'...said the spider to the fly' - Clarifying the interspecies 'shipping mess

No, I'm not trying to open up old arguments and flog the proverbial dead horse; no I'm not trying to annoy the Mods any more than I usually do; no, this is not an attempt to gain more Rishathra Rights. This is just a simple quest for clarification as to how things currently stand.

Right now, the rules are as follows: interspecies pairings are allowed providing the non-human component is either mammalian or at least appears mammalian, and is not covered in fur. Horns and small-scale scales are in, it seems, as are somewhat strangely, HRDs. As long as there's no huge physiological difference on the outside, it's fine: hence Falleen are allowed where, say, Bothans aren't. Any canon relationships that fall outside this aren't allowed to be written unless the couple sleep in seperate beds in seperate rooms and do nothing more romantic than snipe at each other over a mug of caf. However, authors are allowed to reference to them, so having Jaya mention that Raynar and Lusa make a very cute couple is presumably in.

(Whether we're allowed to talk about Winter Celchu's extramaratial affair with Retrd. Admiral Ackbar is an entirely different kettle of fish... )

However, this all leaves us with a problem. Obviously, not all sentients in the GFFA are human. Not all relationships are kept 'in the species', so to speak. And, also canonicaly, not all rishathra pairings are Human/Alien: Lak/Dice, Nrin/Ibistsam and then later Nrin/Koyi all fit into this category. So what exactly are the rules concerning these? Can we go overboard with hippogriphical 'ships, mating Bothan with Mon Cal with Wookie with Fosh with Chadra-Fan with Rodian with Hutt with Waru with Vratix with Baforr Tree with Midichlorians? (No, not all at once. But that does bring up an interesting point...) Or is there an equivilent ruling to the 'humanoid' rule, where species have to be significantly similar to one another?

The other point is this: most species in the GFFA seem to mate in the standard 'nuclear family' model: one mummy, one daddy, and various numbers of little kiddies. But surely non-humanspecies don't necessarily mate this way. So far, the closest we've seen to any truly alien family-groups is the Selonian one. What exacty are we allowed to portray in both of these cases?

--Blended

 

Interesting point you bring up, Speldorion! Humans are generally the only species that is attracted to those outside their species, though I think that the rule is that animal-like species (Wookiees, Ewoks, Trianii, etc.) can mate with animal-like species and human like species (Humans, Twi-leks, Yuuzhan Vong, Givin, etc,) can mate with human-like species.

The mods never adressed this issue...

Go figure.

I can't think of any real-world examples because Dogs and Cats don't mate and Humans are utterly disgusted by chimps.

 

Interesting ideas, if you read the republic comics you'll see that the couples that are hinted at being together are beings of another race for example Tholme and T'ra Saa and Aayla and Kit.

 

Vongdchild: I can't think of any real-world examples because Dogs and Cats don't mate and Humans are utterly disgusted by chimps.

Donkeys and horses can and do have ofspring - mules and whatever the other way round is called - and some humans do find various animals attractive. For example, I know for a fact that Arin once saw a giraffe that he thought was kinda cute...

 

I think I'll add to the confusion by stating that there can be more than two sexes, and that male/female reproduction doesn't necessarily mean physical contact of sexual organs (e.g., pollination). Come to think of it, pollination is a naturally occuring reproductive act that has more than one species involved . . .

For a GFFA example, in Rogue Planet there was a species that needed to be eaten by another species to reproduce (the Priapulin and the food-kin). Would such a relationship be considered "family-friendly"?

 

interspecies pairings are allowed providing the non-human component is either mammalian or at least appears mammalian, and is not covered in fur. Horns and small-scale scales are in, it seems

What I find interesting about that rule is how it affects human/Devaronian relationships due to the difference between the Devaronian genders.

A male human cannot have a relationship with a female Devaronian as she is covered in fur, and fur is not allowed.

A female human though can have a relationship with a male Devaronian as he isn't covered in fur, and horns are allowed.

(Something that stuck in my mind because of how surprised I was when I found what female Devaronians looked like as I'd thought they'd be like the males but with smaller (or no) horns)

 

Right now, the rules are as follows: interspecies pairings are allowed providing the non-human component is either mammalian or at least appears mammalian, and is not covered in fur. Horns and small-scale scales are in, it seems, as are somewhat strangely, HRDs. As long as there's no huge physiological difference on the outside, it's fine: hence Falleen are allowed where, say, Bothans aren't.

