Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

We learn from WOR that the Listeners have children by changing to mate form. We learned that the Parshmen have no form but are closest to dull form. Also, we learned the Listeners once only remembered mate and dull form. Therefore, to have children, the Listeners still went into mate form before they rediscovered the other forms. They did not have children in dull form. Finally, Parshman are not immortal, so they need to reproduce their numbers somehow. But Parshman have no form so they never go into mate form. 

So how do Parshman have offspring?

Posted

Mate form is not the only non-neuter form. 

I'm failing to find the WoB I want, but Parshmen are capable of mating. 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, eveorjoy said:

We learn from WOR that the Listeners have children by changing to mate form. We learned that the Parshmen have no form but are closest to dull form. Also, we learned the Listeners once only remembered mate and dull form. Therefore, to have children, the Listeners still went into mate form before they rediscovered the other forms. They did not have children in dull form. Finally, Parshman are not immortal, so they need to reproduce their numbers somehow. But Parshman have no form so they never go into mate form. 

So how do Parshman have offspring?

Wow I never thought of that before, that wob should clear things up has anyone seen any parshmen children yet(mentioned in the books)?I have a feeling Shallan had seen some,not too sure though.

Edited by StormblessDave
Posted
46 minutes ago, Calderis said:

Mate form is not the only non-neuter form. 

I'm failing to find the WoB I want, but Parshmen are capable of mating. 

That WoB might be the one regarding asexuality in listener forms. Mateform isn't the only form with urges/attraction.

Posted
13 minutes ago, Agent34 said:

That WoB might be the one regarding asexuality in listener forms. Mateform isn't the only form with urges/attraction.

I'm at a loss. It's either not on theoryland, or has a weird wording that doesn't involve the words "Parshmen" "Parshendi" "listener" "mateform" "mate form" "dullform" 

All I can find is the one on the four genders. 

I'm frustrated. 

Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, Calderis said:

I'm at a loss. It's either not on theoryland, or has a weird wording that doesn't involve the words "Parshmen" "Parshendi" "listener" "mateform" "mate form" "dullform" 

All I can find is the one on the four genders. 

I'm frustrated. 

Quote

Q: You said earlier that Parshendi are primarily asexual, does that extend to all Listeners -- parshmen, and those descended from Listeners, like Horneaters and Herdazians -- or is it just the Parshendi?
 
A: Most Listener forms are asexual, but several forms are different, including slaveform. Horneaters and Herdazians are not, as a rule, though there are higher instances of asexuality among them.
 
Q: I was actually wondering about how Parshmen would reproduce if they are only in slaveform? I thought one had to be in mateform in order to reproduce? Also, could Horneaters and Herdazians change forms as well?
 
A: For the first, mateform is not the only form capable of producing--any more than warform is the only one capable of swinging a sword. The forms are specializations. For the second, RAFO.

Source

Quote

Q: Have you included (or do you potentially intend to include) any asexual characters in your published works? Asexual characters don't seem to be very common in fiction, and I'm sure it would be fantastic for people that identify as such to feel in any way represented by one of your characters!
 
A: I originally conceived the asexual nature of most Parshendi (from the Stormlight Archive) forms after reading a very thought-provoking article written by someone asexual. The idea of a primarily asexual race was a fascinating idea to me, and you will see this more in future books.

Source

 

Edited by Extesian
Put in sources
Posted
7 hours ago, Darkness said:

wasn't there also a sequence in the books discussing certain brightlords 'breeding' parshmen?

I don't think so. It has been mentioned that they were very valuable, but I don't remember anything in WOK or WOR that talks about breeding parshmen. Now if you do find this sequence please share it here. I put my original question here because I figured this had been answered and someone knew that answer. ;)   

  • 1 month later...
Posted
On 8/12/2017 at 1:14 AM, Calderis said:

I'm at a loss. It's either not on Theoryland, or has a weird wording.

I'm frustrated. 

The relevant word is neuter.

Quote

Question

Have we seen all four of the genders for the Parshendi?

Brandon Sanderson

Yes. Malen, femalen, male, and female. Basically there is a male neuter and a female neuter, and then a male and a female. And if you can't tell, the malen and femalen are both asexual, completely.

Unsure how you missed it, since it contains the term "Parshendi." Have a follow-up via Botanica and Peter

Quote
37
Botanica
So the Parshendi have four genders - malen, femalen, male, female. I've only read one WoB about this:
 
Q: Have we seen all four of the genders for the Parshendi?
A: Yes. Malen, femalen, male, and female. Basically there is a male neuter and a female neuter, and then a male and a female. And if you can't tell, the malen and femalen are both asexual, completely.[请求来源]

Is this all we can get now? Or is there more?
So malen means male neuter, femalen female neuter? Those Listeners can't reproduce, right? I'm not very sure, but those non-mateforms, are they all malen/femalen? (I suppose male/female is of the mateforms?)
Peter
There’s not more we can get than that at this time. The non-mateforms and non-slaveforms are malen/femalen. Male/female are the mateforms.
  • Chaos locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...