The Salvation War: Pantheocide. Part Eighty One Up

[Ilya Muromets]

So, would "Angie" make for a good catch-all, not-necessarily-derogatory term for angels? While either "wingnut" or "flapper" being the more derogatory terms?

I don't know about Spanish speaking people in Africa and Philippines.

Philippines hasn't really been a Spanish-speaking country since the early 20th Century. In a few small, isolated communities you'll probably find some people who know how to speak colonial Spanish. Even then, most of those people tend to be elderly. For the most part, however, people know jack shit about Spanish other than the loan words that made it into modern Philippine languages and dialects.

Predominant languages here are English, Filipino, and a host of other regional languages and dialects.

[westrim]

Wingnuts was a good start. The danger is trying to be too clever here; nicknames tend to the lowest common denominator. "Flappers" might be a good starting point as well, refers to both daemons and angels having wings. It was also used in the 1930s as slang for a beautiful but slightly dumb woman

Problem is, not all daemons have wings, so it works only for angels and harpies.

Everyone except the behemoths and leviathans have wings, whether or not they use them (and I'm not positive that the big guys don't have them). Wings are the one obvious physical characteristic that both demons and angels have and humans don't, so whatever nickname they get collectively is probably going to refer to them. Size references won't work because a lot of them are right at the tip of human scale and some version of celestials won't work because they don't believe that any more.

[darksoul]

Wingnuts was a good start. The danger is trying to be too clever here; nicknames tend to the lowest common denominator. "Flappers" might be a good starting point as well, refers to both daemons and angels having wings. It was also used in the 1930s as slang for a beautiful but slightly dumb woman

Problem is, not all daemons have wings, so it works only for angels and harpies.
quote]

Everyone except the behemoths and leviathans have wings, whether or not they use them (and I'm not positive that the big guys don't have them). Wings are the one obvious physical characteristic that both demons and angels have and humans don't.

not quite. normal daemons, which compose the majority of the rannk and file, doesnt have wings or at least are not functional, I don`t really remember. And the obvious physical characteristic they both share and humans don`t is the ability to regenerate, telepathy and... well, that`s it, actually.

But even taking into consideration the wings on all caelis, not all of them flap their wings. I don`t know, I just don`t like it.

anyway, there can be more than one nickname... after all, likely there will be at least one slang per race per language per country, so....

[westrim]

Wingnuts was a good start. The danger is trying to be too clever here; nicknames tend to the lowest common denominator. "Flappers" might be a good starting point as well, refers to both daemons and angels having wings. It was also used in the 1930s as slang for a beautiful but slightly dumb woman

Problem is, not all daemons have wings, so it works only for angels and harpies.

Everyone except the behemoths and leviathans have wings, whether or not they use them (and I'm not positive that the big guys don't have them). Wings are the one obvious physical characteristic that both demons and angels have and humans don't, so whatever nickname they get collectively is probably going to refer to them. Size references won't work because a lot of them are right at the tip of human scale and some version of celestials won't work because they don't believe that any more.

Not quite. Normal daemons, which compose the majority of the rank and file, don't have wings or at least they are not functional, I don't really remember. And the obvious physical characteristic they both share and humans don`t is the ability to regenerate, telepathy and... well, that`s it, actually.

But even taking into consideration the wings on all caelis, not all of them flap their wings. I don`t know, I just don't like it.

anyway, there can be more than one nickname... after all, likely there will be at least one slang per race per language per country, so....

Like I said obvious physical characteristics. Can you tell by looking that an angel or demon is telepathic, can regenerate, and can build electrical charge? No. No you cannot.

And yes, so far as I know every demon has wings unless specifically bred out, and that wasn't actually mentioned concerning the behemoths and leviathans. Fuck, I even said "whether or not they use them." It doesn't matter if they use them, just that they've got a set of limbs that humans don't arcing over their back.

And it's likely that there will be at least one catchall nickname used by humanity due to English (the language) penetration. Wingers or wingnuts or wingies, or some variation thereof is likely to catch on, because that's the one thing every human can see that divides both angels and demons from us.

[kulervo]

(Sorry for the lack of quotes, I'm on my phone and out of town.)

darksoul and yaque -

Absolutely that level of speciation is unobserved. But we've got the shortest records! When we have say 10 million years of records we'll begin to understand speciation.

Inter species breeding happens: Ligers, Zeedonks, Mules. And it happens in the wild too. Polar Grizzly crosses have been observed in the wild. Some of those individuals are even fertile with members of the original species (ie a horse with a female mule). Rule of thumb with mammals is that the males are infertile.

Hybrid vigor is just a rule of thumb you are right, but mules and ligers are both examples. No guarantees though. It would be consistent if nephilim were healthier in some areas and less in others.

The idea that the junk DNA in humans allows great variation in phenotype is very consistent with story. Angels/daemons or other pantheons in Earth may revert to humaniform over a long lifetime. Or they may take another form. We'll have to wait and see.

Comparative mythology point: Other pantheons did not regenerate. Odin never got his eye back, the Gaelic silver hand guy (lugh?), Osiris's penis, etc. For the Norse immortality was in part consumed (Idunn's apples).

