I do actually think that; it's the way I was raised. Or at least, one should be bought for all to share, in the case of something like a horse. I don't think one having while another does not is that likely to promote sisterly affection either. And isn't Elizabeth talking about a younger sister being allowed to "come out" before an elder sister is married? If so, it's hardly the same thing as one child being given a horse.
And while the driving lessoons thing might fall down because of my brother not being my twin, I think your comparison also falls down, as Lawrie isn't proetesting that a sister got a horse when she was her age, she was protesting her getting one when there was no prospect of her getting one at that time or later.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2005-08-30 08:47 pm (UTC)I do actually think that; it's the way I was raised. Or at least, one should be bought for all to share, in the case of something like a horse. I don't think one having while another does not is that likely to promote sisterly affection either. And isn't Elizabeth talking about a younger sister being allowed to "come out" before an elder sister is married? If so, it's hardly the same thing as one child being given a horse.
And while the driving lessoons thing might fall down because of my brother not being my twin, I think your comparison also falls down, as Lawrie isn't proetesting that a sister got a horse when she was her age, she was protesting her getting one when there was no prospect of her getting one at that time or later.