Battle of the Sexes, Part II  

Waterboy711 76M
14 posts
8/18/2005 8:15 am

Last Read:
3/5/2006 9:27 pm

Battle of the Sexes, Part II

How religion and politics are intertwined down through history is fascinating. I find Dan Brown’s novels an interesting point of departure along these lines. His most popular novel is particularly captivating. And his references (Page one of chapter sixty) are, also, worth looking into if you are interested. Dan and his references look into the historical relation between religion and politics. Many aspects of religion have been manipulated by politics. And, likewise, many facets of politics have been affected and controlled by religion. In the process of “legislating” politics and religion the relations between men and women have also been structured. Sometimes subtly and sometimes not so subtly, the position of women (no pun intended) in recent society has been defined, more often than not, by men. By recent I mean most of recorded history; in particular since the time of Christ.

We may never know how males (men) and females (women) worked together through the millions of years they lived along side each other before we learned how to record our daily activities. There is, however, archeological evidence to suggest that men and women shared the duties and responsibilities of daily life. The operative word here is SHARED. How else would they be able to survive? (Thank you Darwin.) There are even records of societies where women were equal to and even more powerful than men. How about Egypt?

In Part III we will look into how politics and religion have worked together to manipulate and control the relationships between men and women. Not that it is all bad. Just worth understanding.


KhaosKitty 42F
123 posts
8/19/2005 10:55 am

Here's a random factoid for Part III: polygamy is the only "alternate lifestyle" not only not condemned by the Old Testament - the basis of not one but three major world religions - it is actually condoned. This changed during the Dark Ages when there were fewer women than men and women had a shorter life expectancy. (A unique time in history as it is usually the other way round.) John got tired of Peter down the street having three wives when he didn't have any, so he approached the Church - the major political and religious body of the day - and bitched and moaned. They made a decree stating that monogamy was the way to go and we've been saddled with that decision ever since.

It has long been my contention that humans are polyamrous and matriarchal by nature. It aids in the survival of the species. When the folks in charge try to buck that trend, it just leads to problems if you ask me.


Waterboy711 76M
23 posts
8/19/2005 1:11 pm

Khaos, You and I are walking in the same direction down the same street. You sound better "read" on the subject than I am.
Even with "The Church" proscribing polygamy in Christian times, extra-marital affairs and mistresses have been common.
As a man, I might have trouble sharing my woman with someone else. (Double Standard?) I have not yet shaken the brainwashing that keeps me from enjoying the company of more than one woman at a time. Maybe with time and practice I can over come this handicap.
What, if any, religion would you recomend. It is tough bucking the accepted standards of society.


KhaosKitty 42F
123 posts
8/20/2005 1:59 am

I think that's less brainwashing and more natural selection talking there. After all, it's the male urge to spread his seed as far and wide as possible, while at the same time maintaining "exclusive rights" to "his" women.

On the other hand, the more the merrier.


Waterboy711 76M
23 posts
8/20/2005 5:53 am

Darwin is taking some flack lately from the Intelligent Design people.


KhaosKitty 42F
123 posts
8/21/2005 1:27 am

My answer to strict Intelligent Design types has always taken the form of a question: And how long are God/god/goddess's days?


Become a member to create a blog