011, 12:28 PM
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Flushing, NY
Posts: 4,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by j66 View Post
So, when did bastard become a term of insult, irrespective of birth, primarily for males?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giles View Post
OED's earliest cite is 1830, but since it's in a glossary, the term must have been in spoken use earlier -- possibly much earlier.
Heck, it's used that way in Shakespeare much earlier than that. Consider the solilioquy from King Lear (Act I, sc. ii) that introduces us to Edmund, the illegitimate son of the Duke of Gloucester, who plots to take his legitimate half-brother Edgar's birthright:

Quote:
Thou, nature, art my goddess; to thy law
My services are bound. Wherefore should I
Stand in the plague of custom, and permit
The curiosity of nations to deprive me,
For that I am some twelve or fourteen moon-shines
Lag of a brother? Why bastard? wherefore base?
When my dimensions are as well compact,
My mind as generous, and my shape as true,
As honest madam's issue? Why brand they us
With base? with baseness? bastardy? base, base?
Who, in the lusty stealth of nature, take
More composition and fierce quality
Than doth, within a dull, stale, tired bed,
Go to the creating a whole tribe of fops,
Got 'tween asleep and wake? Well, then,
Legitimate Edgar, I must have your land:
Our father's love is to the bastard Edmund
As to the legitimate: fine word,--legitimate!
Well, my legitimate, if this letter speed,
And my invention thrive, Edmund the base
Shall top the legitimate. I grow; I prosper:
Now, gods, stand up for bastards!
Interestingly, at the same time that "bastards" are considered "base" (socially inferior), they're also thought to be more robust and vigorous for being "natural" rather than the result of arranged marriages.

Plus it's a double insult. At the same time that you paint your target a social pariah with the label "bastard", you're also painting his mother with the label "dishonest" - she either got pregnant out of wedlock, or cheated on her husband (in which case, you're also calling his father a cuckold too en passant). All traditionally very negative concepts.
#13
Old 03-05-2011, 04:45 PM
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,104
There are only illegitimate parents.
Society labels the children that way because of what is called canon law and Civil law that would probable cross back to canon law IMO. Those that follow what is called cannon law mistakenly think they are Christians.
References,

Illegitimate

Canon

The Bible, Galatians

I will stick with The Bible and the fact that a Christian is not bound by any legalism, of which canon law is all about.
#14
Old 03-05-2011, 05:31 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beffnal Green innit
Posts: 8,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by robardin View Post
Heck, it's used that way in Shakespeare much earlier than that. Consider the solilioquy from King Lear (Act I, sc. ii) that introduces us to Edmund, the illegitimate son of the Duke of Gloucester, who plots to take his legitimate half-brother Edgar's birthright:



Interestingly, at the same time that "bastards" are considered "base" (socially inferior), they're also thought to be more robust and vigorous for being "natural" rather than the result of arranged marriages.

Plus it's a double insult. At the same time that you paint your target a social pariah with the label "bastard", you're also painting his mother with the label "dishonest" - she either got pregnant out of wedlock, or cheated on her husband (in which case, you're also calling his father a cuckold too en passant). All traditionally very negative concepts.
But that's different - that's bastard being considered base because it means a child born out of wedlock, not bastard being used as a term of abuse that has nothing to do with the person's actual parentage. You're definitely right about the term bastard having huge import at the time of that play, but that makes it less likely that it would have also been used as a casual insult.
#15
Old 03-08-2011, 05:22 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Away for a while
Posts: 6,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by robardin View Post
Heck, it's used that way in Shakespeare much earlier than that ...
But that usage is not obviously an insult irrespective of birth; 'bastard' is not used to mean nothing more specific than 'dick-head' or 'jerk'.