Right.

Any canon relationships that fall outside this aren't allowed to be written unless the couple sleep in seperate beds in seperate rooms and do nothing more romantic than snipe at each other over a mug of caf.

That's a snide way to put it, but in essence, yes.

However, authors are allowed to reference to them, so having Jaya mention that Raynar and Lusa make a very cute couple is presumably in.

That's fine, yes. And there are some cute Raynar/Lusa 'fics that don't get mushy.

(Whether we're allowed to talk about Winter Celchu's extramaratial affair with Retrd. Admiral Ackbar is an entirely different kettle of fish... mischief )

No.

So what exactly are the rules concerning these? Can we go overboard with hippogriphical 'ships, mating Bothan with Mon Cal with Wookie with Fosh with Chadra-Fan with Rodian with Hutt with Waru with Vratix with Baforr Tree with Midichlorians? (No, not all at once. But that does bring up an interesting point...) Or is there an equivilent ruling to the 'humanoid' rule, where species have to be significantly similar to one another?

No. They should be similar themselves, but do not have to be. It's the humans that can't be with non-humanoids.

The other point is this: most species in the GFFA seem to mate in the standard 'nuclear family' model: one mummy, one daddy, and various numbers of little kiddies. But surely non-humanspecies don't necessarily mate this way. So far, the closest we've seen to any truly alien family-groups is the Selonian one. What exacty are we allowed to portray in both of these cases?

I don't see a problem with representing that, as long as it fits within the current rules of the forum.

Interesting point you bring up, Speldorion! Humans are generally the only species that is attracted to those outside their species, though I think that the rule is that animal-like species (Wookiees, Ewoks, Trianii, etc.) can mate with animal-like species and human like species (Humans, Twi-leks, Yuuzhan Vong, Givin, etc,) can mate with human-like species.

Yes.

I think I'll add to the confusion by stating that there can be more than two sexes, and that male/female reproduction doesn't necessarily mean physical contact of sexual organs (e.g., pollination). Come to think of it, pollination is a naturally occuring reproductive act that has more than one species involved . . .

No, it doesn't. However, for humanoids, it does.

For a GFFA example, in Rogue Planet there was a species that needed to be eaten by another species to reproduce (the Priapulin and the food-kin). Would such a relationship be considered "family-friendly"?

I don't see a problem with it.

What I find interesting about that rule is how it affects human/Devaronian relationships due to the difference between the Devaronian genders.
A male human cannot have a relationship with a female Devaronian as she is covered in fur, and fur is not allowed.
A female human though can have a relationship with a male Devaronian as he isn't covered in fur, and horns are allowed.
(Something that stuck in my mind because of how surprised I was when I found what female Devaronians looked like as I'd thought they'd be like the males but with smaller (or no) horns)

Actually, Devaronians were removed from the allowed list. Naturally, any species is allowed to mate within their species. It would be stupid to disallow that.


Dana

 

Mules rock!!! So do ligers, thought I'm not sure if they exist. Surely the coolest are zebra horses!!

What about furry/furry relationships? Like trianii/wookiee?

 

They should be similar themselves, but do not have to be. It's the humans that can't be with non-humanoids.

Does this mean that humanoid/non-humanoid relationships (e.g., Twi'lek/Wookiee) are allowed?

 

Does this mean that humanoid/non-humanoid relationships (e.g., Twi'lek/Wookiee) are allowed?

Don't think so...

I vaguely remember some rule about second heads. Now, if I want to write a X-over SW/Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy, it would not be allowed when Zaphod Beelebrox (the President of the galaxy, who has an extra-head and extra-arm surgically added) fell in love with Leia though he is human?

 

Vongchild: Mules rock!!! So do ligers, thought I'm not sure if they exist.

Ligers do exist, but not naturally. Lions and tigers don't mate in the wild(but they can be bred in captivity).

 

lazykbyks; For a GFFA example, in Rogue Planet there was a species that needed to be eaten by another species to reproduce (the Priapulin and the food-kin). Would such a relationship be considered "family-friendly"?

That's a good point...

JM; What I find interesting about that rule is how it affects human/Devaronian relationships due to the difference between the Devaronian genders.

A male human cannot have a relationship with a female Devaronian as she is covered in fur, and fur is not allowed.

A female human though can have a relationship with a male Devaronian as he isn't covered in fur, and horns are allowed.

