this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2024
584 points (95.9% liked)
A Comm for Historymemes
1431 readers
484 users here now
A place to share history memes!
Rules:
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.
-
No fascism, atrocity denial, etc.
-
Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.
-
Follow all Lemmy.world rules.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I hope this happens to all Abrahamic religions. Scratch that, I hope it happens to all organized religion. It had its place in the development of human society, but we are past the point of needing angry sky-man to scare us into being nice to each other. It's possible to teach kids to have a moral compass without fear of divine retribution.
plus, how good is someone, really, if the only reason they're behaving is out of fear of punishment or hope for reward?
Good enough for civilized society.
sure, until they aren't
yes, non-religious people are bad too, but if religion is supposed to "make people good," and has such high rate of failure, then what is it for?
SPOILER ALERT:
Same as any laws, the main goal is control. Whether for good, profit or anything else, it depends on who's in control and their motives.
i agree. everything is about control (which money buys).
i'll even do you one better and voice my own controversial opinion: even the concept of monogamy and marriage was invented to control the commoner. can't have just anyone running around with 50 kids and 300 grandkids, all loyal to their patriarch unto death, presenting a threat to the power of the tribe's chieftain
I disagree on that. Monogamy was invented by rich people to secure inheritance rights.
so..control. yep.
But this was more against each other than against the lower class.
I think monogamy was invented by men to control women and to validate their claims of owning land and space that actually belongs to a community.
Women tend to do really well in open nonmonogamy and men sometimes not as good. Like in modern times, think of an orgy - women are usually at the center of these and men at the outskirts. If every man agrees to just take 1 woman, then that's a good deal for men. But maybe not what women naturally want. So we compel women's behavior by withholding capital and needs from them and their children unless they comply.
Eventually over time, this lead to what you're talking about - the wealthy and inheritance rights. But I think monogamy came before that and actually caused it. (Which is why full service sex work is illegal/taboo and why it threatens capitalism and the patriarchy itself). I think marriage is a form of soft slavery for women and has been for thousands of years.
Different ages had different reasons, but in general women indeed weren't seen as equals.
Also let's not forget that having multiple wives or concubines was quite popular in parts of the world not Europe and still is for some.
Despite the commodification of women having a long and constant history, I can't help but doubt monogamy's exact role in it.
The European modern marriage is still only some centuries old. If i recall the story right, it began with merchant houses trading daughters and signing it as contract on paper/leather. And slowly evolved from there.
The peasantry was far more fluid in their cohabitation arrangements and feuding families needed workers/warriors, so back then there was little time for pleasure and was more a matter of survival.
I believe it was the church that eventually shackled the peasantry in monogamous relationships, for control, puritanism, to attack the nobility or whatever other reasons.
So I don't see monogamy as a direct assault on women, but rather a welcomed side effect by those who implemented it for other selfish reasons.
I believe it will, as you can see accross the world that eternalism is crushed beneath the weight of high quality education, delivered on mass.
The problem is, capitalists love what Christianity metastasised into.
If anyone want to see the effect modern Christianity has on people, you won't have to look further than the west indies, during the abolition of slavery in the British empire.
Obviously, they wouldn't let aboloshionists anywhere near the slave plantations of the west indies. However, the slavers would allow missionaries. The rational from the missionaries being that once the people kept as slaves became Christian, the slavers would have no option but to let their fellow Christians go.
However, the enslaved converts didn't go to the slavers, demanding their freedom. Bizarrely, vast numbers of them seem to conclude "oh well, as this is only temporary and I'll have the rest of eternity to enjoy, there's no need to rock to boat here. So, I'll settle down and be the best slave I can be, in service to God."
Crazy huh?
When we think of the vast differences in the world religions, you can only imagine how fortunate the rich and powerful must have felt when that specific version of that one specific religion became the biggest on the planet. They must have thanked their lucky stars when they found that out.
The purpose of Abrahamic religions is to convince people to become soldiers. Hence the legend of Abraham itself that these religions are named after - it's a message to parents to sacrifice their children to war if needed. The entire thing is to groom us into a society with soldiers and babymakers.