I will call a man a bastard as an insult when he is being a cruel or selfish jerk, but not a woman.
#16
Old 03-09-2011, 09:45 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thinktank View Post
I promise I Googled first -but while a fatherless Son is called a "bastard" What is a fatherless daughter? Or to match the relationship in this question What is a motherless daughter called? Are there any o0ther terms to fit the various missing parent circumstances?
According to an old 1960s song by Diana Ross the term is "love child".
#17
Old 03-10-2011, 04:06 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beffnal Green innit
Posts: 8,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by SebastianMichaelis View Post
According to an old 1960s song by Diana Ross the term is "love child".
True. One of my uncles revealed a surprise extra daughter, conceived with another woman while he was still married to his now ex wife, and the family all refer to her as his 'love child.'
#18
Old 03-10-2011, 04:07 AM
Guest
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: The Internet. Since '84.
Posts: 6,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by j66 View Post
So, when did bastard become a term of insult, irrespective of birth, primarily for males?
I just watched an Asian movie today where this was a major plot point. I would guess that illegitimacy (although not the actual term "bastard") was an insult for thousands of years in Asia.
#19
Old 03-10-2011, 07:16 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Away for a while
Posts: 6,680
I should probably just drop this, but I'm feeling a little stubborn tonight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhal View Post
I just watched an Asian movie today where this was a major plot point. I would guess that illegitimacy (although not the actual term "bastard") was an insult for thousands of years in Asia.
That is not "irrespective of birth"; that is an example of using 'bastard' as an insult because it does refer to the circumstances of the birth.

I am talking about the very common use of 'bastard' as an insult that does NOT refer to illegitimacy, simply to mean cruel, unkind, etc.
#20
Old 03-10-2011, 07:55 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beffnal Green innit
Posts: 8,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by j66 View Post
I should probably just drop this, but I'm feeling a little stubborn tonight.
That is not "irrespective of birth"; that is an example of using 'bastard' as an insult because it does refer to the circumstances of the birth.

I am talking about the very common use of 'bastard' as an insult that does NOT refer to illegitimacy, simply to mean cruel, unkind, etc.
I understand what you mean. The female equivalent would be bitch, which has nothing to do with female dogs. It might never have done, but for the way 'bastard' is used these days, it might as well not have anything to do with parentage either.

TBH, my real reason for posting in this thread is that thelabdude's post was pretty fucking horrible and I kept hoping a mod would pull him up on it. I did report it, but I guess it must fit the posting criteria somehow.

As a point of interest: my daughter's original long birth certificate (UK), issued in 1998, had a few short guidance notes on the back, one of which referred to the father's name space and said 'for bastard children, this is usually left blank.' Subsequent reissues have left that out.
#21
Old 03-10-2011, 08:47 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is gone!
Posts: 26,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by robardin View Post
Plus it's a double insult. At the same time that you paint your target a social pariah with the label "bastard", you're also painting his mother with the label "dishonest" - she either got pregnant out of wedlock, or cheated on her husband (in which case, you're also calling his father a cuckold too en passant). All traditionally very negative concepts.
If the child was born to a married woman, it's not a bastard, even if mom cheated on her husband. At law, her husband is the father of the child.
#22
Old 07-02-2011, 11:53 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by j66 View Post
But that usage is not obviously an insult irrespective of birth; 'bastard' is not used to mean nothing more specific than 'dick-head' or 'jerk'.

I will call a man a bastard as an insult when he is being a cruel or selfish jerk, but not a woman.
Quote:
Well, then,
Legitimate Edgar, I must have your land:
Our father's love is to the bastard Edmund
As to the legitimate: fine word,--legitimate!
Well, my legitimate, if this letter speed,
And my invention thrive, Edmund the base
Shall top the legitimate. I grow; I prosper:
Now, gods, stand up for bastards!
Personally, I'm just a little confused. Does he not imply illegitimacy here... he seems to mention it a lot. I haven't ever studied the play, so I could not pretend I know the context or what he is referring to, but I definitely feel like one would be dead wrong to assume that the use of bastard here is simply an insult for cruelty or selfishness. In fact, I just checked SparkNotes (its simple and reliable) to find out more about this play, and Edmund is an illegitimate child.

