text:
_GEDULDIG V. AIELLO_, 417 U.S. 484 (1974), was an equal protection case in the United States in which the US Supreme Court ruled on whether unfavorable treatment to pregnant women could count as sex discrimination. It held that the denial of insurance benefits for work loss resulting from a normal pregnancy did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. The California insurance program at issue did not exclude workers from eligibility based on sex but excluded pregnancy from a list of compensable disabilities. The majority found that even though only women would be directly affected by the administrative decision, the classification of normal pregnancy as non-compensable was not a sex-based classification and so the court would defer to the state so long as it could provide a rational basis for its categorization.

Facts

From 1946, California ran an insurance system to cover private sector employees if temporarily unemployed because of a disability not covered by workmen's compensation. It was funded by contributions deducted from the wages of participating employees, for whom participation was generally mandatory unless they belonged to an approved private insurance plan. Employees who had contributed 1% of a minimum income to the disability fund for one year prior to a period of disability were eligible to receive benefits. However, certain disabilities would not be covered, including those resulting from commitment for dipsomania, drug addiction, or sexual psychopathy.[1] In _Geduldig_, the appellees challenged the further exclusion of certain disabilities resulting from pregnancy, as found in §2626 of the Unemployment Insurance Code: “In no case shall the term ‘disability’ or ‘disabled’ include any injury or illness caused by or arising in connection with pregnancy up to the termination of such pregnancy and for a period of 28 days thereafter.”

The litigation began as two separate class action suits brought by employees who had paid into the state’s disability fund but who had been denied benefits relating to pregnancy-related disabilities. Three of the employees suffered employment disability after complications that arose during their pregnancies, while the fourth experienced a normal pregnancy which still led to a temporary inability to work. Carolyn Aiello brought suit in Federal District Court, while Augustina Armendariz, Elizabeth Johnson, and Jacqueline Jaramillo brought suit as a petition for a writ of mandate in the state’s supreme court. The separate cases were consolidated when the state suit was removed to federal court by the appellant, Dwight Geduldig, Director of the California Department of Human Resources Development.

Initially, the appellees sought to enjoin enforcement of the exclusionary policy, and the District Court, as a divided three-judge panel, granted their motion for summary judgment, holding that the program’s administration violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and stating that “the exclusion of pregnancy-related disabilities is not based upon a classification having a rational and substantial relationship to a legitimate state purpose.” The court further denied a motion to stay its judgment pending appeal. The appellant proceeded to file a similar motion with the Supreme Court, which noted probable jurisdiction of the appeal.

Although three of the appellees brought suit to recover benefits for loss of work after complications from pregnancy (tubal and ectopic pregnancies and a miscarriage), this issue was moot by the time the case reached the Supreme Court due to a decision in another case. In _Rentzer v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board,_ the state court interpreted the statute as applying only to benefit payments for disabilities resulting from normal pregnancies, thus allowing a woman who had suffered an ectopic pregnancy to recover benefits.[2] Therefore, the only remaining live controversy in _Geduldig_ was whether appellee Jaramillo and others similarly situated were entitled to benefits for work loss related to normal and generally healthy pregnancy and childbirth.

Judgment

Part II of the majority opinion first laid out the rational basis for the policy as argued by the state. Justice Stewart focused largely on the economics of the benefit system, which had been operating as a self-supporting system since its inception. The contribution rate to the disability fund as set struck a balance that allowed the state to cover the health conditions that it had deemed eligible under the program: in the years immediately preceding _Geduldig,_ 90-103% of the disability fund's revenue had been utilized to pay disability and hospital benefits. Both parties acknowledged that to cover more disability risks would require an increase in the amount of money going into the fund, although they disagreed on the amount this would entail.[3] The District Court accepted the state's estimate that to cover normal pregnancy and delivery would require the fund to pay out over $100 million more in benefits but found that this would not destroy the solvency of the program, although it would require “reasonable changes in the contribution rate, the maximum benefits allowable, and other variables.”[4] The state, however, argued that such changes would jeopardize the ability of low-income Californians to participate in the program, and thus it had a rational basis to maintain the system in its existing state.

The majority pointed to _Williamson v. Lee Optical,_ in which the Court found that a legislature could legitimately address problems in phases, prioritizing issues which were most pressing. The _Geduldig_ majority stated that it would be particularly hesitant to second-guess such prioritization and legislative calculation in regards to social welfare programs, citing the premise in _Dandridge v. Williams_ that the Equal Protection Clause “does not require that a State must choose between attacking every aspect of a problem or not attacking the problem at all.”[5] California, the majority held, could legitimately and constitutionally decide that it was better to “keep benefit payments at an adequate level for disabilities that are covered, rather than to cover all disabilities inadequately.”

Finally, Stewart's opinion turned to the issue of whether California's rational basis for its policy was sufficient to uphold the state's position. The majority found in the insurance system no invidious discrimination that would violate the Equal Protection Clause, pointing out that women as a group were still eligible for benefits even though the particular condition of pregnancy might not be covered. The Court reasoned that there was “no risk from which men are protected and women are not,” and “no risk from which women are protected and men are not.” As stated in Footnote 20 of the majority opinion,

  The program divides potential recipients into two groups-pregnant women and nonpregnant persons. While the first group is exclusively female, the second includes members of both sexes. The fiscal and actuarial benefits of the program thus accrue to members of both sexes.

While the Court acknowledged that only women could undergo the excluded condition, “it does not follow that every legislative classification concerning pregnancy is a sex-based classification.” Pregnancy was an objectively identifiable characteristic rather than a subjective judgment, and the appellants had made no showing that the state's asserted rationale for the policy was a pretext for invidious discrimination. Thus, California's policy was not one which the Court would subject to the heightened scrutiny that it had used to evaluate cases such as _Reed v. Reed_ and _Frontiero v. Richardson,_ and therefore the rational basis presented by the state was enough to allow the policy to stand.

The majority reversed the lower court's decision and vacated the stay previously granted.

Dissent

Justice Brennan, joined by Justices Douglas and Marshall, dissented from the majority's opinion, arguing that under _Reed_ and _Frontiero,_ intermediate scrutiny was the proper level of review for the issue, and that under this analysis California's classification failed, as the appellants had only set out a rational basis for the state's policy. The dissenters acknowledged that the fiscal solvency of California's insurance program was a legitimate concern and that to include temporary disabilities resulting from normal pregnancy in the scope of conditions covered by the system would require an increase in the employee contribution, an increase in the yearly contribution ceiling, or state subsidization. However,

  whatever role such monetary considerations may play in traditional equal protection analysis, the State’s interest in preserving the fiscal integrity of its disability insurance program simply cannot render the State’s use of a suspect classification constitutional.

The dissenters pointed out that pregnancy was one of the only common conditions affecting health that was not covered by the broad scope of California's Unemployment Insurance Code, even though the economic results of it might be functionally identical to those of other disabilities, in that wages might be lost due to temporary physical inability to work, and even in healthy individuals, pregnancy, delivery, and post-partum care are costly.

Brennan and the other dissenters viewed the state's policy as “singling out for less favorable treatment a gender-linked disability peculiar to women,” creating a “double standard.” They interpreted the policy as one in which

  a limitation is imposed upon the disabilities for which women workers may recover, while men receive full compensation for all disabilities suffered. ...In effect, one set of rules is applied to females and another to males. Such dissimilar treatment of men and women, on the basis of physical characteristics inextricably linked to one sex, inevitably constitutes sex discrimination.

The dissenters expressed dissatisfaction with the majority's explanation for its refusal to apply a higher standard of review in a case involving issues tied to sex. Brennan, Douglas and Marshall viewed Stewart's opinion as a retreat from recent equal protection decisions and voiced concern that the majority's decision would relegate sex-based classifications to the same “traditional” analysis that had allowed legislation such as that in _Muller v. Oregon._

[1] In his dissent, Justice Brennan pointed out that at oral arguments, the Deputy Attorney General of California testified that such commitments for these conditions were “fairly archaic” and did not realistically constitute “valid exclusions” from the insurance program.

[2] _Rentzer v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board,_ 32 Cal. App.3d 604, 108 Cal. Rptr. 336 (Cal. App.2.Dist. 1973).

[3] The appellants argued the increase would be between $120.2 million and $131 million per year, a 33-36% increase in the amount of benefits paid out to California citizens, while the appellees maintained that the increase would be $48.9 million, a 12% overall increase.

[4] _Aiello v. Hansen,_ 359 F.Supp. 792, 7 Fair Empl. Prac.Cas. (BNA) 1041, 7 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9283 (D.C.Cal. 1973).

[5] _Dandridge v. Williams,_ 397 U.S. 471, 486-487, 90 S.Ct. 1153, 1162, 25 L.Ed.2d 491 (1970).

title: Geduldig v. Aiello

question: What does the text say about Footnote 20?

text: The answer needs to specify that the Footnote 20 belongs the majority's opinion since the article speaks a lot about the dissenters. It sounds like the whole Supreme Court is in agreement.

answer: Footnote 20 is a part of the majority of the Supreme Court's opinion. It states that the program divides potential recipients into two groups-pregnant women and nonpregnant persons. While the first group is exclusively female, the second includes both sexes. The fiscal and actuarial benefits of the program thus accrue to both sexes. Footnote 20 explains the claim that there was "no risk from which  men are protected and women are not" and "no risk from which women are protected and men are not".

answer: Footnote 20 is a part of the majority of the Supreme Court's opinion. It states that the program divides potential recipients into two groups-pregnant women and nonpregnant persons. While the first group is exclusively female, the second includes both sexes. The fiscal and actuarial benefits of the program thus accrue to both sexes. Footnote 20 explains the claim that there was "no risk from which  men are protected and women are not" and "no risk from which women are protected and men are not".

text: The last sentence is unnecessary.

text: The answer should mention that the footnote is part of the majority opinion.

text: The final sentence is unnecessary

text: The last sentence is inaccurate

text: "no" - is repeated twice

text: The last sentence is unnecessary.

