Gonna need to be a full on poly commune at this rate if prices keep going up.

  • Captain Janeway@lemmy.world
    141·
    6 months ago

    We’re getting closer and closer to wrapping back around and just having community. Just remove the sex aspect and boom you got a community going.

    • Match!!@pawb.socialEnglish
      108·
      6 months ago

      you ever wonder if communities typically did just have a bunch of sex but revisionism happened

      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        90·
        6 months ago

        For most of the existence of human species (according to the scholarly consensus of anthropologists) we existed in bands of adults who would intermingle freely. Adolescent men would raid nearby tribes and kidnap their young women, which is the means by which genes were exchanged between tribes.

        All the monogamy and licensing happened after agriculture and the great leap forward once tribes became big enough that infectious diseases were no longer contained through pure isolation. We see the misogynistic trends rise in late Hellenic periods and then Christianity cranked it up to eleven, so now we imagine even our migrant hunter-gatherer ancestors paired off.

        As a note, during the middle ages, it was super important among aristocracy to assure ladies-in-waiting were virginal before they were wed, and then used purely as heir machines, but the serf class routinely banged like bunnies in springtime. And while frowned upon by the more piety-minded clergy, it was generally ignored because a) Child mortality was something awful and every kid that ever reached majority was to be celebrated, and b) The labor shortage was extreme everywhere. There was always way too much stuff to be done, and so every pair of hands was welcome, even when they were attacked to an idiot, a malformed hunchback, a ne’er-do-well or the bastard progeny of a mixed coupling.

        Curiously, as we see in the birth of Mordred, pre-Christian European traditions included suspending adultery limitations during holidays, which happened at least once a season, sometimes twice. So even in societies where monogamy was the norm, there was a defined space for getting a bit on the side. (Useful when your partner was infertile.)

        So yeah. Right in one.

        • QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world
          12·
          6 months ago

          Adolescent men would raid nearby tribes and kidnap their young women, which is the means by which genes were exchanged between tribes.

          We see the misogynistic trends rise in late Hellenic periods

          hmmm

          • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
            11·
            6 months ago

            Yeah, adolescence is weird, and some of this is guessing based on other primates. Gorillas, for example, evict familiar adolescent females shortly after puberty while welcoming strange adolescent females, which informs how we model the behavior of pre-agriculture migratory human tribes.

            (I should add we don’t presume that it was the same everywhere either, so it’s quite possible that some prehistorical humans had different means of managing their teens than sending the boys off to wage war and letting the girls get kidnapped in kind by raiders. Once we go that far back, we have to rely on archeological data, which is very selective in the tales it tells.)

            So then, there are some powerful goddesses in early Hellenism, for instance, Aphrodite (commonly a goddess of love and beauty), evolved from Astarte (Lover, Healer, Hunter, Warrior) who developed from Ishtar. In fact, when Aphrodite emerged from the sea foam on Kytherian beaches, Phoenician traders were coming to the Kytherian harbors, not only bringing goods and their own goddess, Astarte but also the modern Greek alphabet (before which the locals were using Linear B). So we have a path from Ishtar and this major poly-faceted goddess being reduced to a love goddess, who is then married to Hephaestus (the crippled forge) to put her in her place.

            Also curious to me is Dread Persephone who ruled the dead and the underworld long before Hades appears on scene. (Poseidon was the Olympian in Chief, and we see part of his gig in creating biodiversity, not just all the creatures of the sea, but also those of the land). Zeus and Hades were added late in the game, and the stories we have of Persephone, specifically of the abduction of Persephone from Demeter and the thing with the six pomegranate seeds comes from a single poem. Even then, winter comes not because Persephone is gone, but because Demeter is sad about it, and stops doing her job. So Persephone’s role is to be mom’s co-dependent emotional-support assistant during springtime, and go back to attending the dead.

            So here we have two examples of powerful goddesses that influenced the Hellenic people and culture who are then shoved backstage with the addition of Zeus and Hades.

            There’s a similar event that I remember from Snow Crash by Neil Stephenson regarding Asherah, the consort to Adonai / Elohim / Yahweh. Asherah was always the ambitious one between the two, and the Canaanite temples to her were bigger and more numerous than the ones to Adonai. Eventually an ideological rift developed and the Hebrews raided all the Asheran temples, massacring the acolytes and burning them to the ground. The whole don’t boil a calf in the milk of its mother thing (which informs the separation of meat products and milk products in kosher diet) is a specific reference to an Asheran ritual meal, I think for weddings, but I’m not sure.