Now that's interesting...

And I didn't know that...

Dana: That's a snide way to put it, but in essence, yes.

Snide? Moi?!

That's fine, yes. And there are some cute Raynar/Lusa 'fics that don't get mushy.

How exactly do you define 'mushy'? Just, for example,most people didn't see TMN as mushy, but you did. Does that qualify?

No.

Is that because it's human/Mon Cal, or is it because it's an extramarital affair?

No. They should be similar themselves, but do not have to be. It's the humans that can't be with non-humanoids.

Ah...

So the fact that it's 'bestiallity' from the sentients in question's POV doesn't matter?

Not that I mind, of course - just curious...

Yes.

Does that mean we can have Ewok/Wookie?

Actually, Devaronians were removed from the allowed list. Naturally, any species is allowed to mate within their species. It would be stupid to disallow that.

Isn't that somewhat strange? I mean, Kapp Dendo, for example, is human in all but horns. Why does that exclude him?

I vaguely remember some rule about second heads. Now, if I want to write a X-over SW/Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy, it would not be allowed when Zaphod Beelebrox (the President of the galaxy, who has an extra-head and extra-arm surgically added) fell in love with Leia though he is human?

That's an interesting one. I'd guess allowed - it's no different really to that holojournalist with the 'second head' or an amputee, when you think about it...

--Blended

EDIT: Stupid Mod colours...

EDIT 2: Stupider markups...

 

lazykbys - Does this mean that humanoid/non-humanoid relationships (e.g., Twi'lek/Wookiee) are allowed?

No.

Viola_Telcontar - I vaguely remember some rule about second heads. Now, if I want to write a X-over SW/Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy, it would not be allowed when Zaphod Beelebrox (the President of the galaxy, who has an extra-head and extra-arm surgically added) fell in love with Leia though he is human?

If he's human . . . As disturbing as the idea is it would still be allowed.


SpeldoriontheBlended - How exactly do you define 'mushy'? Just, for example,most people didn't see TMN as mushy, but you did. Does that qualify? confused

Friendship 'fics are fine, as are references of a relationship, as long as it is not shown. Once the line gets "blurred" between friendship and romance, then it has gone too far for these boards.

As for TMN, there was an obvious attraction between Jaina and Lowie that crossed that line.

Is that because it's human/Mon Cal, or is it because it's an extramarital affair? confused

Human/Mon Cal. I've already said that human/Mon Cal is not allowed. They are not humanoid enough to qualify.

So the fact that it's 'bestiallity' from the sentients in question's POV doesn't matter?

It depends on the humanoids in question. Devaronians, for example, are allowed because their females have fur. But Chiss, Twi'leks, etc. are not allowed to be with a non-humanoid because they are near-human.

Does that mean we can have Ewok/Wookie?

Err . . . Well, it's not out of the question, though I think that would be awkward for both individuals.

Isn't that somewhat strange? I mean, Kapp Dendo, for example, is human in all but horns. Why does that exclude him?

Devaronians, I have been given to believe, also have cloven feet, which takes them out of the "humanoid" category.


Dana

 

Dana: No.

So that little Mission/Zaalbar ficlet of mine is out of the question...

Friendship 'fics are fine, as are references of a relationship, as long as it is not shown. Once the line gets "blurred" between friendship and romance, then it has gone too far for these boards.

Fair enough... are we allowed to talk about the canonical relationship in the past sense so long as we steer well clear of any actual depictions of said relationship? For example, would the Chertyl conversation in Wedges Gamble be allowed if it were in a fanfic? (If that makes sense... )

As for TMN, there was an obvious attraction between Jaina and Lowie that crossed that line.

I have to disagree with you on this point, but TMI's not the subject of this thread and rehashing the arguments here would be counterproductive. I'd be interested in where your justifications are, of course, but if you're willing to rise to my hiddiously ill-concealed bait I'd far rather you did it on PM...

Human/Mon Cal. I've already said that human/Mon Cal is not allowed. They are not humanoid enough to qualify.

That's one that I won't quibble with. But are we allowed to show infidelity in 'fics?

It depends on the humanoids in question. Devaronians, for example, are allowed because their females have fur. But Chiss, Twi'leks, etc. are not allowed to be with a non-humanoid because they are near-human.

I think you're kind of missing the point I'm trying to make here - the difference between, say, a Wookie and a Rodian is far greater than between a Wookie and a human, but it's the Wookie/Human that's condemmed as bestiality...