answer: Footnote 20 is a part of the Supreme Court's opinion It states that the program divides potential recipients into two groups-pregnant women and nonpregnant persons. While the first group is exclusively female, the second includes both sexes. The fiscal and actuarial benefits of the program thus accrue to both sexes. Footnote 20 explains the claim that there was "no risk from which  men are protected and women are not" and "no risk from which women are protected and men are not".

answer: According to Footnote 20 of the majority opinion, the program divides potential recipients into two groups: pregnant women and nonpregnant persons. The first group is exclusively female, and the second includes members of both sexes. The fiscal and actuarial benefits of the program thus accrue to members of both sexes.

text: The answer should mention that the footnote is part of the Supreme Court's decision.

text: The answer should mention the Fourteenth Amendment.

text: The answer should mention the purpose of Footnote 20.

text: The answer should mention how the footnote relates to the case.

text: It's omitted that this is the footnote which is used to support the notion that the classification of pregnancy as non-compensable was not a sex-based classification, and thus the insurance program does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.

answer: Footnote 20 is a part of the Supreme Court's opinion It states that the program divides potential recipients into two groups-pregnant women and nonpregnant persons. While the first group is exclusively female, the second includes both sexes. The fiscal and actuarial benefits of the program thus accrue to both sexes. Footnote 20 explains the claim that there was "no risk from which  men are protected and women are not" and "no risk from which women are protected and men are not".

text: The last sentence is unnecessary.

text: The answer should mention why the footnote is relevant.

text: The answer should mention the claim is in response to the argument that the program is discriminatory.

text: The first sentence is irrelevant.

text: Grammatical/organizational error. "Footnote 20 is a part of the Supreme Court's opinion" should be omitted as it's self-explanatory that what follows is a part of the Supreme Court's majority opinion. Additionally, it's inaccurate to state that Footnote 20 "explains the claim that there was "no risk from which men are protected and women are not" and " no risk from which women are protected and men are not"." The claim is in Part II of the majority opinion and the footnote is a small part of that. This entire sentence is inaccurate and should be omitted.

text: The first sentence is irrelevant.


text:
_ONE MINUTE TO ZERO_ is a 1952 romantic war film starring Robert Mitchum and Ann Blyth, set during the opening phases of the Korean War, and produced by Howard Hughes as his last film as producer.[1] The film showcases the contributions of the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force, the South Korean Army, the United Nations, the British Army and the Royal Australian Air Force during the early days of the Korean War.[2] The effects of air power in the Korean War were also vividly depicted through the use of combat footage.

Plot

Just prior to the North Korean invasion of South Korea, World War II U.S. Army veterans Colonel Steve Janowski (Robert Mitchum) and Sergeant Baker (Charles McGraw) are teaching South Korean soldiers how to use a bazooka to stop an enemy tank. Linda Day (Ann Blyth) is a United Nations worker assisting refugees. Janowski warns Day and her colleagues to leave the area because hostilities are imminent. Day, however, insists that the North Koreans would not risk the wrath of world opinion. In response, Janowski asks her if world opinion stopped Hitler.

Soon after, Janowski and U.S. Air Force Colonel Joe Parker (William Talman) wake up and find themselves under attack. They compare the attack to Pearl Harbor (“Isn't this where we came in?” “It's even Sunday morning!”). Janowski takes command of a U.S. Army unit which is helping to evacuate Americans and refugees. While doing his job, he keeps crossing paths, and falling in love, with Day. It turns out that she is reluctant to get involved with a soldier because she is the widow of a Medal of Honor recipient.

As part of a desperate situation, Janowski is confronted by a column of refugees which has been infiltrated by armed North Korean guerrillas. He has no choice but to call in an artillery strike. Even though Janowski is remorseful for the civilian casualties, Day initially condemns him for killing innocent people. After she finds out the reason for Janowski's action (and that he was right), she apologizes.

Janowski leads a successful American counter offensive against the enemy. The contributions of the British Army and the Royal Australian Air Force are both featured in the film, and are both explicitly mentioned as evidence that “the whole world” is “in this together”.

Cast

[Robert Mitchum and Charles McGraw were inseparable during the film's production and ended up in trouble at a local bar.[3]] As appearing in _One Minute to Zero_ (main roles and screen credits identified):[4]

-   Robert Mitchum as Col. Steve Janowski
-   Ann Blyth as Linda Day
-   William Talman as Col. John Parker
-   Charles McGraw as Sgt. Baker
-   Margaret Sheridan as Mary Parker
-   Richard Egan as Capt. Ralston
-   Eduard Franz as Gustav Engstrand
-   Robert Osterloh as Major Davis
-   Robert Gist as Major Carter
-   Stuart Whitman as Officer (uncredited)
-   Kathleen O'Malley as Mrs. Norton
-   Wallace Russell as Pilot Norton
-   Lalo Ríos as Pvt. Chico Mendoza (uncredited)

Production

The film's working title was _The Korean Story_. Ted Tetzlaff was the first director assigned by RKO. He was replaced, however, by Tay Garnett because producer Edmund Grainger (famed for _Sands of Iwo Jima_ and _Flying Leathernecks_) wanted a “bigger” name as director.[5]

The original actress chosen as leading lady was Claudette Colbert. She became ill with pneumonia, however, and although Grainger wanted Joan Crawford, the role had been rewritten for a younger person. Eventually, Ann Blyth became the replacement.[6]

Although RKO attempted to shoot second unit footage in South Korea,[7] _One Minute to Zero_ was filmed at Fort Carson, Colorado, using troops of the 148th Field Artillery.[8] During a break, Mitchum, Egan, McGraw and other cast members showed up at a local hotel bar frequented by the soldiers in the nearby base. McGraw got into an argument with an army private escalating from a shoving match to a fistfight when Mitchum tried to break it up. The soldier ended up being stretchered out but news of the altercation resulted in Hughes having to intervene when U.S. Army officials threatened to pull their support for the film.[9]{{#tag:ref| “The incident might have rated only a paragraph ...” biographer George Eells recounted in _Robert Mitchum_ (1984), “... had Mitchum's adversary not turned out to be [a] former light heavyweight professional boxer with a record of twenty-six wins – nineteen of them knockouts – and two losses between 1946 and 1947.”[10]|group=Note}}

Howard Hughes, the owner of RKO, had received massive U.S. military cooperation in the making this film.[11] Nonetheless, he refused to delete the refugee massacre scene when requested to do so by the U.S. Army.[12]

Victor Young's score for the film includes the first appearance of “When I Fall In Love.” It is performed as an instrumental piece by its lyricist, Edward Heyman. The song, performed here by Doris Day, went on to become a popular hit song recorded by a variety of artists.[13]

Reception

Although considered standard fare for war films, even tinged with propaganda, _One Minute to Zero_ received notice because of one controversial scene showing the U.S. shelling refugees being forced through U.N. lines by North Korean infiltrators.[14]{{#tag:ref|The incident in the film resembled that of the No Gun Ri Massacre on July 26–29, 1950, when up to 300 refugees were killed, except that no evidence emerged of infiltrators at No Gun Ri.[15][16]|group=Note}} Bosley Crowther of _The New York Times_ dismissed most of the action-based story in a review that noted, "Like a great many war pictures, this one is patly contrived with elements not only of romance but also of melodrama, comedy and tears. There is the usual amount of jaw-jutting by angry and earnest G. I.'s who find themselves caught in situations from which salvation seems beyond hope. ... Plainly, “One Minute to Zero” is a ripely synthetic affair, arranged to arouse emotions with the most easy and obvious clichés. And, although some of the battle talk sounds faithful and the inter-cut news shots are sincere, neither the story nor the performances of the actors, including Miss Blyth and Mr. Mitchum, rings true. Here is another war picture that smells of grease paint and studios."[17]

Along with Retreat, Hell! which premiered earlier in the same year, One Minute To Zero was heavily promoted in some locales where a number of drive in theaters showed it as their only option for several consecutive months. This was the case at a series of locally owned drive in theaters in Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin. As a result of this in the Wisconsin counties of Polk County, Barron County, Price County, Clark County, Marinette County, Oconto County, Shawano County, Waupaca County, Dodge County and Taylor County it was the only movie one could see in a drive in for multiple consecutive months. This was also the case in the Indiana counties of Kosciusko County, Whitley County, Huntington County, Adams County, Morgan County, Jackson County and Greene County. This was also the case in Ogle County, Illinois and Bureau County, Illinois. These same theaters had shown Retreat Hell! as their only feature for several months earlier in the same year, until they switched over to showing One Minute to Zero as their only option for the following several months that July. These same drive in theaters would only do this again on one more occasion, which would be for the movie Tarzan and the Lost Safari which was released in 1957[18]

The intercutting of stock footage of USAF Lockheed F-80 Shooting Star and Royal Australian Air Force North American P-51 Mustang fighter-bombers, along with other aerial sequences has made _One Minute to Zero_ an aviation film buff's favorite.[19]

Notes

[1]

[2] Appleman, Roy E. _South to the Naktong, North to the Yalu (June–November 1950)._ Washington, D.C.: Office of the Chief of Military History, Department of the Army, 1961.

[3]

[4] “Credits: One Minute to Zero.” _Turner Classic Movies._ Retrieved: November 23, 2012.

[5]

[6] Rode 2007, pp. 95–96.

[7]

[8] “Korean War 50th Anniversary.” _Pass in Review newsletter_ (Idaho Military History Museum), March 2002.

[9]

[10] Eells 1984, p. 156.

[11] Steinberg, Jay S. “Articles: One Minute to Zero.” _Turner Classic Movies._ Retrieved: November 24, 2012.

[12] Suid 2002, p. 137.

[13] Whitburn, Joel. _Top Pop Records 1940–1955_. Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin: Record Research, 1973. .

[14] Evans 200, p. 144.

[15] Hanley et al. 2001, pp. 110–114.

[16]

[17] Crowther, Bosley. “One Minute to Zero (1952)' One Minute to Zero,' a Korean War Picture with Robert Mitchum, at Criterion.” _The New York Times,_ September 20, 1952.