            While I can’t speak to whether misogyny is innate, I can say we’ve had periods in which goddesses were accepted alongside gods and in some cases were on top of the pantheon. We don’t talk much about Gaea anymore even though in Hellenism she created everything on earth long before Poseidon was tinkering with horses. I think there’s a division between Dionysian culture and Apollonian culture which parallels the shift from chthonic religion to celestial religion. (Chthonic gods are not to be confused with Cthonian gods, who are 20th century, and definitely celestial).

            I can say that in the middle ages and the domination of Christianity, women were completely unpersoned and regarded as chattel beasts (despite their capacity to think and talk, both of which was discouraged). Even Mary, mother of Jesus was not even given due recognition until the 12th century.

            • Shialac@lemmy.world
              5·
              6 months ago

              Is there a Community on Lemmy about stuff like this?

              I followed a bunch of History/Archeology-Related subreddits to lurk out of interest, but didn’t find anything good here on Lemmy

        • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world
          11·
          6 months ago

          even when they were attacked to an idiot, a malformed hunchback, a ne’er-do-well or the bastard progeny of a mixed coupling.

          The serfs probably become more fit than the nobility over time because they had far more evolutionary pressure and diversity. The bloodline rules limited the nobility more than anything. One capable person doesn’t change much genetically in the grand scheme of things. Nepotism and inequality are anti-meritocratic.

          • Match!!@pawb.socialEnglish
            4·
            6 months ago

            The Roman historian Livy writing around 0 AD attests to “the rape of the Sabine Women”, wherein the founders of Rome kidnapped and raped women from surrounding villages, which may just be mythological but is likely a factor in this concept being so prevalent.

            As a constrast, though, Madagascar was settled by a mix of Bantu and Indonesian (Austronesian) people, and genetic analysis suggests a founding group of at least 30 women from Indonesia, who almost certainly weren’t stolen from across the Indian Ocean.

        • anonymous111@lemmy.world
          6·
          6 months ago

          This is a great write up.

          Do you have any books/sources to recommend on this subject?

          I’ve always been interested in klans persisting in the Middle East but dying out in Europe due (I’m told) to the Catholic church.

          Any interesting sources would be greatly appreciated!

      • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
        4·
        6 months ago

        but revisionism happened

        The spotless translation of countless scrolls, tablets, and old books make this clear. They were all just roommates. Nothing to see here.

    • JDubbleu@programming.dev
      9·
      6 months ago

      This is incredibly common in SF. Many people live in co-ops and it’s created an entire subculture where they coordinate large parties and events both within the co-op and with other co-ops. It’s gone beyond necessity and become preferred by some because they enjoy living with lots of others. Not my thing, but many friends live in co-ops and love it.

  • blindbunny@lemmy.mlEnglish
    61·
    6 months ago

    All three in my triad are ADHD no one else cares enough to try to understand us but we have eachother.

  • Korkki@lemmy.world
    60·
    6 months ago

    Re-establishment of clans and tribes will soon become an economic necessity for the poor. Unions would of course be better, but I’m not holding my breath.

    • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
      2·
      6 months ago

      Read Neal Stephenson’s “The Diamond Age.”

      Book has a lot of idea, but one of them ios that the old nations have broken down and people become part of clans, some small and some nation sized.

    • jabathekek@sopuli.xyz
      51·
      6 months ago

      Or just a co-op house so we don’t feel obligated to copulate with each other, which we could do any ways in a co-op but only if we actually want to.

      • Ranger@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        7·
        6 months ago

        I think there’s this common misconception that poly means everyone is bangging everyone & my experience is the the intimate connections tend to be radial & not closed loops. A sorts of ‘tribe’ structure.

          • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
            5·
            6 months ago

            It’s worse than that. When you look at the status quo through the lens of capitalism, we’re all very strongly aligned with maximum extraction of personal wealth. Everyone is at peak personal inefficiency by everyone having/owning one of everything, as we constantly bleed income to other parties. In other words: we’d all be richer if we shared more stuff and were less territorial about things that don’t matter.

            TL;DR: everything we should be doing is stuff we learned in the sandbox as kids.

  • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
    37·
    6 months ago

    Multiple wives might get you greater revenue but they have higher expenses.

    Men, if you want more net savings, don’t get multiple wives. Just get one husband. Problem solved. The gays figured out how to game the wage gap long ago. Lesbians still have trouble though.

