Zan the Can

AU where everything is the same but Shen Yuan is brazilian

Oh god, now I'm thinking of amputees and how those would work

Horses are SUPER fragile, or maybe more like delicately balanced.. but particularly their crazy spindle-legs which centaurs get to deal with! But a big part of why hurt legs are a death sentence for horses has less to do with “It kills them” and more to do with quality of life, which a centaur can get around! A horse with a broken leg doesn’t understand it can’t put ANY weight on that leg for an extended period and will attempt to go about their daily life and act normally, which basically guarantees re-injuring the bad leg and a high chance of injuring the other 3 legs as they try to cope with the change in balance and weight distribution. It all leads to a really poor quality of life with almost no chance of truly healing properly. The story of all they did trying to save Barbaro the racehorse is a long sad story that illustrates a lot of the issues even with modern veterinary medicine with trying to deal with a broken leg in horses.

Thankfully with centaurs, They understand the need for healing, are able to manage their own quality of life and have the gear to support themselves in the time it takes for the injury to heal!

Also perfectly good for long term use in the case of aging, amputation, or general disability! Which is common with the front legs and lower backs of centaurs given the unusual stresses caused by their body-plans. They were created with thicker and more robust front legs to cope with the permanent added weight of the torso instead of a horse head, but injury and disability in that area is still very common!

however!! these amazing wheelchairs would really do the trick! god they look good!!

Okay so. Let’s begin by the weight of the human part of a centaur.

A quick research gave me access to a list of different human body parts relative to total weights on this site. Summing it up, I found that for a 150 lbs (68 kgs) human the torso + head + arms is about 110 lbs (50 kgs).

That was the easy part.

I looked up the same things for horses but only found guides to weigh your horse, and a scientific paper that may have the answer, but it’s behind a paywall and I’m not coughing up 15€ to maybe get the answer I need.

Then I remembered I have a Facebook friend who’s passionate about horses, and has access to a lot of scientific literature. I asked her. I presented the question as something pretty weird, as I don’t know if people other than I are interested by strange scientific inquiries.

She loved it.

So here is the data :

- If we take in account the center of gravity of a horse, behind the shoulders, we know that its position varies a lot based on the position of the head + neck block (the higher the head gets, the more the gravity center moves towards the rump), so – laws of physics – the head + neck block is an important part of the weigh of the horse, with a leverage effect.

- Also, the position of the center of gravity tells us that 50 % of the horse’s weigh is before that point : head, neck, shoulders, front legs. Even when comparing a strong torso + arms and a slender neck, it means that for a 1,000 lbs (450 kgs) horse the “front block” is about 500 lbs (225 kgs).

This doesn’t give us the weigh of the neck + head block, but it tells us that with the shoulders and front legs (that a centaur keeps) it’s nearly five times the weigh of the human part. And I doubt the front legs of a horse weigh that heavy (to give a vague idea, both legs of a 150 lbs human weigh about 52 lbs – 23 kgs).

Another thing about centaur anatomy (from the same trusted source) : in a centaur, the torso is (most of the time) held straight, so the center of gravity is closer to the rump than for a horse and the distribution of the weigh on the four legs is probably more even (for a horse about two thirds of the weigh is borne by the front legs). However back pathologies like kissing spines could happen more often, since equine anatomy means that horses need to lower their neck to limit the risk of back wounds.

lets hope youre so lucky that you wont have to touch your funds and the only thing burning to ash is his poor shirt 😌💕

I had to turn this off, but it's something that allows Windows and anyone using your device to generate text/images.

Sean: .....yes. absolutely

Elijah: 100 percent.

The Shire is excellent farming country, with consistently good weather, and only one tough winter in living memory; hobbits like to produce large families; they’re resistant to disease, rarely violent, and encounter few dangers. It is usual for hobbits to produce many children, so that (for example) Bilbo and Frodo are unusual in both being only children, with no siblings, and not having children of their own. All of this should point to a population that increases every generation if not doubling outright. Young people (and their ideologies!) should rapidly outnumber the old with an ever-increasing effect and impact on society. However, the Shire has a surprisingly stable history; it never seems to increase or decrease greatly in population, and the bell curve of age seems… demographically balanced? There certainly isn’t a conflict from rising young bloods challenging the middle-aged reactionaries; there’s no unemployment; there are no housing crises or waves of emigration, or even a tendency for young people leaving home to marry. Meanwhile, not only does the Shire not suffer from internal pressures, but it remains obscure and hardly noticed in global politics.

What makes sense here is that adult hobbits form a loose group. Four parents in a polycule, between them all, may produce four children. All four parents claim to have four children. An outsider would assume this meant the adults had eight children.

Hobbits therefore are not especially fertile or fecund. They simply have large families. Much of their interest in genealogy is due to the complex relationships of blood-kin, hearth-kin, love-kin and pledge-kin, who must all be carefully tracked and measured - not just because you need to make sure that you don’t climb into bed with an un-permitted degree of blood-kin, but to track family alliances and carefully quantify the precise level of thoughtfulness to put into the proper present to gift your father’s lover’s lover (too much implies a degree of intimacy that might upset the polycule.)

Thus, while a hobbit matron may tell a startled dwarf that she has seven sons, she might only have borne five of them herself, and have one hearth-son by her wife, and a pledge-son of her first husband’s. There are between three and four fathers involved at various stages of production, from conception to pledge-duty, but there is debate about the precise number of fathers, as one child was festival-conceived and therefore provisionally pledged to the Brandybucks until more distinctive paternal traits should materialise. It’s expected that four of the sons will be uninterested in women, and their contribution to family life will be in raising hearth-children and pledge-duty. However, this level of detail is normally negotiated later in conversation, as a mutual overture of friendship. So she’s just clear and simple: yes, certainly, she has seven sons. Yes, they’re all hers. Yes, that’s fairly normal - yes, hobbits like big families. How big? That’s really hard to say! Well, about thirteen hobbits live in her house… er, she has forty-three nieces and nephews. Yes! She has nine siblings, that’s correct, but some of them are still babies themselves..

In this way, a bewildered dwarf might assume that hobbits are absurdly fertile, producing an average of seven children per couple, at an absurd pace.

When in fact, with about half of hobbits never bearing biological children, the population of hobbits is pretty much always the same.

Tl:dr, hobbit population works perfectly well, both internally and in the perceptions of outsiders, if the majority of the Shire is gay, they’re all polyamorous, and they all firmly claim to be parents of high numbers of children. Of course Frodo fathered Sam’s kids - he named them! They were pledge-kin but not hearth-kin, as Frodo needed a lot of quiet and stability in the home.

In short, all of the hobbits enjoyed achieving even larger families on their adventures, legally and without argument or debate. It’s free real estate. If nobody else is going to sibling these losers, we will. (The condensation of so many entanglements at once also legally made Pippin his own father-in-law.)

Gandalf never explained.

Inheritance follows parent-child pledge as the primary consideration, with matrilineal descent as the secondary. Pippin would have been bewildered to gradually understand that Denethor held his two sons in such odd and different standing :-/ hobbits don’t recognise kingship so it would’ve been very upsetting and disappointing to Pippin to understand how Denethor stood in position of sworn-father to a whole city of people without even being slightly fair to his younger hearth-son. Aragorn is demonstrably much better dad-material and therefore had Pippin’s vote. Pippin, by virtue of being an excellent father-in-law to a spectacularly promising young son-in-law, also considered himself a better candidate for king of Gondor than Denethor, by outranking him in Dad Competence - but was too busy by the time he realized this to point this out .

“Lesson #1 how far can humans see”