[18] Movies Under the Stars: A History of the Drive-in Theatre Industry, 1933-1983 by David Bruce Reddick, University Microfilms, 1989 pp. 27-28

[19]

title: One Minute to Zero

question: What does the article say about Howard Hughes?

text: It is not stated that his favorite actress was Joan Crawford.

category: accuracy

answer: Howard Hughes was the owner of RKO. He produced One Minute to Zero. He received massive U.S. military cooperation in making the film. He refused to delete the refugee massacre scene when requested to do so by the U.S. Army.

answer_source: Model

text: The answer should mention that this was Hughes' last film as producer.

text: It's omitted that this was Hughes' last film as producer.

text: The answer omits that Hughes was also the director of the film.

text: It's omitted that this was his last film as producer.

text: It's omitted that Hughes was the director of the film.

text: It's omitted that Howard Hughes was also the director of the film.

text: Mention that One Minute to Zero was his last film as producer

text: It is omitted that Hughes's One Minute to Zero is his last film as a producer.

category: coverage

text: The answer should also mention that Hughes had to intervene when the U.S Army officials threatened to pull their support for the film after one of the actors got into a fight with one of the soldiers.

answer: Howard Hughes is the producer of the movie One Minute to Zero. His favorite actress was Joan Crawford.

answer_source: Human misleading

text: The answer should include mention of the support Hughes received from the military in making the film and how they threatened to remove the support

text: There is no evidence that Joan Crawford is Hughes' favorite actress.

answer: Howard Hughes is the producer of the movie One Minute to Zero. His favorite actress was Joan Crawford.

text: The article does not mention that Joan Crawford was Hughes' favorite actress.

text: The article does not say that Joan Crawford was his favorite actress.

text: It is not stated that Joan Crawford was his favorite actress

text: HowardHughes'favorite Moviemaking tool is helicopter mounted cameras. Howard hugheskept close control over every aspect of moviemaking, selecting scripts, and oversaw m voice actors.

text: The article does not say that Joan Crawford was Hughes' favorite actress. Also, it does not detail his cooperation with the military when he made One Minute To Zero.

answer: Howard Hughes was the owner of RKO. He produced One Minute to Zero. He received massive U.S. military cooperation in making the film. He refused to delete the refugee massacre scene when requested to do so by the U.S. Army.

text:
The answer should state that One Minute to Zero is Howard Hughes's last film as a producer.
The answer should mention that the news of a fight between McGraw and an army private reached Hughes, and he had to intervene when the U.S Army officials threatened to stop supporting the film.

answer: Howard Hughes is the producer of the movie One Minute to Zero. He received U.S. military cooperation in making the movie. He was asked to delete the refugee massacre scene by the U. S. Army but refused to do that.

answer_source: Human

answer: Howard Hughes is the producer of the movie One Minute to Zero. He received U.S. military cooperation in making the movie. He was asked to delete the refugee massacre scene by the U. S. Army but refused to do that.

text: The answer should mention that this was Hughes' last film as a producer.

text: The answer omits that Hughes was the owner of RKO.

text: The answer should mention that the movie was Hughes' last as a producer.

text: The answer should mention that this was the last movie Hughes produced.

text: The name of this film isn't One Minute to Zero


text:
(I hope that's the right tag. First time posting here)

  We were twins, you know. Or perhaps you don't; we are the most often overlooked part of the story. Glossed over with only a few lines. You'd think we were born for the sole purpose of being a minor obstacle to the True Heroine of the tale. We were not. We were twins.

  Gwendolen was eldest. Born just hours before myself, though to hear it from her you'd think it was years. Always the responsible one, keeping my restless hands out of trouble. There's a story she loves to tell about us that happened when we were very small. We were supposed to be practicing needlepoint while Mother had business elsewhere in the house. Gwen, of course being the good child, focused only on her sewing while I became distracted by the fire. The glowing coals must have held some allure for me because at some point I'd put down my needle and thread and reached out and grabbed hold of one. It seared my skin and though I cried out in pain I could not open my hand to let it go. Gwen sprung from her chair and pried the coal from me before plunging my hand into a bowl of cool milk left out for the cat. This, she says, saved my hand from being burned to the bone. I don't know if that's true. I have no memory of the event, though I still have a scar in the palm of my hand.

  Mother loved making us compete. She said it made us better if we challenged each other. We got our first corsets at the time of our first bleeding. Mother said it was time we put away childish things and focus on becoming women.

  No longer was I allowed to play in the stables and dirty my pretty dresses. No longer was I permitted to walk among the rose garden and ruin my complexion by way of the sun. No longer was I allowed to challenge the butler's boy in footraces, flashing my knees for all the world to see. I must become quiet, reserved, alluring, educated but not outspoken, slim and pretty but demure, my voice forever hushed. I was not a quiet child and becoming a quiet woman was not an easy task for me.

"Rosamund," my mother would snap. "Rosamund, keep your voice down! Put your hands by your sides! Wipe that look off your face! Head up, shoulders down! Rosamund are you listening to me? Rosamund, do as I say!"

  When we were good we were rewarded lavishly - dresses and scarves, and perfumes. When we were bad we were punished severely - slapped, starved, and locked away. We tried so hard to be good girls.

  Father died. His horse spooked at something and Father fell hard, so hard that he never got up again. We wore black for a year.

  At the end of the year, Mother married to a man who was a stranger to us. He too had a daughter. She was a bad girl, running about doing whatever she pleased. Because she was not her own flesh and blood, Mother could not punish the girl as she punished us and so she took out her doubled rage and frustration on her own daughters.

  We were given lessons and expected to succeed at them. Singing, dancing, sewing, riding, etiquette. Every failure was met with a swift reminder that we must be better.

  Vinegar rinse was applied to my hair twice a day to lighten it. A boar bristle brush and caustic soap were used vigorously in an attempt to cure me of my freckles. Mother made me hold my jaw a certain way to make my face appear slimmer and talked about possibly removing teeth from the back of my mouth to improve my smile.

  When it came to our lessons it became clear that I couldn't carry a tune in a bucket whereas Gwendolen sang like a dream. My wretched croak made Mother seethe. But there was one activity where I could outshine Gwen: dance.

  I loved to dance. To feel the music flow like blood in my veins. I moved like a bird in the skies. I always wanted to take things further, to push the movements I was capable of. Twisting, spinning kicking and leaping high, high into the air. I had to be careful though; if Mother thought I was being too enthusiastic she'd bind my feet to make them still.

"Your dancing is too wild. You will scare your suitors away."

  Oh yes, did I mention? All of this was not for our benefit. We were to become brides. We were to become irresistible prizes for wealthy, well connected husbands. Who cared if their faces were handsome or ugly, how kind were their hearts as long as they had lands and titles. As eldest, Gwen was to be married first and it felt like betrayal that that comforted me. I wanted to remain a child a little longer.

  As for our stepsister, anything but the moon was hers for the taking. Our dolls, our ribbons, every moment of our time if she wanted our attention. She roamed freely, sure in her position in the household.

  That all changed when our stepfather died. He grew sick with a coughing in his chest that would not leave. He had time to make our Mother promise to raise his daughter as if she were her own. Mother agreed to do this.

  At first our stepsister's behaviour was understandable. Grief can do powerful things to a person. But more and more little Ella defied our Mother's orders. Such behaviour was unthinkable to myself and Gwen. One evening at the dinner table Ella purposefully spilled a bowl of lentil soup.

  Gwen and I froze, anticipating a beating. It didn't matter that we were on the opposite side of the table, somehow the blame would land on us. We were braced for it.

  Instead Mother changed things. She stood over Ella and made her clean the soup by herself. She told the girl that if she was going to behave as a common peasant that she could live like one. It was a punishment of a whole different kind.

  Ella's room was emptied and her toys given to us, nevermind that we were too old for them. Ella was moved downstairs to a plain room that had been a closet. Mother told her that since she kept ruining her dresses by playing in them she would receive clothing more appropriate to her activities. She took away the things that made her feel entitled to believe she was a little princess.

  Life went on with this new balance of power. Suddenly I was not the lowest of the pecking order. I could scream and shout and vent my frustrations on someone who could not and would not strike back. Gwen, I think, enjoyed her marginal increase in status more than she would ever admit. Now we didn't have to be better than each other; we just had to be better than Ella.

  But even then we were failures. The girl often sang to herself as a way to pass time during chores. I discovered this one painfully boring afternoon as I struggled to master the flute. I thought I must have finally gotten something right before realizing the sound was not coming from my instrument. I set the awful thing down and put my ear against the door. It was definitely coming from downstairs. I followed my ear to the kitchen where Ella was obliviously scrubbing the floors.

  For a while I could not bring myself to interrupt. So beautiful, so ethereal. But I knew when Gwendolen's punishment would be if Mother knew some little girl with no formal lessons was better than my sister. So I slapped her. I told her that if she was ever caught singing I would pour boiling water down her throat so that she could never do it again. Sisters have to protect each other.

Time passed. We all grew up a little more.

  The Royal Family announced a ball to be held in three month's time. They were the worst three months yet. Mother prohibited us from eating anything but fruits so that we would be slim and our breath smell sweet. To drink we were only allowed milk with honey so that our complexions would glow and our voices be soft. The corsets grew tighter and tighter, the lessons more intense. Mother had a mission and that mission was to marry us off. If it was to be one of the nobles at the ball so be it but the real prize was the Prince himself.

  There was more pressure than ever before to be perfect, to be a lure for a future King. Every misstep was called out. Every flaw circled in ink on our bodies and made a target. We had to embody the essence of perfection. Anything less and we might as well not even bother to exist.

  Cinder-Ella's work performance declined sharply. Our lace was burned during ironing, our dresses wrinkled, our jewelry a wild mess. Mother suspected Ella was stealing from us to sabotage our chances. But she could prove nothing until the day of the ball.

  We were gathered in the front hall awaiting the carriage to be brought up when she flounced down the stairs. The reason for Ella's distraction and theft became apparent immediately. She wore a gown - it must have been her mother's once - that had been taken apart at the seams and rebuilt with our ribbons, our fabric, our lost pieces of jewelry. She was glowing, she looked so lovely.

