I'm considering "Queerdom" for my exclusively homosexual feudal setting. ...but then again, it's hardly going to be feudal, seeing how my Quings (Queen+King, see ) fail to produce any legal royal offspring
Let's settle down a bit, people. Some members are behaving a bit like trolls in this thread, and posts here have been reported. So far we haven't issued warnings, but if this thread turns more trollish, we're ready to start doing so. The thread started with a simple question. It doesn't have to turn ugly. Thanks in advance for your cooperation!
I agree. I think it's the sort of term that would be good for a tongue-in-cheek sort of story, but not one with a serious tone.
I think it can work in a more serious story, but with difficulty. A fantasy world I created some 25 years back and occasionally return to using since had one Queendom. That was established by a woman who opposed male rights for various reasons, and she used the term Queendom specifically as a message against the general patriarchy of the world. On the other hand, another major Kingdom, also currently ruled by a queen, was known as a Kingdom because the ruler wasn't trying to make some political point with the name. Language is important and, generally, rather sexually biased (at least the English language, I can't comment on others). It's also the way we speak. I'd say unless there is a specific point the rulers are trying to make with the use of the word Queendom, then it's probably not a good idea in serious literature. Also, why a Kingdom? That's not the only style of government that's existed, nor even existed in European style nations. Empire, Caliphate, Nation, Republic, etc could also be used if you wanted to avoid the male bias of the word itself.
If you're going down that road why bother disseminating between male and female rulers at all just just call either a male or female royal leader the King? It's derived from Caesar anyway, so you could also replace the word King with almost anything you like, and allow it to represent the leader from either sex.
Hm? Well, no actually, the word king has germanic roots. Compare with Modern German könig - and Kaiser (equivalent of Emperor) which is derived from Caesar. Anyway, all modern european languages very obviously show their patriarchal roots. The often repeated argument that "etymology is not important, how we use the language now is important" sounds a bit shallow once you understand that a "language" is a fluid, evolving, natural phenomenon. So you can force it and bully it and make excuses and justifications, but it's still a rape (excuse me for not being pol.cor.) That said, what the hell is wrong with Queendom anyway? ["A state or territory ruled by a queen" says my Merriam-Webster.] I've read 4 pages of bull and still don't get it. Some people think it sounds silly? The word "queen" can refer to transvestites etc? WTF? With that logic, you can argue that naming a character Richard is not wise because, you know, he will eventually become a Dick!
There's nothing wrong with Queendom if you still want to make a distinction between King and Queen, and not just use a single word for the ruler whatever their sex.
@Selbbin yes, but "king" is male, "queen" is female. Using any or both with a gender neutral tendency doesn't make the actual words gender neutral. A "female king" is not the same as a "queen": a "female swine" is still not a "sow" @FrodoKreuger Both words, "kingdom" and "queendom", were around more or less since the words "king" and "queen" were in use - probably for some 15 centuries, more or less. The only reason "kingdom" is more familiar to a casual speaker is that we had more male ruling monarchs than female ruling monarchs in european history. Nothing more. Edit: just found the word "queendom" (meaning "the realm ruled by female monarchs" as the sub-title of Book V/Chapter 19 of Urquhart's translation of "Gargantua and Pantagruel" circa 1660. ("How We Arrived at the Qeendom of Whims or Entelechy")