    • Crow@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      29·
      6 months ago

      I don’t know exactly who you’re talking about, so I can’t really make my own opinion on them, but the way you describe it feels weird. Polyandrous visibility is important, and your comment feels like “it’s fine if they do it in their own homes, but I don’t want to see it in public”

      • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
        17·
        6 months ago

        Yeah I don’t know why they have beef with polyamory and why watch it then. I guess probably some ingrained catholicism issues

        I think I am gonna block them and nothing of value will be lost

        • Hamartia@lemmy.world
          3·
          6 months ago

          There are some Catholics that are reactionary morons but the majority are not. Describing religions by the worst people in them doesn’t really come across as tolerant. Which ironically is what you’re accusing them of.

          • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
            9·
            6 months ago

            The whole catholic doctrine is fundamentally flawed and incompatible with progressive world. I am not very tolerant of it at all. I can’t tolerate bullshit

            This isn’t some high horse I am trying to ride but a pragmatic approach vs something that is fundamentally against me.

            I don’t pretend I have the keys to the only true and ultimate best way of life but I am simply pragmatic in my war against that which hates me.

            If I was POC I would fundamentally hate Klu Klux Klan out of innate will to survive. This is very similar. I don’t get to pick sides or have a luxury of tolerance here.

            Similarly with so called right wing nationalism. I don’t have any choice other than to keep battling against them on sea, land and air. Even literally so if needed. My loyalty to my kin is unwavering and I would be willing to die for them if it was necessary. Thankfully it isn’t. However I am ready. Believe me.

            The current struggle however requires different action. Drastically lowering influence of Catholic Church is very important objective we must secure. As the influence of it wanes, so our freedom increases. One day we will see the world we fight for, where no one has to fear to be themselves.

            Luckily, it is not very hard to expose various CC pedophilic affairs which severely undermines public support for this institution. It has decreased here to 60% from 80% in 3 years and the churches are rapidly emptying thanks to the brave and brilliant journalists.

            • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
              3·
              6 months ago

              There are also those that view me as some political ideology, a choice so to say. However this couldn’t be further from the truth. My identity is the same as race or the colour of hair I was born with. To deem it a choice is fundamentally a hostile action to my very existence which will of course be met with appropriate reaction as needed out of the necessity for survival.

              Religion is a choice, even politics (though not always as you can see). Who you are isn’t a choice it is simply a fundamental right that needs to be won in a war if needed the same way ethnic groups fight for the rights to exist in peace.

            • Hamartia@lemmy.world
              2·
              6 months ago

              It’s perfectly legitimate to have issues with any organised religion but damning everyone brought up in their traditions is myopic.

              I was brought up a catholic in Northern Ireland during the troubles. Similar prejudice was routinely trotted out to justify treating us as second class citizens. So surprise, surprise even now as an atheist, I find it a bit triggering, as anyone mght imagine, to hear someone singling out my persecuted community in such a toxic mischaracterisation. I didn’t ask to be catholic but I was brought up in a community of caring and open minded people. Sure there were arseholes but guess what every community has them.

              • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
                2·
                6 months ago

                I know the scripture and the official interpretation and that in itself is enough. I am not damning, you misunderstood me. I am not proclaiming that catholics are worse. I just find it aligning with my best interests to pursue downfall of catholicism so to say. It is rather calculated and well thought position than some kind of fit of anger or even hate. It is what benefits me.

                If this interpretation ever changes then I will reassess the situation. For now it is beneficial for me to hold this position considering the deeply ingrained rules of that religion being incompatible with me.

                There is a bigger enemy however - Islam. I’d be even willing to temporarily join the catholics against them to stop the wave of Islam from spreading to Europe which would be disastrous for me.

                Frankly if the Catholic Church changed a little and modernised their conservative interpretations they would be an extremely valuable organisation to me to help me ensure my continued well being and survival.

                It could indeed happen in the near future considering the tendencies. To ensure their own survival they will probably have to remodel some of their core philosophies. However the current pope is clearly clueless and unfit for this considering the awkward and dumb attempt at staying neutral during Russian invasion. It was a terrible move. A mistake that can cost everything this organisation really.

          • Crow@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            4·
            6 months ago

            Just because someone was annoying about it doesn’t mean it’s okay to be shitty towards others of that group

    • ElderWendigo@sh.itjust.works
      2·
      6 months ago

      This sounds remarkably similar to the attitude of that homophobic uncle crying about the gays shoving their lifestyle in his face by just existing. Maybe reevaluate your hang-ups.