At 12:36 AM -0600 2/16/05, Matthew Hunter wrote: >On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 12:30:17AM -0600, Lydia Nickerson ><lydy at demesne.com> wrote: >> At 12:22 AM -0600 2/16/05, Matthew Hunter wrote: >> >Thirded. If anything, that aspect of the series is somewhat >> >underdeveloped; it's important in one fairly vital way, but the >> >reader is not really given the opportunity to understand why the >> >character reacts that way, nor does that aspect of her >> >personality grow or change detectably. >> She was born that way. That's the way her nervous system works. >> "Kushiel's Dart" is the visible sign of her physical nature. It's >> not a personality trait, any more than tasting cilantro as soupy or >> being color blind is a personality trait. > >You were (presumably) born a woman. Would you say that your >understanding of, reaction to, and behavior concerning your >gender and sexuality are the same today as what you were born >with? You said that the reader isn't given the opportunity to understand why she reacts as she does, nor does that aspect of her character change. As I understood you, you were referring to her sexual masochism. Rephrased, you would be saying, if I'm following you correctly, that the readers aren't given an opportunity to understand why she is a woman, nor does her gender grow or change detectably. If I've misunderstood you point, would you please clarify?