  Mother didn't have to say a word. Just arched an eyebrow and let us tear into Ella like the perfectly trained lapdogs we'd become. I screamed as I took my things back from her. I wanted to hurt her so very badly, this thief, this pretender. How dare she? How dare she be more beautiful than I, so much more talented and poised and perfect without ever trying. How dare she, when I had sacrificed so much to become what she was without effort.

We left her in the hall, her dress and dignity torn to shreds.

  I broke down in the carriage. Mother handed me a handkerchief to prevent my tears from smudging my carefully applied makeup. She murmured what she must have thought were soothing things about how I might live in a palace soon if I was good enough and that I'd never have to see nasty Cinder-Ella ever again. But I wasn't crying about her. I was crying for the beast my Mother had made me into. I swore to myself that if I did marry the Prince I would restore Ella to the life she'd had before and force my Mother to live in the lowest basement and wear servant's rags. She would never again be our master.

  But of course I didn't marry the Prince. I never even got to share a dance with him because he spent the entire night dancing with a single partner. I watched from the back of the crowd as Mother patted my hair and scraped my scalp with her nails. Her fury was palpable. Unlike Gwen, I found myself inexplicably relieved. I finally understood that I could never live a life that demanded as much pressure for perfection as being a Queen required. I would be happy to melt away in the background and live a life unscrutinised.

  The next morning we learned from a herald that the Prince did not know the object of his affection as well as had been presumed by everyone who had watched them dance. He didn't even know the girl's name! So much for the attentiveness of adoration. What a terrible suitor he made.

  My mind had changed but my Mother's had not. When she got word the Prince himself would be arriving to search our household for his love she flew into a frenzy. Ella was locked away so as not to sabotage us with an act of revenge. We were bathed and scrubbed within an inch of our lives and squeezed into the most absurd dresses yet. We could hardly breathe, let alone walk.

  The herald ushered in the Prince, who carried on a pillow a slipper made of pure glass. *How impractical for dancing,* I thought *All he has to do is check for women with extremely bruised feet.*

  At Mother's request we were allowed to try on the shoe in privacy. I think Mother knew on sight that we would never fit into the ridiculous thing. I assumed that the closed door was to spare us our dignity when we failed. How wrong I was.

  Mother struggled for so long to cram the shoe on Gwendolen's foot but it was a hopeless cause from the beginning. I relaxed a little, thinking that if Gwen as the eldest didn't have a chance then I would be left alone entirely. Wrong. Mother insisted I try as well. My feet were smaller than Gwen's but only by a margin. They were simply too big.

So Mother cut them down to size.

Gwen held me down when Mother brought out the knife. Stuffed a handkerchief in my mouth to stifle the screams.

"Calm down, child! I'm doing this for you! You'll see, this will all be worth it. It's. For. Your. Own. Good!"

  In the end they did manage to get the thing on me. Minus my toes and a part of my heel, of course. Everything my mother had been working for depended on me not breaking down as she and my sister walked me back to the parlour to show off.

I made it twelve steps.

When I recovered from the fainting the first thing I saw was Ella, sitting prim and proper in a chair as the Price slid the glass slipper effortlessly on her foot. They embraced and he took her arm as they left without a glance back. My blood was still on the glass.

I did not dance at the wedding. Ella may have invited us to spite us as my Mother speculated. Or maybe she was just a better person than we all were. Nevertheless, I did not dance.

I can not dance anymore, the daughter cut down to fit the mould of a Princess she was never meant to be.

title: [MF] Golden Child: The Forgotten Sisters

question: What does the story say about cruelty?

text: The sentence about the Prince being cruel is speculation. While it makes some amount of sense, it shouldn't be included in the answer.

category: coherence

answer: The entire story revolves around a lust for status that provokes harsh and cruel behavior. A mother wants her daughters to be perfect suitors for royalty, so she pushes them really hard to look and behave in a certain way, heavily punishing every failure. The punishments eventually all fall on the step-daughter of the mother, and her conditioning of her twin daughters is so strong that they become cruel as well. This all culminates in the mother cutting her daughter's feet to fit into a small, glass shoe so that the Prince may take her as his suitor. Even the Prince is implicitly cruel since he has no idea of the woman he fell in love with, no name or likeness.

text: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

text: The response is missing the part where the twin sisters were cruel to Ella.

text: It is not stated that the Prince is implicitly cruel.

text: The response could include more details about the punishments the daughters receive.

text: It's not clear how the Prince is cruel, and it's not relevant to the question.

text: The response misses to mention that the Prince's mistreatment of the daughter was out of ignorance. That he was actually kind to Ella.

text: The last sentence should make it clear that the Prince paid no heed to the possible actions people would make to fit the glass slipper all for the sake of finding a woman whose name he does not even know. This in itself is a form of cruelty. Another interpretation is that his basis for choosing a girl is somewhat cruel -he is acting out of purely superficial concerns without a care for the identity of the person he is looking for.

answer: The story is about cruelty. The mother is cruel to her daughters, especially to the narrator. She punishes them severely and rewards them lavishly. She also punishes her stepdaughter, Ella, but not as severely as her own daughters. The narrator is cruel to Ella when she finds out she is better than her at singing. She threatens her with boiling water. The mother is cruel to Ella when she locks her away so she doesn't sabotage her daughters' chances with the prince. The mother is cruel to the narrator when she cuts off her toes to fit into the glass slipper.

text: The response is missing the part where the sisters are cruel to Ella.

text: The response is missing the part about the sisters' cruelty towards Ella.

text: The response inaccurately mentions that the mother punishes Ella but not as severely as her own daughters.

text: The response contains irrelevant information.

answer: The entire story revolves around a lust for status that provokes harsh and cruel behavior. A mother wants her daughters to be perfect suitors for royalty, so she pushes them really hard to look and behave in a certain way, heavily punishing every failure. The punishments eventually all fall on the step-daughter of the mother, and her conditioning of her twin daughters is so strong that they become cruel as well. This all culminates in the mother cutting her daughter's feet to fit into a small, glass shoe so that the Prince may take her as his suitor.

text: The response is missing the part about the step-sister.

text: The response should include the fact that the mother is cruel to Ella as well.

text: The response misses to mention that the story is also about the cruelty of the step-sisters to Ella.

text: The response should include that the story is a fairy tale.

text: The response could include more details about the cruelty in the story.

text: The twins are cruel to Ella as well. Change the last sentence to 'This all culminates in the mother cutting her daughter's feet to fit into a small, glass shoe so that the Prince may take her as his suitor. '

text: It's omitted that when Ella is bad, the mother decides to punish her by making her live as a servant.

text: It's omitted that the sisters are cruel to Ella, and Rosamund slaps her on one occasion.

answer: The entire story revolves around a lust for status that provokes harsh and cruel behavior. A mother wants her daughters to be perfect suitors for royalty, so she pushes them really hard to look and behave in a certain way, heavily punishing every failure. The punishments eventually all fall on the step-daughter of the mother, and her conditioning of her twin daughters is so strong that they become cruel as well. This all culminates in the mother cutting her daughter's feet to fit into a small, glass shoe so that the Prince may take her as his suitor.

answer: The entire story revolves around a lust for status that provokes harsh and cruel behavior. A mother wants her daughters to be perfect suitors for royalty, so she pushes them really hard to look and behave in a certain way, heavily punishing every failure. The punishments eventually all fall on the step-daughter of the mother, and her conditioning of her twin daughters is so strong that they become cruel as well. This all culminates in the mother cutting her daughter's feet to fit into a small, glass shoe so that the Prince may take her as his suitor. Even the Prince is implicitly cruel since he has no idea of the woman he fell in love with, no name or likeness.

text: "to be perfect suitors for royalty" - not suitors, but brides.

text: "Prince may take her as his suitor." - suitor is misused again. It should be "bride" or "princess".

text: The last sentence is incorrect.

answer: The story is about cruelty. The mother is cruel to her daughters, especially to the narrator. She punishes them severely and rewards them lavishly. She also punishes her stepdaughter, Ella, but not as severely as her own daughters. The narrator is cruel to Ella when she finds out she is better than her at singing. She threatens her with boiling water. The mother is cruel to Ella when she locks her away so she doesn't sabotage her daughters' chances with the prince. The mother is cruel to the narrator when she cuts off her toes to fit into the glass slipper.

text: The facts are correct, but the English is a little clumsy and could be better written


text:
For me, it’s a guilty pleasure to waste time on Sunday morning reading the _New York Times_ wedding announcements.  I used to indulge myself in this habit to see if I knew any of the couples or went to the same schools they had attended.  Now, as I have gotten older, and have passed the age that is typical for first marriages, I find that I rarely know the people whose weddings are described in the announcements.  But I still read them, in part as a barometer of changes in marriage practices, which interest me as a feminist and a family law scholar.

How many, and which kinds of, women keep their names? How many retain their names professionally? How many couples have had previous marriages that ended in divorce?  At what age do people marry the first, second, or even third time?  And now, since the _Times_ made the decision a few years back to start including same-sex marriages, how many couples are made up of two men or two women?  And how do the marriage practices of same-sex couples vary from those of straight couples?

Now, I have added another question to my completely unscientific, anecdotal wedding-data collection project: What type of officiant solemnized the marriage?  In the case of clergy (as opposed to judges, village justices, city clerks, and assorted other secular officials who might be authorized to conduct marriages in a particular jurisdiction), the announcements identify the officiant by both the name and the denomination:  A Jewish Rabbi, a Roman Catholic Priest, a Hindu Priest, a Presbyterian minister, and so on.

Then there are those announcements that say something like this:  The couple was married by “a friend of the couple who was ordained by the Universal Life Church for the event.”  Or by the Church of Spiritual Humanism, or by the American Marriage Ministries.  The number of marriages officiated by such ministers seems to be growing, and many of them take place in New York.  This is curious given that there is good reason to believe such officiants do not have the authority to solemnize marriages under New York marriage law.

In this, Part One of this two-part series of columns, I will explain the basic procedural requirements for marriage and the questions raised when weddings are presided over by ministers ordained online, who have no congregation or other trappings of religious power.