[darksoul]

(Sorry for the lack of quotes, I'm on my phone and out of town.)

darksoul and yaque -

Absolutely that level of speciation is unobserved. But we've got the shortest records! When we have say 10 million years of records we'll begin to understand speciation.

Inter species breeding happens: Ligers, Zeedonks, Mules. And it happens in the wild too. Polar Grizzly crosses have been observed in the wild. Some of those individuals are even fertile with members of the original species (ie a horse with a female mule). Rule of thumb with mammals is that the males are infertile.

Hybrid vigor is just a rule of thumb you are right, but mules and ligers are both examples. No guarantees though. It would be consistent if nephilim were healthier in some areas and less in others.

The idea that the junk DNA in humans allows great variation in phenotype is very consistent with story. Angels/daemons or other pantheons in Earth may revert to humaniform over a long lifetime. Or they may take another form. We'll have to wait and see.

Comparative mythology point: Other pantheons did not regenerate. Odin never got his eye back, the Gaelic silver hand guy (lugh?), Osiris's penis, etc. For the Norse immortality was in part consumed (Idunn's apples).

we all agree in most points, it seems. How would you divide the species, then?

[darksoul]

Comparative mythology point: Other pantheons did not regenerate. Odin never got his eye back, the Gaelic silver hand guy (lugh?), Osiris's penis, etc. For the Norse immortality was in part consumed (Idunn's apples).

Yes, that is true. it would be interesting if the Norse pantheon were beings from other dimensions or anything, but rather plain humans or proto humans ascended by some factor, and transplanted to another bubble world. If we accept the idea that human dna responds to environment with strong mutation, then the Aesir could be more human than caelis, having originated later and from proto hominids, rather than in the far common ancestor. it would accommodate the sentiment we get of the Norse gods not being all... godlike, as a manner of speaking. They having limited regeneration, not being naturally immortal, having conscience of the end of their own rule, and engaging in human activities often provokes the thought that these guys were more close to us than all the others, except perhaps some avatars in Hindu pantheons. Some.

[yaque]

kulervo -
absolutely!
differentiating genus, family, etc. is speciation, you just have to wait longer.

The ancestors of, say, rabbits and wolves, when they first diverged, could hardly be told apart,
at the time.
Only after a few million years, in response to different evolutionary pressures, in different ecological niches,
would you start to see the familiar characteristics you now expect gradually emerge.
Only after 10's of millions of years (as you said) of divergence and development,
could you start to talk about genus, and not just species.
In 20 million years the descendants of the red squirrel and the gray squirrel could be just as differentiated
as bears and deer are today.
(I go on about this because this is a common creationist misunderstanding ... look up "crocoduck" )

As for our sister species (angels and demons), well, somebody's been doing a lot of genetic engineering,
who knows when or how or why ... or who.
So all bets are off, categorization-wise.

[darksoul]

As for our sister species (angels and demons), well, somebody's been doing a lot of genetic engineering,
who knows when or how or why ... or who.
So all bets are off, categorization-wise.

well, at least we know satan has been meddling with daemons, which is why we know they are all the same family although different enough to be several species. It would be interesting to study interdaemon breeding, hybrids of different daemonic species. that would shed light on the matter.
other than that, anyone or anything could happen. i still support the theory of the very, very old common ancestor, from where proto angels and proto humans separated. then humanity evolved, and proto angels splitted in angels and daemons, which satan later bred at his leisure.
that could happen naturally, or directed. Problem is, i dont see this being enough of a plot device to get an explanation

[westrim]

(I go on about this because this is a common creationist misunderstanding ... look up "crocoduck" )

Crocoduck? *googles*

...

......



Damn, creationists are amusing.

[ehenders]

I was thinking in terms of slang naming that you might have "Buffaloes" (as in buffalo wings) for Angels, not just because of the wings, but also because of the whole thing about wiping out the great herds...

I'm now seeing a HEA footsoldier humming "Buffalo Soldier" to himself while guarding the pearly gates.

TRH

[kulervo]

I am going to ignore the topic of pre-history and defer to further narrative.

On the topic of species: H.Sap and H.Cae definitely different species. Hybrids show both increased (portals) and decreased (mild nuttiness and anthrax) function beyond the range of the human norm. (we might also want to see sterility or low fertility in male nephilim.)

H.caelis I am unsure if it is multiple species or sub species. Satan, yah yah and Uriel are the same species as they are siblings. All the unborn(?) the daemons that remember heaven are the same species as angels. Heralds, leviathans, etc may be separate species, bu I would tIhnk of them as different breeds. Pending some evidence they are more different than dog breeds.... As long as A can breed fertile child with B then I would call A and B the same species.

As to the mutation... I'm not sure daemons would have needed to mutate. Genotype is your genes, phenotype your looks. If the phenotype of the same individual can include angel and daemons, very little actual change might be necessary for individuals born in different dimensions to be crazy different.

[CaptainChewbacca]

A note:

Despite its' supposed clever popularity, 'Ozzie' will never describe a demon as a pejorative as long as the nation of AUSTRALIA utilizes the term as one of pride. It makes as much sense as calling an angel a 'yankee'.