Again - just a question...

Err . . . Well, it's not out of the question, though I think that would be awkward for both individuals.



Devaronians, I have been given to believe, also have cloven feet, which takes them out of the "humanoid" category.

Oh?

Isn't that somewhat hypocritical? I mean, the big differences between Falleen and Human aren't seen in public, and neither are the differences between male Devaronians and humans...

Just out of interest, where does the info come from?

 

Fair enough... are we allowed to talk about the canonical relationship in the past sense so long as we steer well clear of any actual depictions of said relationship? For example, would the Chertyl conversation in Wedges Gamble be allowed if it were in a fanfic? confused (If that makes sense... tongue )

That's fine, yes.

That's one that I won't quibble with. tongue But are we allowed to show infidelity in 'fics? confused

Well, considering that I know of several that depict it off the top of my head, I would say yes.

I think you're kind of missing the point I'm trying to make here - the difference between, say, a Wookie and a Rodian is far greater than between a Wookie and a human, but it's the Wookie/Human that's condemmed as bestiality...

Uh. No, I wouldn't say a Rodian and a Wookiee would be allowed, either; they're a little too dissimilar.

Oh? raised_brow
Isn't that somewhat hypocritical? I mean, the big differences between Falleen and Human aren't seen in public, and neither are the differences between male Devaronians and humans...
Just out of interest, where does the info come from?

I can't recall at the moment, but I remember reading somewhere that Devaronians have cloven feet. If they don't, my mistake. But they're still not on the allowed list.

We're not attempting to enforce homogenisation or anything like that, we're trying to keep this "family friendly".


Dana

 

Now, if I want to write a X-over SW/Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy, it would not be allowed when Zaphod Beelebrox (the President of the galaxy, who has an extra-head and extra-arm surgically added) fell in love with Leia though he is human?

Actually, Zaphod isn't human. He's from Betelgeuse, and not a Betelgeusian human because there are none (in Mostly Harmless, it's implicitly stated that Arthur and Trillian are the only humans left after the destruction of Earth). However, Ford is also from Betelgeuse and he managed to pass himself off as English So I'm assuming Betelgeusians are remarkably similar to humans.... except of course that Mr. President has two heads and three arms

-sj loves kevin spacey

 

*pokes head into thread*

For example, I know for a fact that Arin once saw a giraffe that he thought was kinda cute...

 

Um, when you say "covered in fur", are you referring to the alien as a whole, or does it also apply if only certain appendages (not THOSE appendages) are? What if, instead of fur, it was feathers?

 

Actually, Zaphod isn't human. He's from Betelgeuse, and not a Betelgeusian human because there are none (in Mostly Harmless, it's implicitly stated that Arthur and Trillian are the only humans left after the destruction of Earth).

Oh...
You're right sj. It seems like my memory is not getting any better these days... How could I forget my problems with reading the word "Beteigeuze" (German transcription for the name of that star) for the first time in my life?
Reminds me that I always wanted to read my way through "In the Shadow of the chosen one"...

Well, as long as I don't forget to call my Mum on her birthday (Sunday), everything's alright.

Viola

 

We're not attempting to enforce homogenisation or anything like that, we're trying to keep this "family friendly".

I've been sorta watching this and the other thread for a while now and I'd just like to interject here with a question: could you possibly define how inter-species dating or coupling might not be "family friendly" if kept to the proper rating?

Cause honestly, Disney does it and they have some of the most family friendly movies in existance. Beauty and the Beast for example, and even more recently Treasure Planet: at the ened of the movie, the dog-alien and the cat-alien wind up together, and it's cute and completely family friendly. Other examples could even include Donkey and Dragon in Shrek. Again, another family friendly film.

I know bringing up those examples does step away from the topic of inter-species dating in the Star Wars universe, but what I don't understand is how you would consider it not "family friendly" if written in the proper way, keeping to specific ratings and guidelines and all. I have read SW fics like that and I find no problem with them at all.

 

Dana That's fine, yes.

Okay.

Well, considering that I know of several that depict it off the top of my head, I would say yes.

[voice=Palps] Excelent... [/voice]

Uh. No, I wouldn't say a Rodian and a Wookiee would be allowed, either; they're a little too dissimilar.

Hmmm...