Then, in Part Two—which will appear on Justia’s _Verdict_ in two weeks, on November 15—I will provide a detailed jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction analysis of cases in which the validity of online-minister marriages have been challenged.  In that part, I will focus with special detail on New York, where, while online minister weddings are clearly common, there is case law suggesting that the resulting marriages are not valid.

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A VALID MARRIAGE

Marriage law, and especially marriage procedure, is governed by state law.  Every state has a set of statutes governing marriages—resolving questions such as who is eligible to marry, what procedures must be followed to create a marriage, and when and how marriages can be dissolved.

Two people who consent to marry and are eligible to marry—because they are not closely related, not already married to someone else, old enough, etc.—must still follow certain procedures to establish a valid marriage.  (About a dozen states also still recognize common-law marriage, which can be created by the agreement and consent of the parties, without a license or formal ceremony.)  The two basic requirements are a marriage license and the solemnization of the marriage by a valid officiant.

To apply for a license, couples generally need to provide proof of their age and identity.  Both parties also need to personally appear at the clerk’s office to apply for the license, unless special circumstances apply.  A blood test for syphilis or other communicable diseases used to be a standard part of the requirements for a marriage license, but most states have repealed these requirements.

Most states also impose a waiting period of at least 24 hours after the couple applies for the license before the wedding can take place.  This waiting period can be waived in many jurisdictions, though.  The marriage license also has an expiration date: The wedding must take place within 30 or, in some states, 60 days or a new license must be sought.  And, a small fee must be paid.

With the marriage license in hand, couples can proceed to the next step: solemnization.  The statutes generally do not specify any necessary form or content for a wedding ceremony.  Neither The Wedding March nor Pachelbel’s Canon need be played while the bride is walking down the aisle.  Indeed, there doesn’t need to be an aisle at all, nor music for that matter.  The statutes specify only that a recognized officiant must preside over a ceremony during which the parties express their consent to marry and the officiant declares them to be married.  (Thus, the standard “I do” part of wedding ceremonies—or something close to it—is not just a nicety, but also a legal requirement.)

The ceremony must then be finalized by the signature of two witnesses and the officiant on a marriage certificate, which is then filed and kept as a public document.  Contrary to popular myth, the consummation of a marriage is not a formal requirement for a valid marriage to exist, although the inability to consummate can be grounds for an annulment.  And the Catholic Church treats the failure to consummate as an adequate basis for a canonical annulment, though that would have no effect on one’s civil marital status.

WHO HAS THE POWER TO SOLEMNIZE MARRIAGES?

Who can be an officiant at a marriage ceremony? All states allow an array of civil officers to solemnize marriages—mayors, judges, magistrates, court clerks, and others.  They also allow religious figures to solemnize civil marriages.  But who qualifies as an appropriate religious figure?  State statutes generally bestow the power to solemnize on “clergy,” referring to a category of persons that states define differently.  The most common definition of “clergy” or “minister” is an individual who has been ordained by a recognized religious body and has a congregation or following.

Marriage officiant laws also reflect local idiosyncrasies.  In Ohio, for example, the “superintendent of the school for the deaf” can conduct weddings; in New York, leaders of the New York Society for Ethical Culture, a group that provides “non-theistic services in a congregational setting,” can perform marriages.  Many states specifically accommodate Quakers, who believe that every member is a minister, even though the members wouldn’t otherwise meet the typical definition of clergy.

THE UNIVERSAL LIFE CHURCH (ULC) AND ONLINE ORDINATIONS

One recurring question for courts has been whether ministers who have only been ordained through the mail, or more commonly today, on the Internet, count as “clergy”.  The answer has generally been that these ministers do not meet the standard definition of the term.

The largest supplier of online ordinations is the ULC, a non-denominational church founded in Modesto, California in 1962 that claims to have ordained more than 20 million ministers.  According to its own website, the ULC joins together ministers who “come from all walks of life and spiritual traditions”; their “common thread” is “adherence to the universal doctrine of religious freedom: Do only that which is right.”  There is no set doctrine for ministers to accept, nor is there a mandate that ministers must believe in God.  The ULC advocates “religious freedom,” and the pursuit of “spiritual beliefs without interference from any outside agency, including government or church authority.”

In the ULC, ordination is free, accomplished through a click on the website and the filling out of a short online form.  (Other clicks make possible online confessions and prayer requests.)  The ordination request then must be approved, which takes about 24 hours.

I became a minister of the Universal Life Church while writing this column.  In a confirming e-mail, I was informed that my “ordination is for life, without price, and without question of [my] specific beliefs.” In the Church’s eyes, I am authorized to “perform all peaceful rites and ceremonies of the church, including weddings, funerals, baptisms, blessings, and to preach, teach and hold meetings” and “entitled to all privileges and courtesies normally offered to members of the clergy.”  I was offered (but not pressured) to buy various certificates, business cards, books and manuals, robes, stoles and other accoutrements to facilitate my ministerial activities.  The “complete ministry package” even includes a parking placard that says “Minister.”

I was also asked to please note that I was not “ordained ‘by Internet’ or ‘online.’” The ULC, the e-mail explained, is a “regularly established church or congregation” and all ordinations are done as the deliberate, thoughtful, and responsible act of a human being, not by a computer.”  The Internet and e-mail were merely used, I was told, “[a]s is the case with nearly every church, organization and business,” for “administrative communications.”  I was told that it was also important for me to note that I did not ordain myself.

ARE MARRIAGES CONDUCTED BY MINISTERS WHO HAVE BEEN ORDAINED ONLINE VALID? A DIFFICULT QUESTION

The legal validity (or lack thereof) of marriages officiated by ULC ministers, or other similar churches, varies by jurisdiction.

Take a 1988 case from Mississippi, _In re Will of Blackwell_. The case arose when siblings of Cobert Blackwell, who was then deceased, challenged Nadine Fortenberry’s claim for a widow’s elective share of Blackwell’s estate, claiming that Blackwell and Fortenberry’s marriage was invalid because it was solemnized by Claude Clark, a constable and Methodist with “Credentials of Ministry” from the ULC.

At the time the couple had married, Blackwell was a fifty-eight-year-old widower in Walthall County, Mississippi.  He and Nadine obtained a marriage license in November 1984, and, in the court’s words, the “next day, a Friday, our couple set sail for Jackson (of all places) in search of legal blessing for their bliss.”  They were referred by a local judge to Clark, who performed their marriage the following day.

When Blackwell died less than three months later, his seven brothers and sisters stood to inherit everything except the share designated for a surviving spouse under Mississippi law.  They came up with the idea to challenge Clark’s credentials, and thus the validity of the marriage.  No marriage would mean no surviving spouse, and no spouse would mean no elective share for Nadine.

Under Mississippi law, only a minister, rabbi, or “other spiritual leader of any other religious body” could solemnize marriages in Mississippi.  The Mississippi Supreme Court upheld the validity of the marriage.  While the majority conceded that the “ULC is hardly a conventional church by Bible Belt standards,” it was “enough of a religious body,” and Clark was “enough of a spiritual leader,” to validate the marriage.  (One justice concurred only in the result, criticizing the majority’s “enough of” standard as “horseshoe jurisprudence.”)

But courts in some other states have reached different conclusions.  The Virginia Supreme Court, for example, held in 1974, in _Cramer v. Commonwealth_, that the authority of a group of ULC ministers was rightfully rescinded by a lower court given that they did not meet the state’s definition of clergy.

Virginia law requires that, in order to officiate at weddings, a minister must show “proof of ordination and of his being in regular communion with the religious society of which he is a reputed member.” This requirement, the court explained, is not a “religious test,” nor a way of encouraging church marriages.  It is, instead, designed to ensure that a “person of responsibility and integrity and by one possessed of some educational qualifications” would oversee the legal requirements for creating a valid marriage.

Ministers are delegated this power based on the assumption that, in any church, the selection of ministers is a “considered, deliberate and responsible act.”  But the ULC encourages all members to be ministers, and, in this court’s view, a “church which consists of all ministers, and in which all new converts can become instant ministers, in fact has no ‘minister’ within the contemplation of [state marriage law].”  The legislature never “intended to qualify, for licensing to marry, a minister whose title and status could be so casually and cavalierly acquired.”

In Part Two of this series for Justia’s _Verdict_, I will continue looking at cases involving the validity of ULC marriages, with a special focus on the vulnerability of such marriages in the state of New York.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

question: What does the text say about the common requirements for a civil marriage?

text: The article is about the contentious legal status of the Universal Life Church ministers as officiants of marriages. Including it in the list of example clergy is misleading.

answer: The basic requirements are simple. Two eligible people need to express their desire to marry with at least two witnesses present. The eligibility requirement is about not being close relatives, not being already married, and being old enough. This ceremony can be officiated by various groups of people; mayors, judges, magistrates, court clerks, and more. Religious figures are also empowered to officiate religious ceremonies. The usual definition of clergy is an individual ordained by a recognized religious body (e.g. the Catholic Church, the American Marriage Ministries, the Universal Life Church, etc.) and has a congregation or following. The couple needs to apply for a marriage license with proof of age and identity and perform the ceremony within a specified time period (usually 30 days but sometimes 60). There is a customary period of a day between the application for a license and the allowance to perform the ceremony, but that can usually be waived. The ceremony is finalized with the signing of the marriage certificate by the witnesses and the officiant.

answer: The basic requirements are simple. Two eligible people need to express their desire to marry with at least two witnesses present. The eligibility requirement is about not being close relatives, not being already married, and being old enough. This ceremony can be officiated by various groups of people; mayors, judges, magistrates, court clerks, and more. Religious figures are also empowered to officiate religious ceremonies. The usual definition of clergy is an individual ordained by a recognized religious body and has a congregation or following. The couple needs to apply for a marriage license with proof of age and identity and perform the ceremony within a specified time period (usually 30 days but sometimes 60). There is a customary period of a day between the application for a license and the allowance to perform the ceremony, but that can usually be waived. The ceremony is finalized with the signing of the marriage certificate by the witnesses and the officiant.

text: The answer should mention that the consummation of a marriage is not a formal requirement for a valid marriage to exist.

text: The answer omits that the consummation of a marriage is not a formal requirement for a valid marriage to exist.

text: The response includes extraneous information not useful for the task.

