If the symbiont commits Reassociation, they're exiled. Exile from Trill would mean death for the symbiont. Since the Federation does not practice the death penelty, this would seem to support the case that Trill is not a Federation member. Then again the individual member worlds could still maintain a form of an independant judical system?

Please sign your posts with 4 ~ There's a difference between allowing a being to die a natural death and execution. The Federation forbids the latter, not the former. Exile simply means that hte symbiont won't get another host, no one is actively taking part in its death. Logan 5 00:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Definition vs Odan paragraph Edit

Since reassociation is defined (at least on Memory Alpha) as "between two joined Trill," the discussion about Odan and Crusher seems to be out of place. Since Crusher is not even Trill, it seems that the rule against reassociation would not apply. However, rather than deleting the Odan comment, I added a note to that effect to the article. However, I think the entire italicized paragraph may need to be reviewed; either that, or the definition should be changed to be "between a joined Trill and another individual."

--Commodore Sixty-Fourtalk 22:32, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Rules of Reassociation? Edit

I don't recall reassociation (as a law) to apply ONLY to joined Trills in the episode "Rejoined". Wouldn't it apply to basically any past lover? Re-connecting with romantic/sexual relationships with past-life lovers, be that they are joined or not, would be considered, logically, "unnatural". The romances of Odan-Crusher and Ezri-Worf were (basically) kept private to a secertive level, so they were (at least) able to get away with it. Or does it only apply to married lovers -- such as Kahn and Dax, as well as Dax and Worf? --Ambassador Weyoun 06:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

It was made very clear that it was about passed joined Trills:
BASHIR: "It's more of a... taboo, really. Having a relationship with a lover from a past life is called, "reassociation," and the Trill feel very strongly that it's... unnatural."
KIRA: "Unnatural? How can it be unnatural for a married couple to resume their marriage?"
BASHIR: "The whole point of joining is to allow the symbiont to accumulate experiences over the span of many lifetimes. But in order to move on from host to host, the symbiont has to let go of the past... let go of parents, children, siblings, even spouses."
Hope that helps. --OuroborosCobra talk 06:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

To me, that still makes it sound like only one of the previous lovers has to be a joined Trill. A non-Trill lover from a past life could still be alive (Worf, for example). The other could be any species. If not, like I said a year ago, why should this apply to Crusher and Odan? Crusher is definitely not a Trill (not to mention that she didn't marry him or fit into any of the other categories given by Bashir.) And why couldn't Ezri Dax (re)marry Worf (who, again, is not a Trill)?

--Commodore Sixty-Four(talk) 07:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, so I've waited a month and nobody has said anything, so I'm changing the lead. If you want to change it back, please post your reasons here. If the lead is reverted and no comment is made here after 3 (three) days or (whenever I get back online, whichever is later), I will revert back to my edit. --Commodore Sixty-Four(talk) 17:50, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Just to answer this one thing first, there's no doubt in my mind that "Rejoined" makes absolutely no exception for non-Trill lovers. The language used is pretty absolute—"lovers", in general—which is probably why the whole thing was abandoned after Jadzia died. CzechOut | 08:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
To me, reassociation is a topic specific to "Rejoined". It has no significant support from any other episode. In fact, it seems flatly contradicted by other episodes. "Dax" never brings up the point at all, despite the episode revolving around a past love. I take Dax' actions in that epiosde to be tantamount to continuing a romantic relationship in a non-sexual way. At the very least, it goes against what Bashir says in "Rejoined": Ah, but there's the rub. Even if they do harbor feelings for each other, it's strictly against the rules of Trill society for them to acknowledge it in any way."
Indeed, Jadzia is risking her life and Dax' over her commitments to the past lover. That's a pretty big "acknowledgement". Granted, she doesn't seek out her past lover, but she definitely doesn't distance herself once that lover comes on board the station. The whole affair was in fact officially acknowledged by being entered into a court report.
"The Host" is a blatant violation, with the Trill actively initiating reassociation after a new joining. And certainly "Penumbra" is too. The only reason it seems to matter in "Rejoined" is that there are other Trills there prepared to tattletale.
Hell, forget about other episodes; I've never understood the internal logic of it just within the episode, "Rejoined". In one breath, Julian's dismissing it as a "rule" by calling it a mere "taboo". The next minute, he's saying that, in fact, it's a taboo that can result in the death of your symbiont. That's not a taboo, that's freakin' capital punishment, which, as another editor has mentioned, should mean the Trills are ineligible for Federation membership. (And I don't buy the argument that it's the "natural" end of the symbiont's life. Naturally, the symbionts are to move from one host from the next until they are unable to do so, not until some Trill law forces them into a situation where they can't.)
Fact is, this was a one-off literary device that the writers never thought of before or (meaningfully) used afterwards. It's been so thoroughly screwed up, it'll never make any real sense, except to describe it within the context of the one episode. It certainly has been forgotten, conveniently, that breaking this rule/law/taboo can lead to the death of the symbiont. There's no WAY that Worf would've dabbled with Ezri had that part of the concept not been conveniently forgotten. And the scarcity of symbionts established in "Playing God" would seem to suggest the Trills can't really afford to exile a symbiont to death.
I think it's best to describe this thing as having applicability only within the episode "Rejoined" with no real support in any other part of canon. CzechOut | 08:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Actually, what am I thinkin' about? The Federation doesn't actually ban capital punishment: General Order 7. But still the penalty for reassociation is a somewhat capricious form of capital punishment, as the precise definition of reassociation would seem to be highly subjective. CzechOut | 08:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I love you, Czech! What a great response! Thank you! It is odd that only "Rejoined" mentioned the rule -- I mean, TABOO -- and in no other episodes. I agree that Odan/Crusher and Ezri/Worf would be full-out violations of reassociation. "Dax" comes close, but remains sexually platonic. --Ambassador Weyoun 15:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)