Alternatives to traditional marriage - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

kerry · #1 03-04-2010, 11:57 PM

Been reading about the hetero marriage/gay marriage issue recently. Got me thinking in general about viable options to traditional hetero marriage. Dug up this study I had read about a few years ago and am curious about people's opinions.

http://www.second-congress-matriarchal-studies.com/yan.html

Here's a rough summary: System is matriarchal. 'Family' unit during the day consists of older woman, (grandmother), her children and their children. In other words, the child raising unit consists of siblings and the female siblings' children. At night, the brothers leave and go to sleep in the bedrooms of their sex partners who are females in another family unit. Next morning, they return to spend the day with their sisters to play the male role in raising their sister's children.
It's very different than the family unit most posters here must be familiar with but it keeps a genetic connection between the male child raiser and the child being raised, without the problems associated with the system we are familiar with. Such as, males wanting to control their sexual partner's sexual activity so they can be sure the child they are raising is really his genetic child. In other words, the brother doesn't care whose f**king his sister because he'll have a genetic connection to the child thru his own mother no matter who it is.
I think it's a very creative, ingenious, and viable system that could accommodate homosexuality much easier than our system because gay or straight, would make no difference to the daytime family raising unit and would only come into play when a person left for the evening to spend the night with their sex partner.
Not sure how effective it would be in our highly mobile society where siblings are often in different cities.

aklim · #2 03-05-2010, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

In other words, the brother doesn't care whose f**king his sister because he'll have a genetic connection to the child thru his own mother no matter who it is.

Not sure how effective it would be in our highly mobile society where siblings are often in different cities.

Doesn't he already have? Whoever boinks my sister, I have a genetic connection already to the offspring thru my mom.

I suppose, assuming I cared for my sister, I'd still be concerned even if I were in that group. Even if I don't care about my sister, that offspring also affects me in the sense that I will be with my family and the sister will be there with the offspring.

That is the problem. I am half a world, literally away from my parents. Of course if all of us lived in the same small town, it might have a slight chance of working.

kerry · #3 03-05-2010, 02:04 PM

I don't think there's any doubt about it working under the conditions it was developed. Looks like it has been very successful.
I agree that it doesn't look that viable in today's world. But it is a remarkable system that created effective child raising units without focusing on fathers.

aklim · #4 03-05-2010, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

I don't think there's any doubt about it working under the conditions it was developed. Looks like it has been very successful.
I agree that it doesn't look that viable in today's world. But it is a remarkable system that created effective child raising units without focusing on fathers.

Seeing as how the circumstances are totally different, I don't think it has any bearing on our world as we have it today. To make it work would require such an overhaul of our current system and, most importantly, the mentality of the people that it is probably easier to go thru with what we have than to change it.

As to homosexuality, bisexuality, open marriage, swinging, etc, etc, the only problem we have is probably traced back to religion. None of those lifestyles or sexual preferences have any positive things with regard to the religion growing. None of them really help the religion grow from the standpoint that it is less likely that you will have offspring if you are in a relationship that isn't monogamous. In the case you mentioned, there is a loss of father children interaction and that might not help the kids be shoved into a religion. Probably makes the religion against anything but a stable family which means they can grow, have more money, power, etc, etc.

kerry · #5 03-05-2010, 03:51 PM

I think to focus on 'religion' in analyzing these kinds of situations is not that helpful because what most people think of as religion is a version of Christianity. Christianity is predominantly a patriarchal family system like a lot of other religions. Religion doesn't have to be patriarchal but it has been connected up with patriarchy in the West for many centuries, just like Islam.
Whatever 'religion' developed alongside this matriarchal non-father based family system would be quite different from what we know as religion today. The problems that you see in regards to homosexuality, bisexuality, open marriage etc and trace back to religion, I would trace back to patriarchy and it's basic evolutionary problem of the males being sure that their female sexual partners are not impregnated by another males resulting in the father raising a non-genetic offspring.
In this instance, the brothers don't care who f**ks their sister because the offspring is guaranteed to have a genetic connection to the brother.
Despite our inability to reproduce these kinds of families in our world in short order, its an important alternative because there are a lot of people in this world, some of whom have the ear of important Supreme Court justices, who think that the patriarchal family is the only viable child raising unit in a culture.

aklim · #6 03-05-2010, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

In this instance, the brothers don't care who f**ks their sister because the offspring is guaranteed to have a genetic connection to the brother.

Despite our inability to reproduce these kinds of families in our world in short order, its an important alternative because there are a lot of people in this world, some of whom have the ear of important Supreme Court justices, who think that the patriarchal family is the only viable child raising unit in a culture.

How is that different from now? I know you said that a couple of times but I don't quite understand it. Even if I boink your sister in our current situation, don't you have genetic relation to the child being that it is your sister's child and she has genetic relationship to you?

Absolutely. Way too many people are ingrained with this idea that they have been brought up with. You must have heard people wear it as a badge when they say "I was brought up ......". It tells me one simple thing. You have no brain to think.

kerry · #7 03-05-2010, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

How is that different from now? I know you said that a couple of times but I don't quite understand it. Even if I boink your sister in our current situation, don't you have genetic relation to the child being that it is your sister's child and she has genetic relationship to you?

.

Correct. But in the Mosuo system, guys don't care about the children their sex partner's have, only the children their sister's have since it is their sister's children they are socially responsible for. Their sex partner's children are the responsibility of her brothers. Hence all the focus in patriarchal systems on sexual control of women to assure paternity by a specific man is unnecessary. In other words, paternity and fatherhood seem to be absent from the Mosuo system. Guys are only uncles, not fathers.