Quote:
Edmund - Gloucesterís younger, illegitimate son.
So unfortunately, I don't think you could be any more wrong on this topic, which is kind of hilarious considering the entire text was presented earlier...
#23
Old 07-02-2011, 02:03 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beffnal Green innit
Posts: 8,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArhV5 View Post
Personally, I'm just a little confused. Does he not imply illegitimacy here... he seems to mention it a lot. I haven't ever studied the play, so I could not pretend I know the context or what he is referring to, but I definitely feel like one would be dead wrong to assume that the use of bastard here is simply an insult for cruelty or selfishness. In fact, I just checked SparkNotes (its simple and reliable) to find out more about this play, and Edmund is an illegitimate child.



So unfortunately, I don't think you could be any more wrong on this topic, which is kind of hilarious considering the entire text was presented earlier...
He's asking about the use of the insult bastard irrespective of birth - the bit you bolded. As you note, all those comments are about Edmund's lineage; the use of the word bastard to describe him is not irrespective of his parentage.

You're disagreeing with him by making exactly the same point he was making.
#24
Old 07-02-2011, 04:13 PM
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northern USA
Posts: 1,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by SciFiSam View Post
I understand what you mean. The female equivalent would be bitch, which has nothing to do with female dogs. It might never have done, but for the way 'bastard' is used these days, it might as well not have anything to do with parentage either.

TBH, my real reason for posting in this thread is that thelabdude's post was pretty fucking horrible and I kept hoping a mod would pull him up on it. I did report it, but I guess it must fit the posting criteria somehow.

As a point of interest: my daughter's original long birth certificate (UK), issued in 1998, had a few short guidance notes on the back, one of which referred to the father's name space and said 'for bastard children, this is usually left blank.' Subsequent reissues have left that out.
You might do well to read up on some current sociology.
#25
Old 07-02-2011, 04:36 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by thelabdude View Post
Over all, bastards get less attention from their fathers. Their mothers may also be disadvantaged and have a history of poor decisions. Thus, bastards are a product of their upbringing and reflect it.
Everyone is a product of their upbringing. Though many may, not all of any group, "reflect it".
#26
Old 07-02-2011, 06:30 PM
Charter Member
Charter Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Montana, U.S.A.
Posts: 9,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gbro View Post
There are only illegitimate parents.
Society labels the children that way because of what is called canon law and Civil law that would probable cross back to canon law IMO. Those that follow what is called cannon law mistakenly think they are Christians.
[moderating]
Witnessing is not allowed in this forum. Do not make any more posts like this.

And everyone else, this is GQ. Stick to factual answers, please, not opinions or debates.
[/moderating]
__________________
---
Yes, I have joined the ranks of former moderators. Being a mod was eating my life. Now I'm a member just like you. Except smarter and better looking.
#27
Old 07-02-2011, 08:07 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,833
Another tern (also gender neutral) is 'natural child'.

Third definition in the Mirriam Webster dictionary under 'natural' and used in Jane Austen's Emma in describing the ultimately illegitimate Harriet Smith.
#28
Old 07-02-2011, 08:14 PM
Isaiah 1:15 Screw the NRA.
Charter Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 49,561
Girls don't count.


Historically, it's true. Sons matter, daughters don't. So whether or not a daughter was produced by an assignation was irrelevant. They couldn't inherit, so who cared?

Last edited by silenus; 07-02-2011 at 08:14 PM.
#29
Old 07-02-2011, 08:35 PM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by silenus View Post
Girls don't count.


Historically, it's true. Sons matter, daughters don't. So whether or not a daughter was produced by an assignation was irrelevant. They couldn't inherit, so who cared?
Actually, considering the value of political marriages, some families cared quite a great deal about their daughters, as they were essential pawns in placing the family higher in the nobility, or in a better political alignment, through their marriages to well-placed, politically approved, or otherwise influential men.