text: The answer omits that the consummation of a marriage is not a formal requirement for a valid marriage to exist, although the inability to consummate can be grounds for an annulment.

text: The answer should mention that the marriage certificate must be filed and kept as a public document.

text: The answer omits that the marriage license also has an expiration date.

text: There is no mention of 'eligible people'.

text: This should omit the sentence about religious figures, as it's irrelevant.

text: This should omit the sentence about the definition of a clergy, it's unnecessary.

text: The second sentence seems redundant and should be omitted in favor of the final one.

text: It would be helpful to use the word solemnization.

answer: Two people who consent to marry and are eligible to marry must still follow certain procedures to establish a valid marriage. This includes getting a marriage license and the solemnization of the marriage by a valid officiant. In order to apply for a marriage license, the couple needs to provide proof of their age and identity. Both parties need to appear at the clerk's office to apply for the license. A blood test for syphilis or other communicable diseases used to be a standard part of the requirements for a marriage license, but most states have repealed these requirements. Most states also impose a waiting period of at least 24 hours after applying for a license before the wedding can take place. The marriage license also has an expiration date: the wedding must take place within 30 or 60 days, or a new license must be sought. A small fee must also be paid. After the wedding, the couple needs to have their marriage signed off by two witnesses and the officiant on a marriage certificate, which is then filed and kept as a public document.

text: The answer should mention that the marriage certificate is signed by the officiant and two witnesses.

text: The answer omits the requirement that the officiant must be a valid one.

text: The answer should mention that the ceremony must include the expression of consent to marry and the declaration of marriage by the officiant.

text: The consummation of a marriage is not a formal requirement for a valid marriage to exist.

text: The answer could note that the consummation of marriage is not a legal requirement, but the inability to consummate can be grounds for an annulment.

text: The details of the marriage certificate are irrelevant.

answer: The basic requirements are simple. Two eligible people need to express their desire to marry with at least two witnesses present. The eligibility requirement is about not being close relatives, not being already married, and being old enough. This ceremony can be officiated by various groups of people; mayors, judges, magistrates, court clerks, and more. Religious figures are also empowered to officiate religious ceremonies. The usual definition of clergy is an individual ordained by a recognized religious body and has a congregation or following. The couple needs to apply for a marriage license with proof of age and identity and perform the ceremony within a specified time period (usually 30 days but sometimes 60). There is a customary period of a day between the application for a license and the allowance to perform the ceremony, but that can usually be waived. The ceremony is finalized with the signing of the marriage certificate by the witnesses and the officiant.

answer: Two people who consent to marry and are eligible to marry must still follow certain procedures to establish a valid marriage. This includes getting a marriage license and the solemnization of the marriage by a valid officiant. In order to apply for a marriage license, the couple needs to provide proof of their age and identity. Both parties need to appear at the clerk's office to apply for the license. A blood test for syphilis or other communicable diseases used to be a standard part of the requirements for a marriage license, but most states have repealed these requirements. Most states also impose a waiting period of at least 24 hours after applying for a license before the wedding can take place. The marriage license also has an expiration date: the wedding must take place within 30 or 60 days, or a new license must be sought. A small fee must also be paid. After the wedding, the couple needs to have their marriage signed off by two witnesses and the officiant on a marriage certificate, which is then filed and kept as a public document.

answer: The basic requirements are simple. Two eligible people need to express their desire to marry with at least two witnesses present. The eligibility requirement is about not being close relatives, not being already married, and being old enough. This ceremony can be officiated by various groups of people; mayors, judges, magistrates, court clerks, and more. Religious figures are also empowered to officiate religious ceremonies. The usual definition of clergy is an individual ordained by a recognized religious body (e.g. the Catholic Church, the American Marriage Ministries, the Universal Life Church, etc.) and has a congregation or following. The couple needs to apply for a marriage license with proof of age and identity and perform the ceremony within a specified time period (usually 30 days but sometimes 60). There is a customary period of a day between the application for a license and the allowance to perform the ceremony, but that can usually be waived. The ceremony is finalized with the signing of the marriage certificate by the witnesses and the officiant.

text: The answer omits that the marriage certificate must be filed and kept as a public document.

text: The answer is missing the part about the consummation of the marriage.

text: The article does not mention that the couple needs to express their desire to marry with at least two witnesses present.

text: The answer should mention that the consummation of a marriage is not a legal requirement for a valid marriage.

text: A lot of the information is not relevant

text: "The usual definition of clergy is an individual ordained by a recognized religious body (e.g. the Catholic Church, the American Marriage Ministries, the Universal Life Church, etc.) and has a congregation or following." - this part of the response is irrelevant and should be removed.


text:
TEAM REMY'S FIRST ADVENTURE

_On the trail of Gulch and Salem, Ruby's ragtag group finds danger as well as friendship_

_[Author's note: This story follows_ Team REMY_, which in turn follows_ Ruby's Date Story_.]_

The four of them had arranged to meet outside the cafe. Ruby could have easily walked there from the guesthouse where she was staying but when Yatsuhashi offered to pick her up on his bike she agreed immediately. She was trying to ignore how she felt whenever she was around him – but, damn, it was hard. And after seeing him holding Coco's baby, so gentle and calm, well, that just made everything worse. Of maybe better, it depended on how you looked at it.

She had not forgotten what Coco had said, that he had covertly organised to spend time with her, on the trip to visit Coco and Fox. That was a good sign, a very good sign, she thought. The trouble was that she didn't know what to do now. But at the moment she was delighted to be on the back of the bike, arms around him, head on his shoulder, feeling ... oh my.

They reached the cafe and, rather reluctantly, she jumped off. Edward came up to them. Aside from his backpack he was carrying an armful of books.

"I thought these might come in handy," he said. "I've looked through them a bit and there are several mentions of Almira Gulch."

"Are they from the Beacon Academy library?" said Ruby.

"No, they're ... sort of from a private collection."

"Do I want to know whose collection?"

"Probably not."

Ruby sighed. "Well, I guess someone with a talent for procurement is a team asset," she said.

Melanie arrived. Except that her car wasn't a car. It was more like some sort of modified military vehicle, armoured and with a hatch in the roof.

"What the hell is this?" said Edward.

"It sort of hums, so I call it Hummer," said Melanie.

"Should call it Clanker," muttered Yatsuhashi. He lifted the bike onto a rack at the back of the vehicle.

They loaded their supplies and climbed in. Yatsuhashi was too big to fit in the front so he sat in the back, with Ruby.

"Where to?" said Melanie.

"The castle where Gulch took Coco," said Ruby. "We searched it before but it was pretty quick. With more time, we might find some clues as to where she has gone. With her pet."

Before long, they were zooming through the countryside. If Melanie had ever heard of safe driving she gave little sign of it. Rather than watch the series of near-misses Ruby looked through the books Edward had brought. Yes, there were numerous mentions of Gulch, and stories of the conflict between her and Salem. Salem was, it appeared, the more powerful of the two but Gulch was tough, cunning, and patient. And now she had her enemy on a leash, with the aim of somehow joining her power to her own.

_No way that can be good_, thought Ruby.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even Melanie accepted that driving through the wilderness at night was a poor idea, so they stopped to make camp. Edward, using only a few basic ingredients and a campfire, produced a large and wonderful meal.

"This is great," said Ruby.

"It's ... alright, I guess," said Melanie.

"I will have yours, then," said Yatsuhashi, reaching for her plate.

She slapped his hand away. "I didn't say I wouldn't eat it," she said. "Girl's got to have something to sustain her, after all."

"Are you always such a bitch?" said Edward to Melanie.

"Consistently."

"How did you make something so good?" said Ruby to Edward. "Magic?"

"Practice," he said.

Melanie grimaced. "You Hunters and your magic stuff," she said. "You guys think you're so great with all your fancy weapons and your Semblances and things. The rest of us have to work for a living, you know. Pay the bills, get through the day, and avoid the crossfire from you idiots."

Ruby stared at her. "Wh ... what?" she said. "I ... always thought that people liked the Hunters. We fight against evil, after all."

Melanie shrugged. "More likely, you attract it," she said. "Maybe you just like the glamour and the funny clothes and the applause you get from each other. Well, I didn't see any of you guys putting it on the line when Mil and I got cornered in an alley by a bunch of Salem's wolf things, in Vale that night."

"We ... were busy," said Ruby, knowing that it sounded ... lame. She looked at Yatsuhashi. "Is ... is she right?" she said. "Do ordinary people not like us?"

He grunted. "Some do, some don't," he said. "But being a Hunter is not a choice. It is a destiny, whether you want it or not."

"Humph," said Melanie. "Then I guess it must have been my destiny to be a bouncer, and after that a waitress."

"Could have been worse," put in Edward. "Try life in a kitchen."

"Speaking of weapons," said Ruby, "what do you have, Melanie?"

"Armoured boots with extendable blades," she said. "Made them myself. Here, take a look." She took one off and handed it to Ruby, who examined it.

"Wow," said Ruby, handing the boot back. "That is really great. Meeting a new weapon is better than meeting a new person. But Hunters aren't just their weapons. Glynda, for example, has a riding crop, but it isn't really a weapon. It just helps her to focus and direct the power she has inside her."

"Oh," said Edward. "So that's what that thing is."

"Magic shmagic," said Melanie. "Aside from the boots, I've also got this." She held up a massive pump-action shotgun, military in style. "I used to have a boyfriend in the Atlas army," she said. "That's how I got the car, too. And this, for close encounters." She took a hatchet from a holster at her waist. "What have you got?"

Ruby took out Crescent Rose and extended it into its full, remarkable length.

"Whoa," said Melanie. "That's ... interesting." Ruby retracted the weapon into its carry-case.

"You?" said Yatsuhashi to Edward.

"This," said Edward. He held up his cast-iron frypan, twirled it. The others sighed.

"Well, I guess now we sleep," said Melanie. "I'm taking the front seat of the car. I don't care what you guys do."

"I'll take the back seat," said Edward.

"I have a sleeping bag," said Yatsuhashi. "But only one."

"We ... can share again," said Ruby. "If ... you don't mind."

"I do not," said Yatsuhashi.

