Which one is right…to have several sexual partners or only one? The Indians Tupis-Caraibas from the Brazilian hinterland agree on that the tribe chief takes up many wives at the same time, so long as they are all sisters. In certain Asian regions, the situation is somewhat reverse; a group of brothers gets to share the same wife. How is it supposed to explain the existence of kinds of relationship so different from ours? For time being, there used to believe that the family model based on the monogamy marriage, would be the final and superior stage of evolution for the humanity.
Consequently, the polygamy- marriage of a man with several women or a woman with several men- should match the remnants of an inferior type of family, which would have been about thousand of years a go. There used to be called “group marriage” or “sexual promiscuity” to namely such hypothetic pre-historic stage. After some time there was found that the family based on monogamy marriage was no privilege of those civilized-ones. It existed and still exists in most varied regions of the world. Although, with a higher frequency rate than in any other form of familial organization.
To pinpoint it on “primitive” societies seems common-place. It happens to be the case of the Nhambiquara, who are nomadic Indians of the Brazilian hinterland. In their midst, the strings that attach husband, wife and sons being extremely similar to those observed in the so-called “civilized” society.
In face of “well-behaved savages” as such, it turn out a lot harder to keep on talking about survival of the pre-historic family. Thus it was bizarre to concede that our conception of family was neither exclusive invention, nor the only way likely to regulate the rapport between the sexes and procreation. The predominance of monogamist marriage gets explained, above all, by a question of demographic equilibrium. The amount of men and women, in any given human population, tends to be approximately the same, unless exceptional conditions come to alter such proportion.
Yet polygamy may spring out in societies whereupon a restrict number of individuals gets to accumulate power and prestige sufficiently to “monopolize” the women as of the younger and most desirable. It’s significant that, in most “primitive” groups, being the polygamy privilege exclusive of chiefs. It’s interesting the example of the Naires, group which inhabits the Malabar Coast, in India. Bygone years, the war was the man’s primarily activity. It did not let them to constitute family. Thus marriage was a ceremony of symbolic meaning, which did not create any permanent bond between a man and a woman. The only unity for stable parenthood was constituted by a woman, her brothers and her sons.
The family and sexual relations have changed a lot in the world. Currently it’s commonplace finding families constituted by several different manners-with absence of both mother and father, sons being raised by next of kin, etc. Also it’s commonly found diverse sexual options. Some people prefer to have several sexual partners. Others would rather get involved with only one person.
What’s right and what’s wrong? There’s no answer to this question. Those “exquisite” familial and sexual relations come to show us how much of the behavioral diversity and demeanors lies within it. The important is the person feeling good about oneself and practice sex that is healthy.
Consequently, the polygamy- marriage of a man with several women or a woman with several men- should match the remnants of an inferior type of family, which would have been about thousand of years a go. There used to be called “group marriage” or “sexual promiscuity” to namely such hypothetic pre-historic stage. After some time there was found that the family based on monogamy marriage was no privilege of those civilized-ones. It existed and still exists in most varied regions of the world. Although, with a higher frequency rate than in any other form of familial organization.
To pinpoint it on “primitive” societies seems common-place. It happens to be the case of the Nhambiquara, who are nomadic Indians of the Brazilian hinterland. In their midst, the strings that attach husband, wife and sons being extremely similar to those observed in the so-called “civilized” society.
In face of “well-behaved savages” as such, it turn out a lot harder to keep on talking about survival of the pre-historic family. Thus it was bizarre to concede that our conception of family was neither exclusive invention, nor the only way likely to regulate the rapport between the sexes and procreation. The predominance of monogamist marriage gets explained, above all, by a question of demographic equilibrium. The amount of men and women, in any given human population, tends to be approximately the same, unless exceptional conditions come to alter such proportion.
Yet polygamy may spring out in societies whereupon a restrict number of individuals gets to accumulate power and prestige sufficiently to “monopolize” the women as of the younger and most desirable. It’s significant that, in most “primitive” groups, being the polygamy privilege exclusive of chiefs. It’s interesting the example of the Naires, group which inhabits the Malabar Coast, in India. Bygone years, the war was the man’s primarily activity. It did not let them to constitute family. Thus marriage was a ceremony of symbolic meaning, which did not create any permanent bond between a man and a woman. The only unity for stable parenthood was constituted by a woman, her brothers and her sons.
The family and sexual relations have changed a lot in the world. Currently it’s commonplace finding families constituted by several different manners-with absence of both mother and father, sons being raised by next of kin, etc. Also it’s commonly found diverse sexual options. Some people prefer to have several sexual partners. Others would rather get involved with only one person.
What’s right and what’s wrong? There’s no answer to this question. Those “exquisite” familial and sexual relations come to show us how much of the behavioral diversity and demeanors lies within it. The important is the person feeling good about oneself and practice sex that is healthy.
Kisses,
Jesse~
0 comments:
Post a Comment