Having a bastard daughter (at least a KNOWN bastard daughter) could have been quite limiting to the family as a whole, and a very noticeable loss to their ability to make alliances.

At the very least, having ONE known bastard put all of the children of that family in doubt - the combination of one bastard without having any way to know the truth about the others would be a black mark against the lot of them. A bastard sibling, regardless of gender, could very well squelch the marriage propositions of an entirely legitimate brother or sister.
#30
Old 07-02-2011, 09:14 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,833
But you could mitigate the bastardry by cutting that family member . (Emma again)Harriet Smith was schooled and housed out in the country since her father was "rich enough to afford her the comfortable maintenance ... and decent enough to have always wished for concealment"

Again from Austen, but Mansfield Park this time. Maria commits adultery and is refused access back into the family home. The most her father will do for her is provide accomodation, but she will never speak to or be acknowledged by her family again. It's the only way they can maintain their standing in society.

In Pride and Prejudice, Wickham has to be forced into marrying Lydia so she can avoid the same fate as Darcy's younger sister who will remain unmarried at home after being 'despoiled'.

Last edited by maggenpye; 07-02-2011 at 09:16 PM.
#31
Old 07-02-2011, 09:45 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by silenus View Post
Girls don't count.


Historically, it's true. Sons matter, daughters don't. So whether or not a daughter was produced by an assignation was irrelevant. They couldn't inherit, so who cared?
Depends on the society. There are matrilineal societies (for example the Naxi in what is now SW china). Some of the Tibetans had a different take, where brothers shared a main wife, and inheritance was according to the main wife irrespective of the father.
#32
Old 07-02-2011, 10:41 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 13,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by silenus View Post
Girls don't count.


Historically, it's true. Sons matter, daughters don't. So whether or not a daughter was produced by an assignation was irrelevant. They couldn't inherit, so who cared?
Generally, but it also varied just a bit on the rank. Bastard daughters were very occasionally sought after as brides by lesser ranked nobility if the father was important enough to a.) provide a rich dowry and/or b.) was of high enough rank that even a bastard daughter was better than nothing. The bastards of someone of thr rank of HRE or the Byzantine emperor could be somewhat valuable as minor political tokens.

So for example the HRE Frederick II had at least four illegitimate daughters. One became a nun, but the other three were married off to prominent Italian noblemen.
#33
Old 07-02-2011, 10:50 PM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Beijing, CA
Posts: 3,196
Not to mention the acknowleged bastard children of the various Borgia popes...definitely not much stigma on those!

Last edited by Maggie the Ocelot; 07-02-2011 at 10:50 PM.
#34
Old 07-03-2011, 05:36 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beffnal Green innit
Posts: 8,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by thelabdude View Post
You might do well to read up on some current sociology.
You know, what, somehow I don't think there's any sociology that will back up the irrelevant and vile opinions that you've posted in this GQ thread.
#35
Old 07-03-2011, 05:40 PM
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northern USA
Posts: 1,943
No studies showing children in fatherless homes do worse?
#36
Old 07-03-2011, 06:11 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beffnal Green innit
Posts: 8,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by thelabdude View Post
No studies showing children in fatherless homes do worse?
That's really not what you said. You haven't said anything that is actually relevant to this thread, so I think I'm just going to leave this now.
#37
Old 07-03-2011, 10:53 PM
Charter Member
Charter Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Montana, U.S.A.
Posts: 9,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by thelabdude View Post
No studies showing children in fatherless homes do worse?
[moderating]
Stop with the hijacks. This is GQ and you're doing nothing to answer the question. If you want a debate, we have another forum for that.
[/moderating]
#38
Old 07-07-2011, 07:59 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Away for a while
Posts: 6,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by maggenpye View Post
In Pride and Prejudice, Wickham has to be forced into marrying Lydia so she can avoid the same fate as Darcy's younger sister who will remain unmarried at home after being 'despoiled'.
That's not quite right. Everyone pushes to get Lydia married (especially Darcy), so that her sisters stand some chance of decent marriages. Lydia is allowed to visit the family home only to squelch gossip.