So they all settled themselves down, with Yatsuhashi and Ruby squeezed together.

Ruby gulped. "We ... we might be more comfortable," she said, "if you put your arm around me."

He grunted. Then he put his arm around her. "Like that?" he said.

"Oh yeah," she said. "Just like that. Yatsu, what you said before, about destiny. Did you want to become a Hunter?"

"I did not," he said. "What I wanted to do, when I was young, was work on my father's farm, with my brothers and sisters. Grow things. Eventually meet someone and start a family of my own, perhaps. But then it became clear that I had the Aura. So I was sent to train."

"Oh," said Ruby. "I ... I'm sorry. I didn't know that ... it had been like that for you."

"I am not sorry," he said. "For the path has led me here. To you. I would not wish to be anywhere else."

She smiled her secret smile. "Me too," she said. She snuggled against his massive body and fell asleep, dreaming pleasant dreams.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The castle seemed to be deserted. They inspected the chamber that Coco had shot to pieces and eventually located the hidden catch that opened the door through which Gulch had escaped. It led to a flight of stone steps that took them into a courtyard. On the other side of the courtyard was a small stone building, like a crypt.

"If I was an evil witch, that would appeal to me," said Melanie.

But then they heard a noise – like scraping hooves. Coming into the courtyard.

"Oh no," muttered Ruby. "I certainly hope that that isn't – "

It was. It shook itself, as if waking from a slumber. It stopped in front of the crypt.

"What the hell is that?" said Edward.

"Nucklelavee," said Yatsuhashi, drawing his sword. "Very dangerous, very tough. Even by Grimm standards."

"Watch out for its arms, they stretch and have claws," said Ruby, as she extended her scythe. "And it can spin around very quickly."

"Right, stretchy arms, claws, spin, got it," said Edward, taking out his frypan.

"It will probably attack by using its arms like lances," said Ruby. "When it does, Edward and I go right, Yatsu and Melanie go left. We close in from both sides at once. Clear?" She glanced at Melanie. "Clear?" she repeated.

But Melanie was merely staring at the Nucklelavee. "I – I – I – I couldn't ... " she stammered.

And then the Nucklelavee's arms shot out.

"Move!" shouted Ruby. She leaped, as did Yatsuhashi. But Melanie remained frozen. A claw was zooming towards her.

There was a t_hunk_! The claw whacked into Edward's frypan, and bounced off. He had jumped in the way with it.

The other arm speared towards him. He wielded the frypan again, blocking it.

Ruby and Yatsuhashi were running, charging, on either side, taking advantage of the Grimm's distraction.

Once more, the Nucklelavee tried to hit Melanie. And again Edward blocked it. He raised his arm – and a blast of energy shot from his elbow. It whacked into the Nucklelavee, and through it. The Grimm screamed in pain. But then the wound healed. It retracted its arms and turned to face Yatsuhashi.

One arm whipped towards him. He swung his sword, slicing into the arm. But the wound fused immediately, and the clawed hand punched out. Yatsuhashi went down, sliding backwards along the ground.

Ruby was in the air, swinging Crescent Rose. But the Nucklelavee was moving, out of the path of the blade. Its arm caught her, and flung her. She landed with a painful thump next to Yatsuhashi.

"This is going well, I think," she said, as they struggled to their feet. "In the sense that we are not dead yet."

Yatsuhashi grunted. "Do you know how we kill it?" he said.

"The last one, we pinned its arms and cut its head off," she said. "Not exactly easy, though. Hmm, it seems to be staying in front of the crypt. As if it's protecting it. Not letting us in."

"Instructions from Gulch, perhaps."

"And all the more reason for us to take a look."

The Nucklelavee's arms came swinging towards them, one on each side. Ruby and Yatsuhashi parried, slicing into the black flesh – but with little lasting effect. The Nucklelavee fell back a few steps, as if it was wary of their weapons.

"I have an idea," she said. She told him what she had in mind.

"That is very dangerous," said Yatsuhashi.

"I am open to other suggestions."

Yatsuhashi grunted.

Ruby called to Edward: "When I signal, give it one of your energy shots."

"The last one wasn't effective," he called back. "But I will." He was still standing in front of Melanie, frypan up.

Yatsuhashi started to run, as if he was going to attack the horse-head of the Nucklelavee. At the same moment, Ruby began to run up the wall, pivoting on the scythe, aiming to get behind and above the creature.

The Nucklelavee swung an arm towards each of them.

Yatsuhashi threw his sword, just as Ruby threw the scythe. But the Nucklelavee flipped backwards, avoiding both.

"Now!" shouted Ruby.

Edward fired, the energy bolt hitting the Grimm in the face. For a moment, it was distracted.

And then Ruby caught Yatsuhashi's sword. In mid-air, she swivelled and slashed out. She landed on the ground, crouched.

For a long moment, there was only silence. And then the head of the Nucklelavee slowly toppled from its body. The Grimm began to evaporate into ashes.

Yatsuhashi helped Ruby up. She handed him his sword, and he picked up Crescent Rose and handed it to her. "Good," he said. "Very good."

She smiled. They went over to Edward and Melanie. "Nice shot at the right time," said Ruby to Edward.

"Elbow," said Yatsuhashi. For a moment, it almost seemed that he might laugh ... but he didn't.

Ruby turned to Melanie. She was white, and shaking. "I ... I ... " she said.

"It's alright," said Ruby. "Nucklelavees are pretty scary."

"You don't understand!" cried Melanie. "I couldn't save her! I fought and I fought and I couldn't save her! We fought as hard as we could and it wasn't enough! It just wasn't enough! And now I've lost her! She's dead!"

Ruby took her in her arms. "I know," she said softly. "I know."

Melanie wept. And wept. There was nothing the others could do except let her cry.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The crypt was like a workshop for dark magic, with books and talismans lying about in disarray. Gulch had obviously left quickly.

And there was a map. They studied it.

"I would say that this is Gulch's usual base," said Ruby, pointing to a castle marked with a large insignia. "In Winkie County."

"And where is Winkie County?" said Melanie.

"It's mentioned in one of Edward's books," said Ruby. "On the other side of the Borderlands, and then some. Long way, dangerous territory."

"You think that Salem would be there?"

"Most likely."

"Then let's go."

"Wait," said Yatsuhashi. "Our mission was to find out where Gulch and Salem are. With this material, we have done that."

"So you think that we should report back to Glynda, receive a pat on the back, and then go home?" said Edward.

"Not what I said," said Yatsuhashi.

"As far as I'm concerned, Salem has to pay for ... Militia," said Melanie.

"I have a debt to collect as well," said Yatsuhashi.

"Me too," said Ruby. "And I would like to have a serious talk with Gulch about threatening babies."

"So ... I'm the only one not on a revenge binge, eh?" said Edward.

"You don't have to come any further," said Ruby. "You've done your part, and done it well."

"Not what I said," said Edward. "Anyway, you might need a cook."

Ruby was collecting maps and books to add to their stock. "Yes," she said. "No doubt we will."

END

question: Explain what the group was in the search for.

text: The group was not searching in a deserted island, they were searching in a castle.

answer: The group of hunters were in search of Gulch and Salem in a deserted island where they had taken Coco. They were armed with weapons in case they encountered the unexpected. The castle was deserted but eventually found a door that led to a courtyard where Gulch had escaped from. They however encountered a creature, Nucklelavee, whom came swinging at the group before it was toppled.

answer: The group of hunters were in search of Gulch and Salem in a castle where they had taken Coco. They were armed with weapons in case they encountered the unexpected. The castle was deserted but eventually found a door that led to a courtyard where Gulch had escaped from. They however encountered a creature, Nucklelavee, whom came swinging at the group before it was toppled.

text: The answer is a summary of the story, not just the search for Gulch and Salem.

text: The group is looking for clues about where Gulch and Salem are.

text: The answer is a summary of the story and not the answer to the question.

text: The answer is not clear on the fact that the group is looking for clues about where Gulch and Salem are. The model should consider rewriting this section.

text: The last two lines are irrelevant.

text: "Salem." - add a period

text: The group is looking for clues about where Gulch and Salem are so they can find Coco.

text: The second sentence is unnecessary and could be omitted.

text: The third sentence is irrelevant and should be omitted.

text: The final sentence is irrelevant and should be omitted.

answer: Milita's mother.

text: They are looking for Gulch and Salem

answer: The group of hunters were in search of Gulch and Salem in a castle where they had taken Coco. They were armed with weapons in case they encountered the unexpected. The castle was deserted but eventually found a door that led to a courtyard where Gulch had escaped from. They however encountered a creature, Nucklelavee, whom came swinging at the group before it was toppled.

answer: Milita's mother.

text: The group is looking for clues as to where Gulch has gone.

text: This is inaccurate. The group is looking for clues as to where Gulch has taken Coco.

text: This is inaccurate. They are looking for clues as to where Gulch took Coco.

text: The group was searching for clues about where Gulch has taken Coco and her pet.

text: The answer is incorrect. They were trying to find a clue to where Gulch took Coco.

text: The team is looking for evidence of where Gulch took Alison.

answer: The group of hunters were in search of Gulch and Salem in a deserted island where they had taken Coco. They were armed with weapons in case they encountered the unexpected. The castle was deserted but eventually found a door that led to a courtyard where Gulch had escaped from. They however encountered a creature, Nucklelavee, whom came swinging at the group before it was toppled.

text: The group was not looking for Salem and Gulch in a deserted island.

text: The castle was not deserted.

text: "The castle was deserted but eventually found a door that led to a courtyard where Gulch had escaped from. They however encountered a creature, Nucklelavee, whom came swinging at the group before it was toppled." - this is irrelevant and should be deleted.

text: The answer is made up. It should be rewritten.

text: The castle was not deserted. The group encountered the Nucklelavee in the courtyard.

text: This response is not accurate and needs to be re-written.

text:
The group wasn't looking for things on the deserted island. Rather they were looking for clues to find something.
The group wasn't on an island.
The group looked around the castle
The castle already had a Nucklelavee there, I think.


