Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Oikoman · 08-25-2004, 12:06 AM

The direction that this thread turned reminded me of some recent articles comparing the rate of evolution of the y chromosome (male-descent) vs the mitochondrial DNA (female-descent) which strongly indicate that humans have been polygamous for much of the past few hundred-thousand years. This would strongly suggest that the egalitarian period proposed by some feminist authors never existed.

Dupanloup I, Pereira L, Bertorelle G, Calafell F, Prata MJ, Amorim A, Barbujani G. 2003. A recent shift from polygyny to monogamy in humans is suggested by the analysis of worldwide Y-chromosome diversity. J Mol Evol. 2003 Jul;57(1):85-97.

Hyndis · 08-25-2004, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc Clarke

The direction that this thread turned reminded me of some recent articles comparing the rate of evolution of the y chromosome (male-descent) vs the mitochondrial DNA (female-descent) which strongly indicate that humans have been polygamous for much of the past few hundred-thousand years. This would strongly suggest that the egalitarian period proposed by some feminist authors never existed.

Just take a look at most closely related species to humans. Chimps and bonobos, who aren't the most chaste species in the world...

But one theorey about how societies shifted from goddess to god worship could be due to how reproduction works. At first, it seemed that women would just produce babies if by magic, and so something about women must be magical, thus there must be some sort of goddess figure.

Then once they figured out how sex and reproduction actually works, it suddenly flipped over the other way, where it was all up to the male, and goddesses turned into gods. For a while it was thought that males did all of the work in reproduction, hence the nickname of semen, "seed." Like a seed that's planted in fertile ground...

Of course both of these views are wrong, but ignorance didn't stop earlier cultures from making elaborate justifications for power.

Chris Weimer · 08-25-2004, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piscez

The thing is, the REAL earliest agrarian cultures didn't have writing, or its lost, or we can't translate it. How do we know they worshipped Mother Earth and the Sun? I'm sure many worshipped them, others worshipped the moon, other worshipped the stars, the whale, the lion, the jaguar, etc, etc. But I'd like some sort of proof that they all (and where are we talking about, anyway?) worshipped a feminine "Goddess" and that that was superior to the "warrior tribes" that invaded them.

Egypt has the earliest known writing. Then Sumer. Both had female agrarian goddess with male sun god. Egypt - Ra and Isis/Hathor (debatable); Sumer - Utu and Inanna. Questions?

Nostalgic Pushhead · 08-25-2004, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Egypt has the earliest known writing. Then Sumer. Both had female agrarian goddess with male sun god. Egypt - Ra and Isis/Hathor (debatable); Sumer - Utu and Inanna. Questions?

Okay, but Egypt also had a whole pantheon. 12-14 major gods, according to a quick google.

I'm also finding alternate descriptions... one says Isis is god of magic, one says fertility, one says Inanna is goddess of love & war... I honest ain't seeing any evidence here for a goddess-worshipping egalitarian wonderland.

BTW, since 99% of this thread is OT (thanks to me, sorry) I'd say it should be split...

Chris Weimer · 08-25-2004, 08:58 AM

The pantheon and different descriptions descend from the advancement of the civilization. As things became more complex, so did the roles of the dieties. Just look at the Greek version of Aries and the Roman version. As cultural views shift, aren't the views of dieties allowed to shift as well?

lulay · 08-25-2004, 09:26 AM

this thread is really a follow on from "goddess in history" i realized it was moved from 'dark bible' which i'd had trouble accessing ANYway owing to my limited memory....not MINE, my systems....and when i found the other one it got 'thread closed' so i start this

ok. i keep hearing "EVIDENCE evidence evidence" reminding me of Blair's 'education education education'--an in-joke
i am looking at the criteria for this demand. it is within the paradigm of the scientific age isn't it with its deMAND for 'EVIDENCE'. now don't get me wrong, i am not averse to finding evidence for things. BUT, this obsession for 'it' can create a barrier to creative exploration....in my opinion

for example, someone said: " how can we KNOW what happened pre-writing?"....TRUE, how CAN we 'know'...so what does that mean. that we should KNOW in another way? a pre-literate way. a poetic way. whaddayasay?

also. someone else said about evidence being tampered with. are you aware TEXT has been tampered with by the patriarchs--as in myth (which someone thought not apporiate for the discussion. oh it IS! it is.).....If THat can be manipulated, can you not entertain the idea that archaeological evidence might also follow that pattern. do you trust them. have you been your self to study what you've read? if not, how do you know, ESPECIALLY if u are not prepared to un-specialize. to become wildly generalistic and look for clues everywhere, including ESPECIALLY the stories we have lived by and live by--MYTHOLOGY?

Nostalgic Pushhead · 08-25-2004, 02:02 PM

Yes, they shifted and changed, of course. But evidence they shifted from a belief in a "Goddess"?

This site mentions Hathor, Nut, and Neith as "early Egyptian goddesses" who were associated with cows. "Therefore, the first clear divinities we find in Egypt's archaeological record are for the most cases, animal deities such as the cow and the falcon."
And: "A "great mother goddess" is quite unknown in Egypt during the earlier historical period"

Evidence of widespread worship of a "The Goddess"? None.

None.

I repeat, a third time, none.