And Darcy's younger sister wasn't despoiled; Wickham and she were prevented from eloping. I think you confuse her with the young woman offstage in Sense and Sensibility - the colonel's god-daughter?
#39
Old 07-07-2011, 10:12 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by j66 View Post
That's not quite right. Everyone pushes to get Lydia married (especially Darcy), so that her sisters stand some chance of decent marriages. Lydia is allowed to visit the family home only to squelch gossip.

And Darcy's younger sister wasn't despoiled; Wickham and she were prevented from eloping. I think you confuse her with the young woman offstage in Sense and Sensibility - the colonel's god-daughter?
Yes, if Lydia remained unmarried, her sisters would not make good marriage material. Lizzie realizes as much after telling Darcy about Lydia running away with Wickham. It wasn't Lydia but Maria from Mansfield Park who was never allowed home again, I do make that clear in my post. Lydia was allowed home after she was married. Her mother doesn't understand why she can't be allowed home before.

The wrap up at the end of the novel specifically states that Georgiana's home was to remain at Pemberly with Lizzie and Darcy. However close Wickham got to her in Ramsgate, she's tainted.

The Colonel's god-daughter in S&S was another 'natural' child (his childhood sweeteart's) who was loved enough to be cared for and shameful enough to be hidden.
#40
Old 07-08-2011, 12:15 PM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: TX
Posts: 952
regarding the "bastard" as an insult irrespective of actual parentage, one of the Patrick O'Brien novels portray a quarrel between Aubrey and Maturin in which Aubrey calls Maturin a bastard in addition to other opprobrious names. Aubrey later formally apologizes to Maturin on the grounds that Maturin actually is illegitimate, and so calling him that was a faux pas (Aubrey does not withdraw the other insults which are grounds for a duel).

This is probably irrelevant to the thread because, while this story is set in the 18-teens, it was written in the 20-aughts, but O'Brien did seem to have excellent research on the social conditions that he wrote about.
#41
Old 07-10-2011, 08:34 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Away for a while
Posts: 6,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by maggenpye View Post
The wrap up at the end of the novel specifically states that Georgiana's home was to remain at Pemberly with Lizzie and Darcy. However close Wickham got to her in Ramsgate, she's tainted.
I thought G. lived with E. & D. only because she was still so young. And I cannot believe a young woman as rich as she would be unable to make a respectable marriage. I will re-read the book and get back to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reno Nevada View Post
regarding the "bastard" as an insult irrespective of actual parentage, one of the Patrick O'Brien novels portray a quarrel between Aubrey and Maturin in which Aubrey calls Maturin a bastard in addition to other opprobrious names. Aubrey later formally apologizes to Maturin on the grounds that Maturin actually is illegitimate, and so calling him that was a faux pas (Aubrey does not withdraw the other insults which are grounds for a duel).

This is probably irrelevant to the thread because, while this story is set in the 18-teens, it was written in the 20-aughts, but O'Brien did seem to have excellent research on the social conditions that he wrote about.
Does O'Brien provide references?
#42
Old 07-10-2011, 08:54 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by j66 View Post
I thought G. lived with E. & D. only because she was still so young. And I cannot believe a young woman as rich as she would be unable to make a respectable marriage. I will re-read the book and get back to you.
No need, it's online.

She had been set up with her own establishment in London, that's how Wickham gained access. She is removed back to Pemberly and in the final wrap up, that's where she's staying.

The nearest thing to a husband that's mentioned is that she learns that Lizzie can be cheekier to Darcy than she can:

Pemberley was now Georgiana's home; and the attachment of the
sisters was exactly what Darcy had hoped to see. They were
able to love each other even as well as they intended.
Georgiana had the highest opinion in the world of Elizabeth;
though at first she often listened with an astonishment
bordering on alarm at her lively, sportive, manner of talking
to her brother. He, who had always inspired in herself a
respect which almost overcame her affection, she now saw the
object of open pleasantry. Her mind received knowledge which
had never before fallen in her way. By Elizabeth's
instructions, she began to comprehend that a woman may take
liberties with her husband which a brother will not always
allow in a sister more than ten years younger than himself.