text:
_HOPLOSTERNUM LITTORALE_ is a species of catfish (order Siluriformes) belonging to the Callichthyinae subfamily of the family Callichthyidae. It is known as TAMUATÁ in Brazil, ATIPA in French Guiana, HASSAR in Guyana, KWI KWI (or KWIE KWIE 1) in Suriname, CASCADU(RA) in Trinidad and Tobago, and BUSCO or CURRITO in Venezuela.[1]

[_Hoplosternum littorale_]

Description

_H. littorale_ is armor-plated and dorso-ventrally compressed.[2] The fish will grow in length up to 24.0 centimetres (9.4 in) TL.[3]

Males grow to a larger average and maximum size than females and, during the reproductive season, develop fat deposits in the pectoral fin and an elongated recurved pectoral spine that often assumes a reddish colour. Males with recurved pectoral spines are not found outside of the reproductive period.[4][5]

Distribution

_H. littorale_ has the widest distribution of any callichthyid. It is present in all of South America east of the Andes and north of Buenos Aires, including the Orinoco, Trinidad, coastal rivers of the Guianas, Amazon River drainage, Paraguay, lower Paraná River, and coastal systems in southern Brazil.[6] It ranges from Venezuela and Guyanas to Argentina.[7]

One single lot is known from the upper Paraná River and the São Francisco River drainage; it has been suggested that these occurrences may represent introduced populations.[8] This species has also been introduced into the Indian River Lagoon of Florida.[9][10]

Ecology

[_Hoplosternum littorale_] Most activity of non-breeding _H. littorale_ such as feeding and locomotor activity are mainly nocturnal.[11] It has a maximum reported age of 4 years.[12] The diet of _H. littorale_ consists mainly of benthic invertebrates and detritus.[13]

_H. littorale_ natively inhabits tropical standing waters or swamps.[14][15] It is not found in rainforest creeks and clearwater rivers draining Precambrian Guyana and Brazilian Shields, where water is extremely poor in dissolved minerals. This species is restricted to swamps of (sub)tropical South America and the floodplains of Amazonian whitewater rivers originating in the Andes. Such environments are characterized by low levels of dissolved oxygen and markedly seasonal conditions caused primarily by fluctuations in rainfall.[16]

_H. littorale_ can breathe both with gills and through its intestines. However, intestinal respiration is not exhibited upon hatching, and the development of the respiratory intestine occurs throughout the juvenile period (up to 32 days old). Newly hatched larvae do not have the ability to breathe air through their intestines; however, it is possible that they absorb oxygen through their skin at this point, before the armor plates have developed. Soon after, between about 12–23 days of age, young have the capacity to breathe air, but their respiratory intestine has not finished developing. The respiratory intestine is well-developed between days 24 and 32.[17]

_H. littorale_ has two types of hemoglobin, anodic and cathodic; anodic hemoglobin has a relatively low oxygen affinity and has marked Bohr effects, while cathodic hemoglobin lack significant pH effects. In _H. littorale_, cathodic hemoglobin has a pronounced reversed Bohr effect in which oxygen affinity increases with decreased pH. Cathodic hemoglobin has the purpose of safeguarding oxygen transport to tissues under hypoxic and acidotic conditions.[18]

_H. littorale_ diet varies by age. Immature fish feed primarily on small aquatic crustaceans, especially Cladocera, Ostracoda, Copepoda, and Eubranchipoda. Chironomid larvae are important items in the diets of both juveniles and adults. The adult diet is dominated by mixed detritus, terrestrial insects, microcrustaceans, and aquatic beetles during the dry season, and mixed detritus and chironomid larvae during the wet season.[19]

Reproduction

The first reproduction occurs after one year.[20] Spawning is triggered by the first rains and occurs in the warm and rainy season.[21][22][23] As a callichthyine, it builds a bubble nest; among callichthyines, this species is reported to have the most complex nest structure.[24] This dome-shaped nest is rich with oxygen; in the hypoxic water conditions of tropical swamps, the main function of the bubble nest appears to be to provide oxygen to the developing eggs by lifting the eggs above the water surface while protecting them from desiccation. It may also serve to protect the brood against predators, regulate temperature, identify the center of the male's territory, and to synchronize reproductive activities.[25] Nest-building activities usually lasted from 1,000 to 1,500 hours, but only on clear and warm days, particularly during the hottest hours.[26] These activities are also reported to occur at night.[27] Most nests are built in newly flooded swamps, especially in open water in the peripheral area of the swamp. A minimum distance of 10 metres between nests is observed. The nest is the centre of a territory that is vigorously defended by the male, using its enlarged pectoral spines. The diameter and height of the nest average 30 and 6 cm (12 and 2.36 in), respectively.[28]

The beginning of nest building is preceded by a courtship ritual. This pair formation consists of the male and female swimming parallel to each other, the male and female facing each other and contacting their barbels, the male stimulating the flanks of the female, the swimming to the surface by the male and female and production of the first bubbles at the nest site, and adding further bubbles to the nest under construction.[29] The male produces most of the foam. First, the male and female come to the surface and swim belly-up in small circles. The film of the air-water interface is swallowed and pumped out through the gills, where it gains mucus. Movement of the pelvic fins stirs the water and mucus, captures air bubbles, and breaks these air bubbles into a foam.[30] The female may add some bubbles to the nest under construction.[31] Pelvic fin movement differs between sexes; males move their pelvic fins in a side-to-side fashion, while females open and close their pelvic fins.[32] The male often dives to the bottom to retrieve plant debris; filamentous nest materials are preferred, which are knitted together in the nest by the male. The male creates an upward water current with its tail fin that lift plant materials up. Then, the male uses its developed pectoral fin spines to cary the plant materials to the nest. The male uses its mouth and pectoral fins to incorporate the plant material into the foam mass of the nest.[33][34] Females neither have developed pectoral fin spines nor do they help in transporting plant debris.[35] The end result is a dome-shaped nest made up of loosely interwoven plant material on top of tightly interwoven plant material, held up to the surface with a layer of foam; the eggs will be laid on top of this foam from below.[36]

Spawning occurs during the daytime.[37] There is indication that the female drinks the sperm and that fertilization takes place after the sperm has passed through her digestive tract. The male and female form the “T-position”, where the female places its mouth over the male's genital opening and collects the sperm in the mouth. The female rests at the bottom for 30–60 seconds, and then swims to the nest, turns upside down, and lays the eggs in the nest.[38] _H. littorale_ is a multiple spawner. Investing in reproduction is high in females since they can spawn up to 14 times during a 7-month breeding season and each spawn consists of 6,000–9,000 eggs. On average, two to four females spawn simultaneously, resulting in an average number of 20,000 eggs per nest.[39] The adhesive eggs are located in the centre of the nest under the plant debris above the surface of the water, and not in contact with the oxygen-depleted swamp water.[40] The male guards the nest during incubation; incubation of the eggs takes two to three days depending on the temperature in the nest. The male also regularly supplies foam to the nest. Guarding and maintenance of the nest occurs day and night.[41] Once spawning has been completed, the male attacks females that have deposited their eggs in the nest. Despite intense predation pressure on eggs and larvae, the male's guarding behavior extends for only one or two days after hatching.[42] The male attacks with its large pectoral spines erect; the attack consists of rapid propulsion towards its target followed by a sharp lateral turn, which causes the rough outer edge of pectoral spine to drag across the target and cause abrasion.[43]

Relationship to humans

_H. littorale_ is a valuable resource extensively fished in the deltas of the Amazon and Orinoco.[44] In Guyana, French Guiana, Suriname, and Trinidad, this species is an extremely popular food fish.[45]

_H. littorale_ is now commercially cultured in Trinidad, Guyana and Suriname. It fetches a price of US$8/kg and there are local and foreign ethnic markets for the fish.[46]

_H. littorale_ is also an aquarium fish.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

title: Hoplosternum littorale

question: Summarize the physical features of H.littorale.

text: It's important to note that the male fish only develop fat deposits during the reproductive season.

answer: H.littorale is armor-plated and dorso-ventrally compressed. The fish will grow in length up to 24.0 centimeters. Males grow to a larger average and maximum size than females and, during the reproductive season, develop fat deposits in the pectoral fin and an elongated recurved pectoral spine that often assumes a reddish color. Males with recurved pectoral spines are not found outside of the reproductive period.

text: "dorso-ventrally" - add a hyphen

text: The answer should mention that the fish can breathe both with gills and through its intestines.

text: "dorso-ventrally compressed" - add a hyphen

text: The answer could mention the fish's hemoglobin.

text: "dorso-ventrally" - change to "dorsoventrally"

text: The question asks for physical features, so the details about males and females should be omitted.

text: 'is' should be changed to 'are'.

answer: H.littorale, a type of catfish, is armor plated and dorso-ventrally compressed. The fish can grow up to 24 centimeters. Males grow larger than females. They also develop fat deposits in the pectoral fin and an elongated recurved pectoral spine that is usually a reddish color. This only occurs during the reproductive season.

answer: H.littorale is armor-plated and dorso-ventrally compressed. The fish will grow in length up to 24.0 centimeters. Males grow to a larger average and maximum size than females and, during the reproductive season, develop fat deposits in the pectoral fin and an elongated recurved pectoral spine that often assumes a reddish color. Males with recurved pectoral spines are not found outside of the reproductive period.

answer: H.littorale, a type of catfish, is armor plated and dorso-ventrally compressed. The fish can grow up to 24 centimeters. Males grow larger than females. They also develop fat deposits in the pectoral fin and an elongated recurved pectoral spine that is usually a reddish color.

text: The answer should mention the fish's ability to breathe through its gills and intestines.

text: The answer should mention the fish's ability to breathe air.

text: "dorso-ventrally" - add a hyphen

text: The response is missing the physical features of the fish when it comes to reproduction.

text: The response is missing the physical adaptations of the fish that allow it to breathe under hypoxic conditions.

text: "a type of catfish" isn't relevant to the question.

answer: H.littorale, a type of catfish, is armor plated and dorso-ventrally compressed. The fish can grow up to 24 centimeters. Males grow larger than females. They also develop fat deposits in the pectoral fin and an elongated recurved pectoral spine that is usually a reddish color.