Hakan:
>By the way, I'm glad I found out about this list a while ago - what >do you
>think this list looks like to anyone who discovers it during >the present
>discussion about *pezd- etc...
Well, I'm not sure, Hakan. Everyone has their own tastes. I suppose *perd�s
to some, while perfectly *swexd�s to others. I suppose some might go so far
as to throw up their hands and exclaim "Oy veh, tukhes oyfn tisch, already!
This list is lower than schmegma!"
On a related topic, I find the idea that different cultures have different
sorts of "taboos" fascinating. Since it's a done-deal that IE speakers had
swearwords like the rest of us, IE swears would seem to me to most likely
stem from mythology (deities, legends, etc)... or even about rulership
(which also is entwined in mythology afterall).
If biological terms were preserved as well as they appear to be, it would
seem that these words were not so terrible to IE speakers and euphemizable
as they tend to be in our global culture. So mythology and rulership would
appear to be two of the most important things in their way of life, quite
ripe for slur-making and the most effective in striking an IE nerve.
Now comes something interesting...
I do have to wonder whether homosexuality and related issues regarding
sexuality and gender identity (transsexuality, transvestism, bisexuality,
etc) were considered vile, acceptable or revered in IE culture. This ties in
with the possibility for uncovering sexual swears in IE. I've heard of war
societies that consider homosexual acts perfectly normal. I also know of
NorthAmerican native cultures especially who revere "two-spirits" or
"berdaches" (Navajo /nadleehe/), men who take on feminine roles within their
society when so inclined. Two-sprits are not to be viewed as entirely
homosexual nor are they entirely transsexuals, bisexuals, transvestites or
humourous tribal oddities. They don't necessarily dress up as women either.
In the end, the briefest but most accurate description might be to simply
call them the "third gender".
In the end, unfortunately, I get the heavy impression that IEs in general
didn't think highly of transsexuality, transvestism and drag. Afterall, it
would appear that any mention of men dressing up as women invariably
involves deceit and trickery in mythology. Consider also the association
between wolves and crime ("you are as a wolf", etc) lending the imagery of
"a wolf in sheep's clothing". So, I've concluded that transsexuality,
transvestism and drag, because of those same differences between the inner
and outer form of these individuals, was probably considered downright evil
in IE culture, implying untrustworthness, criminality and inadequacy. This
is of course not to say that drag queens are truely evil... Sure, some of
them are outright bitches but that's just their stage persona, darling.
Think I'm a quack? Apparently I arrived at these connections before coming
to some literature of substantiation (as is often quite eerily my case). The
following mentions the "wolf" and what the author terms quite
inappropriately as "passive homosexuality".
http://www.indigogroup.co.uk/edge/hellhnds.htm
Now, need I lecture everyone about the differences between transvestism,
transsexuality and drag on the one hand (which in themselves are not the
same thing) and homosexuality on the other hand. And due to the IEs'
apparent distain for incongruences between gender and gender-roles, I would
add that women taking on the roles of men were equally "disgusting" to them.
While the negative attitudes towards gender/gender-role mismatches that are
apparent in IE myth would appear to me to be strongly suggestive of the
treatment of such individuals and even their attitudes towards men as
recipient in intercourse (aka. "bottoms") or women as aggressors in
intercourse in IE society, it says nothing about homosexual men who remain
masculine in appearance and conform to male roles in IE society (ie:
"tops").
I can think of nothing direct as of yet that might lead me to a good hint at
their attitudes in regards to "active homosexuality" except by comparing
this sexual model to cultural attitudes I've heard elsewhere. I immediately
think of a bisexual friends' own description of his Italian culture where
being on the receiving end is considered disgusting while being the "giver"
is considered entirely normal and un-gay.
I guess to some up, it would seem that whatever one's sexuality or
gender-identity, one's role in IE society would be determined only by one's
physical gender. So I get the funny feeling that IE homosexuals were
expected to get married and do "manly" things just as the evil Fundamental
Christians expect us to do. As for potential sexual swearwords, I suspect
that *wlkWos, or something to this effect, might have been an expletive for
individuals who fail to conform to accepted IE gender roles.
Any added thoughts people? Was this mentioned in the EIEC as well or have I
finally tread on something original?
- gLeN
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com