So, to a certain degree, it's based on what kind of skin you have? (Human/Human, Fur/Fur, etc)

I can't recall at the moment, but I remember reading somewhere that Devaronians have cloven feet. If they don't, my mistake. But they're still not on the allowed list.

*Goes to start a thread to check*

Why, if they don't have cloven feet, would they be on the 'off' list? We already have precedence of different skin colours being accemptable and also have precedent of horns. (Zabrak) So why the bias?

We're not attempting to enforce homogenisation or anything like that, we're trying to keep this "family friendly".

But what exactly is the definition of 'family friendly'?

Arin:

Moff_Yitreas: Um, when you say "covered in fur", are you referring to the alien as a whole, or does it also apply if only certain appendages (not THOSE appendages) are? What if, instead of fur, it was feathers?


Good question....

What happens if the alien in question was for all intents and purposes, an angel?

Eneyla_sol: I've been sorta watching this and the other thread for a while now and I'd just like to interject here with a question: could you possibly define how inter-species dating or coupling might not be "family friendly" if kept to the proper rating?

Cause honestly, Disney does it and they have some of the most family friendly movies in existance. Beauty and the Beast for example, and even more recently Treasure Planet: at the ened of the movie, the dog-alien and the cat-alien wind up together, and it's cute and completely family friendly. Other examples could even include Donkey and Dragon in Shrek. Again, another family friendly film.

I know bringing up those examples does step away from the topic of inter-species dating in the Star Wars universe, but what I don't understand is how you would consider it not "family friendly" if written in the proper way, keeping to specific ratings and guidelines and all. I have read SW fics like that and I find no problem with them at all.

Good catch. That's my one of my main problems with the whole rulings, really, and also with the anti-homosexual rule as well, but lets keep that out of this because, in a PG-13 setting, it's very difficult to be hugely distateful. Distasteful is the wrong word - offensive is possibly better, but not by much. I think, however, that you've got the general gist...

 

Enelya_Sol: I can't disagree with the reasoning behind the decision made in regard to interspecies relationships, because we all know some people are going to abuse an opening like that, so therefore we all lose that right. But you brought a very valid argument that I still can't keep from busting a gut over.

Well said.

I think you forgot the most famous example though...Kermit and Miss Piggy.

 

SpeldoriontheBlended:
Good question....

What happens if the alien in question was for all intents and purposes, an angel?

Hardly. More like very similar to a certain person mentioned in my sig.

 

Well, Kermit/Miss Piggy, like Donkey/Dragon, Goofy/Clarabell, Pinky/Phar Fignewton, and other pairings, would be more like what this thread's about, since neither partner is human. On the other hand, it's hard to cite Donkey/Dragon as an example, since the central relationship of that film starts as a human/ogre romance, which -- like Beauty and the Beast -- would violate the main part of the rule as it is now enforced, which has been declared off-limits for discussion. [I will say nothing. I am calm. I am centered.]

I know that many here don't want to look to non-SW examples, but in general, there is -- particularly among children's fiction -- a strong acceptance of couples from very different species when neither one's human. In many cases, both are very anthropomorphized, like Kermit/Miss Piggy or Goofy/Clarabell, but not always.

 

Eneyla_sol:

Cause honestly, Disney does it and they have some of the most family friendly movies in existance. Beauty and the Beast for example, and even more recently Treasure Planet: at the ened of the movie, the dog-alien and the cat-alien wind up together, and it's cute and completely family friendly. Other examples could even include Donkey and Dragon in Shrek. Again, another family friendly film.

Point, however, if you'll notice in Beauty and the Beast, we are told before the movie really even STARTS that the Beast is fundementally HUMAN, and not another species, and in the end, he ends up Human again anyways which practically negates that whole issue.

In Treasure Planet, Dr. Fillburt and Captian Amelia are both supporting (not main) characters, and, once again, they are not human. Also, the artists made them look very similar physically.

The Donkey and Dragon in Shrek... uh... its... well, it SHOULD be physically impossible (oh God I hope so..) and I felt it was more of a humor plot device then anything real.

Shrek and Fiona, once again, Fiona was half-Ogress, and she, like the Beast, ended up as an Oger in the end. (Well, so the Beast turned Human and Fiona into a beast but... I think you get the point) Therefore negating the entry of Beauty and the Beast and Shek as valid points of arguments because they could and did change into the same species as their significant other.

And besides, I don't think that Lowie could suddenly turn into a human when Jaina kissed him.