Monogamy and the Western Civilization Part 2 - The value of women | One of the things that become apparent when studying
European culture is the fact that on both sides of the Hajnal line, women, by
being not regarded as possession but as free agents, are regarded as free to
choose their mate. When women get to choose their own partners, said partners
have to prove themselves worthy. As human babies require significantly more of
a parental investment than the progeny of any other animal, a mate needs to
prove not just his genetic superiority but also his suitability as a provider
for his mate and progeny. In a monogamous culture, this actually means that men
are dealing with the choice of either being good mates and providers and thus
contributing and integrating themselves into society or not getting to mate and
breed. This makes women the gatekeepers of civilization in the
West. Even when the choice of a mate falls upon the woman’s family, the issue
of whether a man would be a good provider continues to be a major factor even
in the 21st century in European communities. The myth of the white
young man who tells his prospective partner and/or her family that he “Earns X
amount and has good prospects” is exactly that, he states his suitability as a
provider for his future family. This is again a characteristic of European society on both
sides of the Hajnal line. Monogamy means every woman needs a husband, but it
also means that men need to prove themselves worthy. Unlike in non-European
cultures, the taking of a mate by force or for clan politics purpose has been
pushed out of practice for centuries,
persisting only in the upper classes for said political purposes, but even in
these cases the women get to approve of their proposed mate. This is a practice that goes back millennia. The taking of the Sabines was the last time
European culture sanctioned men taking wives without said wives’ consent, and
that was about 2900 years ago. However, an interesting consequence of a monogamous society
is that the value of women is no longer consisting just from their dowry/ physical
aspects and fertility. As we notice in many non-European cultures, women past
fertile age have been and still are casually
cast aside when they are no longer useful as mates. An older woman with no
children to provide for her, or just a widow - as it is still the custom in
some parts of India - would find herself being cast out because she had
exhausted her only perceived value for clan based societies - namely that of a
brood mare. In the European monogamous culture however, society
disapproves of a man who discards his old wife for a younger one just because
the new one is fertile and more attractive. It happens, but the custom is severely
frowned upon and has been for millennia. The words “till death do us part” in
this regard precede the institution of religious marriage by several stages of
human societal evolution. This means that the older women have to develop other skills
in order to maintain usefulness and rank in the community after they can no
longer produce children. There is of course the obvious role of helping care
for and raise the grandchildren, but we also notice the interesting phenomenon
of work for the community as an extension of one’s family. Older women are midwives, sages, priestesses and advisors.
They are crafters and thus keepers of knowledge and also casually step in to
fill the caretaker role for families where the mother is incapable to properly
look after her children due to death, illness etc. Without any clannish
obligation, all women in the community will step in to help make sure all
children are looked after. Again this is still visible in small rural communities in
Western Europe and in Eastern Europe. The older women in a social group, be it
a village, a city block etc. will actively
seek to ensure the wellbeing of strangers’ children just by virtue of
being members of the same micro community. The neighbour lady who ensures all
of the neighbourhood kids are safely home after school if their parents are
both at work plays just this role, and she doesn’t even have to be asked for
it. The well-known matchmaker cliché of the older female relatives is in fact a
form of “looking out for the communal good” - ensuring that all women in their
microcommunity/macrofamily are well paired and provided for. This is of course altruism, but a direct consequence of a
monogamous society, which also gives women a great deal of power. Not only do
they have value as actual contributing members of society and not just breeding
beasts, but they manage to attain a similar level of authority and respect only
older men receive in clannish/non monogamous societies. By virtue of being
older and being an active part of society the woman is in and by herself a
valued partner, her skills are appreciated and her advice sought after. I mentioned in the first part of this work the name of
Cornelia Africana - daughter of Scipio. We remember her not for her beauty or
riches but because she refused to marry a king after her first husband died so
that she could properly raise and educate her children. Cornelia Africana could only act as such in a monogamous
society where women have their own
power. In any other society she would have either been forced to remarry by her
parents or been thrown out. The women of the west are as such raised in a society that
perceived and used their skills and
their value as individuals for at least 2000 years. So, you will ask, if this is the case, how come feminism
appears in the West and not in one of the more woman-oppressive societies? I will address that in the third part. |
If you enjoy our work, please share it on your medium of choice.
While we are a free site and make no money from traffic, more visitors mean a larger the number of people who get to see an alternative view.
Thank you