[Deebles]

I like this nickname discussion, and would like to not-so-humbly submit some of my own ideas;

A couple of affectionate colloquialisms for angels or demons:
Big brothers/sisters/cousins
Electrics

(Based on size and the ability to build up a charge being two features that clearly differentiate most of each from either first or second-life humans)

A couple of ambivalent ones for angels:
Jellies (trim the first too letters off "angel")
Percies (to continue the Blackadder reference)

Some less affectionate ones for angels:
Birdbrains
Featherbrains
Chickens, chicken-whatevers etc.
Flying sheeple
Feathered eunuchs
Giant surrender-monkeys

Main sources for derogatory terms: anger over disasters wrought; contempt for their meek, unthinking acceptance of Y's "divinity"; disdain for their casualty-averse mentality and swift surrender (cowardice, in the eyes of some); further contempt for their low fertility; speciesism; disdain for low level of technological achievement.

My favourite of these is "Jellies".

[Ryan Thunder]

"Birds".

[CaptainChewbacca]

Its not going to be multi-word or multi-syllable. The quick, dirty, convenient slur has to be quick and convenient. Its probably one syllable or word. Sorry to those of you coming up with grammatically complex racism.

[Eulogy]

Its not going to be multi-word or multi-syllable. The quick, dirty, convenient slur has to be quick and convenient. Its probably one syllable or word. Sorry to those of you coming up with grammatically complex racism.

Boobies? Dodos? Pillows?

[darksoul]

I like this nickname discussion, and would like to not-so-humbly submit some of my own ideas;

A couple of affectionate colloquialisms for angels or demons:
Big brothers/sisters/cousins
Electrics

(Based on size and the ability to build up a charge being two features that clearly differentiate most of each from either first or second-life humans)

A couple of ambivalent ones for angels:
Jellies (trim the first too letters off "angel")
Percies (to continue the Blackadder reference)

Some less affectionate ones for angels:
Birdbrains
Featherbrains
Chickens, chicken-whatevers etc.
Flying sheeple
Feathered eunuchs
Giant surrender-monkeys

Main sources for derogatory terms: anger over disasters wrought; contempt for their meek, unthinking acceptance of Y's "divinity"; disdain for their casualty-averse mentality and swift surrender (cowardice, in the eyes of some); further contempt for their low fertility; speciesism; disdain for low level of technological achievement.

My favourite of these is "Jellies".

Jellies is good. It`s short, and conveys an idea of weakness and a condescending sentiment of superiority over angels.

[GrayAnderson]

Its not going to be multi-word or multi-syllable. The quick, dirty, convenient slur has to be quick and convenient. Its probably one syllable or word. Sorry to those of you coming up with grammatically complex racism.

Two syllable words fly a lot. I can think of a couple off the top of my head that I would rather not repeat, but the one that is probably the most obvious is "Baldricks".

[darksoul]

A note:

Despite its' supposed clever popularity, 'Ozzie' will never describe a demon as a pejorative as long as the nation of AUSTRALIA utilizes the term as one of pride. It makes as much sense as calling an angel a 'yankee'.

well, so Australians won`t use it as such, other people could. As it is with yankees, by the way. It may be a term of pride for Americans, but it is not overseas, quite the contrary, actually.

I still think baldricks can do the trick. It also holds two years of use ahead of every other form of addressing daemons, and it has been already used derogatorily. It`s angels we don`t have a name for.

Although calling them angels is quite ironic per se. Boy the tons of poetry books torched...

[Deebles]

Jellies is good. It`s short, and conveys an idea of weakness and a condescending sentiment of superiority over angels.

Indeed. And for those who would really be pissed off at the angels for fighting from hiding, then surrendering promptly, there's even a dash of cowardice there again.

(Yes, I know that "cowardice" is simply realpolitik in this instance, and that Michael and his coterie's actions in particular were hardly cowardly, whatever else they were. However, people in this world not blessed with our narrator's-eye view might not all see it that way).

[Gogyra]

(I go on about this because this is a common creationist misunderstanding ... look up "crocoduck" )

Crocoduck? *googles*

...

......



Damn, creationists are amusing.

The funniest part is that a fossil was recently discovered that bears a vague resemblance to both a crocodile and a duck: http://www.agiweb.org/geotimes/feb02/WebExtra0219.html

[Commander Xillian]

Fluffers? For Angels? Because of the Feathers?

[darksoul]

Jellies is good. It`s short, and conveys an idea of weakness and a condescending sentiment of superiority over angels.

Indeed. And for those who would really be pissed off at the angels for fighting from hiding, then surrendering promptly, there's even a dash of cowardice there again.

(Yes, I know that "cowardice" is simply realpolitik in this instance, and that Michael and his coterie's actions in particular were hardly cowardly, whatever else they were. However, people in this world not blessed with our narrator's-eye view might not all see it that way).

Yep. it`s also similar sounding to angel and angelic, so it lends itself to word play, something like the jell-o hosts of Mickey...

[Commander Xillian]

I actually like how jellies sounds...