Hey people if you have based takes for me to read that’s the moment I wanna read your based takes (I love lemmygrad thank you for being based)
Hey people if you have based takes for me to read that’s the moment I wanna read your based takes (I love lemmygrad thank you for being based)
It’s interesting how a lot of leftist groups I was a part of always seem to end up hating monogamy lol. I myself don’t hate it or anything, I am perfectly happy with one partner, so just an observation I made in my years of leftism.
Also the whole natural thing is always weird to me. Chimps climb trees and throw shit at each other from time to time but you don’t see me doing that. Human society is much more complex than the ones of our relatives.
Not an attack on your comment btw, just what I was thinking
All these leftists be like we should model our sexual behavior on monke—but, why not dream big? We could liberate women from childbirth by using technology to grow children in giant green glowing glass tubes then raise them collectively and society could tend towards a post-sexual fraternal bonhomie à la termites, a clearly superior model for society.
I’m not sure whether I’m joking or not. I probably should be kept far away from any positions of power or influence. 😬
Yes, we should absolutely do that
I probably should have use some more examples from the book, but pretty much all human societies before the institution of class society were not monagamous. The book makes the case convincingly that we should see their sexual behavior as more enlightened than the post-feudal modes, just as we view primitive communism as a more enlightened precursor to post-class society, where no one has ownership over the sexuality of someone else. Communal life incentivizes the non-ownership of another’s romantic and sexual life, just as feudalism and the nuclear family incentivizes ownership of the other person.
Monogamy was forced onto society by the feudal lords, who required strict female sexual subjugation in order to secure the property in the male lines. In contrast, tribal societies encouraged promiscuity and developed myths and religious beliefs to obfuscate male parentage and make sure every child was seen as the children of the entire tribe.
Appeals to nature are an awful argument when talking about human society, especially regarding sex. Look at how many animals commit rape as one of their primary ways of reproducing.
I agree with Parenti, that humans do have a nature, its just more varied, malleable, and adaptable, but it still has trends and limits, we still exhibit automatic responses to certain stimulus, and we have statistical predictability in a lot of areas.
The “there is no such thing as human nature” line seems like the anarchist rejection of terms, just because capitalists define their preferred system as “natural”. If you look at most of human history tho, we lived in primitive communist, non-monagamous and non-patriarchal societies, and even in the capitalist and feudal age people still reject private ownership in many areas of their lives.