= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MartinB comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 13, chapter 81 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (1099)
It sounds more like a oath of obedience.
So was the traditional wedding vow... "I promise to love, honor, and obey."
“I promise to love, honor, and obey you”, not “the master or mistress of your house”.
Well, yes, agreed that points more towards an oath of servitude. But I could easily imagine someone marrying me and promising to obey "the master of my house" as a poetic and formal way of referring to me. My point in the comment you were responding to was that obedience is hardly foreign to wedding vows.
Point.
Yes. I agree. I was just saying that the gender-inclusive language specifically isn't a good reason to think that, given Wizarding Britain's displayed attitude toward homosexuality.
It's not the "gender inclusiveness" that's the problem, it's the vagueness. Harry is male, why not call him "Master" instead of "Master or Mistress"? It's because the oath is a fealty oath sworn to the House, and after Harry dies, the mastery of his house may pass to a daughter of his (which Hermione would then be still sworn to obey).
Marital oaths are between specific people. In this case obedience was sworn to House Potter, and Harry accepted it as the heir and last scion of House Potter.
Yes. I agree.