Bridget is a boy raised as a girl because twins were a bad sign in his village, but he's also been trying to establish his masculinity while still being as girly as possible.
Bridget is a boy raised as a girl because twins were a bad sign in his village, but he's also been trying to establish his masculinity while still being as girly as possible.
i still dont understand that part, so he has a twin brother, so they raised him as a girl? .... how does that solve anything? Wouldn't have made more sense to send one of them away to another relative or village? if its that much of a bad sign wouldn't they have just killed one of them?
i still dont understand that part, so he has a twin brother, so they raised him as a girl? .... how does that solve anything? Wouldn't have made more sense to send one of them away to another relative or village? if its that much of a bad sign wouldn't they have just killed one of them?
The usual trope (for "twins are bad heebie jeebies" in fiction) is that the baby would have been killed, if not for the mother/midwife quickly disguising one of them. Though usually the 'cross-dressing' or disguising of said gender (if it occurs) is only temporary until they can smuggle the baby away for adoption... but if the mother wants to also keep the baby, that isn't exactly an option.
But, primarily, from a meta-perspective? It's there to justify his cross-dressing.
The usual trope (for "twins are bad heebie jeebies" in fiction) is that the baby would have been killed, if not for the mother/midwife quickly disguising one of them.
But aren't different gendered twins still twins? Or the trope is not empowered if the twins genders are different?
The usual trope (for "twins are bad heebie jeebies" in fiction) is that the baby would have been killed, if not for the mother/midwife quickly disguising one of them. Though usually the 'cross-dressing' or disguising of said gender (if it occurs) is only temporary until they can smuggle the baby away for adoption... but if the mother wants to also keep the baby, that isn't exactly an option.
But, primarily, from a meta-perspective? It's there to justify his cross-dressing.
The reason different gendered twins are more 'acceptable' in most cases is that they have 'difference', unlike same-gendered twin. In same-gendered twin, the suspicion came from the fact that there's one perfect copy of a human, so they can't differentiate which is the 'real' one (yeah, old legends, tales and suspicions don't exactly contribute good things in most of humanity's recorded history).
Or so my history professor used to say. Don't know if that's only applies in most cases.
But aren't different gendered twins still twins? Or the trope is not empowered if the twins genders are different?
Nobody knows they are twins, other than the mother and midwife. Of course, that's harder to say for a smaller community, but.. let's just say plausibility deniability exists and we can also suspend our disbelief here for a bit.
Anyhow, if they dress differently with different hairstyles, people may go, oh, "Brother and sister. Look at how they resemble each other! Aren't they adorable?". If they dress as the same gender, then the similarity becomes much more apparent, and it's much harder to not think "TWINS! EVIL HEEBIE HEEBIES!".
Rathurue said:
The reason different gendered twins are more 'acceptable' in most cases is that they have 'difference', unlike same-gendered twin. In same-gendered twin, the suspicion came from the fact that there's one perfect copy of a human, so they can't differentiate which is the 'real' one (yeah, old legends, tales and suspicions don't exactly contribute good things in most of humanity's recorded history).
Or so my history professor used to say. Don't know if that's only applies in most cases.
Yeah, oftentimes the basis or excuse for the "twins taboo" is that one of them is an evil spirit masquerading as the other. So, safer to get rid of both of them "just to be sure".
And usually in places where the "taboo" exists (still does, in some places in Africa), the socially-acceptable 'solution' is to get rid of both of them, not just one. Families who keep their twins may be shunned or even exiled from the community.
IIRC the "twins taboo" also existed in Japan in the past.
Anyhow, I've read somewhere that part of the reason why this "taboo" sometimes pop up and persist for quite a time in societies is that it allows families a socially-acceptable way of getting rid of babies, as they might not have the ability to feed both (instead of just the one they expected). Though I couldn't quite remember where, so I can't cite this.