Tony99 · 08-25-2004, 02:04 PM

Quote:

understand that womens bodies have always been known to be more EARTHEd than males mainly cause of there menstruation. in myth it is this which GROUNDs the woman. it has been called the 'Wise Wound". it has been held in so much awae by men, that some have appropriated it. an example, Australian Aboriginees ritual for young men had them hold them down and slit the dick from stem to stern. this was the emulation of the woman's 'mana' for bleeding

Just a correction here. The subincision was not done to emulate "woman's mana". It's a secret male right of passage. (Aboriginal women had their secret rights as well)
"Walbiri aborigines claim
that the subincision is done to make the penis resemble the bifid penis of
kangaroos and other marsupials, with whom they have mythical kinship ties"
(155).

book by Armando R. Favazza: _Bodies under
siege: Self-mutilation in culture and psychiatry._ 1987.

IrishGuy · 08-25-2004, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cweb255

Early Hebrews represented the Mother Earth in, arguably, Ashera. Until they adopted Yahweh and became tribal warriors, they also practiced goddess worship.

You seem to be confusing the native Canaanites with the Isrealites out of Egypt that took the place over. Although the Isrealites often times in their history did worship Asherah, Baal, Molech, etc, instead of YHWH.

truthie · 08-25-2004, 02:37 PM

Heard this before... Pseudo-history/anthropology.

I do not understand why some feminists are so eager to claim that there was a goddess-worship society and that patriarchy ruined it. :huh:
There is no evidene for it.
It is as listening to some feminists ranting that matriarchal societies did exist, no evidence for that either, practically this is a myth.

From Wiki

Quote:

This belief system was the result of errors in early ethnography, which in return was the result of unsophisticated methods of field work. When strangers arrive and start asking where babies come from, the urge to respond imaginatively is hard to resist, as Margaret Mead might have discovered in Samoa. In fact, while prior to genetics there have been many different explanations of the mechanics of pregnancy and the relative contributions of either sex, no human group, however primitive, is unaware of the link between intercourse and pregnancy. The fact that each child has one unique father has come more recently, however; Greek and Roman writers thought that the seed of two men might both contribute to the character of the child. By the time these mistakes were corrected in anthropology, however, the idea that a matriarchy had once existed had been picked up on in comparative religion and archaeology, and was used as the basis of new hypotheses that were unrelated to the postulated ignorance of primitive people about paternity.

I am female, and honestly, I do not care if there wasn't a goddess worship society at the beginning of civilization.

Do some women need to brag about this ideas in order to make themselves feel superior? To make women superior than men?
"Na na....My goddess is older than your god"

This is no better than chauvanism and it is quite childish, IMO.

This just reminds me of Wiccan victim complex.
"No more the burning times" "The Wiccans (hinting at females here) that were burned in the inquisition.."
"Wicca and women destroyed by Patriarchy"

T.

08-25-2004, 12:06 AM	#21
Oikoman Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: North of nowhere Posts: 1,356	Speaking of evidence... The direction that this thread turned reminded me of some recent articles comparing the rate of evolution of the y chromosome (male-descent) vs the mitochondrial DNA (female-descent) which strongly indicate that humans have been polygamous for much of the past few hundred-thousand years. This would strongly suggest that the egalitarian period proposed by some feminist authors never existed. Dupanloup I, Pereira L, Bertorelle G, Calafell F, Prata MJ, Amorim A, Barbujani G. 2003. A recent shift from polygyny to monogamy in humans is suggested by the analysis of worldwide Y-chromosome diversity. J Mol Evol. 2003 Jul;57(1):85-97.

08-25-2004, 09:26 AM	#26
lulay Banned Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: manchester, England Posts: 916	"Missing" Goddess this thread is really a follow on from "goddess in history" i realized it was moved from 'dark bible' which i'd had trouble accessing ANYway owing to my limited memory....not MINE, my systems....and when i found the other one it got 'thread closed' so i start this ok. i keep hearing "EVIDENCE evidence evidence" reminding me of Blair's 'education education education'--an in-joke i am looking at the criteria for this demand. it is within the paradigm of the scientific age isn't it with its deMAND for 'EVIDENCE'. now don't get me wrong, i am not averse to finding evidence for things. BUT, this obsession for 'it' can create a barrier to creative exploration....in my opinion for example, someone said: " how can we KNOW what happened pre-writing?"....TRUE, how CAN we 'know'...so what does that mean. that we should KNOW in another way? a pre-literate way. a poetic way. whaddayasay? also. someone else said about evidence being tampered with. are you aware TEXT has been tampered with by the patriarchs--as in myth (which someone thought not apporiate for the discussion. oh it IS! it is.).....If THat can be manipulated, can you not entertain the idea that archaeological evidence might also follow that pattern. do you trust them. have you been your self to study what you've read? if not, how do you know, ESPECIALLY if u are not prepared to un-specialize. to become wildly generalistic and look for clues everywhere, including ESPECIALLY the stories we have lived by and live by--MYTHOLOGY?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-25-2004, 08:58 AM	#25
Chris Weimer Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: none Posts: 9,879	The pantheon and different descriptions descend from the advancement of the civilization. As things became more complex, so did the roles of the dieties. Just look at the Greek version of Aries and the Roman version. As cultural views shift, aren't the views of dieties allowed to shift as well?

08-25-2004, 02:02 PM	#27
Nostalgic Pushhead Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: So. Burlington, Vermont Posts: 4,315	Yes, they shifted and changed, of course. But evidence they shifted from a belief in a "Goddess"? This site mentions Hathor, Nut, and Neith as "early Egyptian goddesses" who were associated with cows. "Therefore, the first clear divinities we find in Egypt's archaeological record are for the most cases, animal deities such as the cow and the falcon." And: "A "great mother goddess" is quite unknown in Egypt during the earlier historical period" Evidence of widespread worship of a "The Goddess"? None. None. I repeat, a third time, none.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.