There are only two more paragraphs to the end of the book and she isn't mentioned in either of them.

This is later in the same final wrap up where Kitty is reeducated by her two elder sisters 'to her material advantage' and Mary is noted as the only sister to stay home (never marry). It's where all the story lines are ended - Georgiana is always to be at Pemberly.

Last edited by maggenpye; 07-10-2011 at 08:57 PM.
#43
Old 07-10-2011, 08:54 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 13,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by j66 View Post
I thought G. lived with E. & D. only because she was still so young. And I cannot believe a young woman as rich as she would be unable to make a respectable marriage. I will re-read the book and get back to you.
I just checked the passage in question, and the exact line is "Pemberley was now Georgiana's home; and the attachment of the sisters [Georgiana and her new sister-in-law Elizabeth] was exactly what Darcy had hoped to see." While it's possible to interpret this as meaning that Pemberley was going to be Georgiana's home forever, this was never my impression.

I don't believe there's ever any hint in the book that Georgiana is considered "ruined" by society. Not that she wouldn't have been if people had known, but apparently Mr. Darcy managed to keep the whole affair quiet. He never told anyone about it himself except Elizabeth.

IIRC there's some suggestion that Mr. Darcy had hoped Mr. Bingley would someday marry Georgiana.
#44
Old 07-11-2011, 07:43 PM
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 13,806
I always thought that "bitch" came from the insult "son of a bithc", you are a dirty dog and so is your mother. The leap to general insult for any female, calling them a dog, is obvious. Notice though it is a character insult, not a sexual behaviour one, at least the way I've ever heard it used. Similarly, to back the OP, I've never really heard someone seriously use bastard as a female insult. It seems in general use to be exclusively male.

The Patrick O'Brien reference seems to point to the time when it changes? When family lines are becoming less important so it can be used as an insult, but the term still has legitimate(sorry) meaning.

Sort of like saying to someone nowadays or 20 years ago, "you are so retarded! Oops, sorry, I see you actually are retarded."

Last edited by md2000; 07-11-2011 at 07:44 PM.
#45
Old 07-12-2011, 12:09 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamia View Post
I just checked the passage in question, and the exact line is "Pemberley was now Georgiana's home; and the attachment of the sisters [Georgiana and her new sister-in-law Elizabeth] was exactly what Darcy had hoped to see." While it's possible to interpret this as meaning that Pemberley was going to be Georgiana's home forever, this was never my impression.

I don't believe there's ever any hint in the book that Georgiana is considered "ruined" by society. Not that she wouldn't have been if people had known, but apparently Mr. Darcy managed to keep the whole affair quiet. He never told anyone about it himself except Elizabeth.
I quoted the same passage.

Kitty's future is laid out. Mary's future is laid out. Georgiana's future is laid out. Pemberly is now her home the end.

If modern sensibility dictates that she should be able to be married that's just modern sensibility. Austen was writing of and for her times. Georgiana is removed from her establishment in London after a scandal, she is taken to Pemberly and there is nothing in the book that says any different ending for her.

Georgiana is a device to show the fate that faces Lydia if she isn't married to Wickham, nothing more.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:37 PM.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: [email protected]

Send comments about this website to:

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

Copyright © 2017
Best Topics: pussey galore disappointments room real breaking glasses porn star fluffer cracker bolts watertight vs airtight 1984 sucks marshall mg250dfx price submissive pet names 1870 penny real pimp suits bottom line publications health secrets scan photos at cvs why do we feel cold when sick buy vinyl siding pieces detox drinks for weed walgreens girls watch guy masterbate stories why do they use lime on dead bodies blocks of wood home depot la totally awesome cleaner ingredients can you use goo gone on clothes witty responses to how are you