Socialism will fail if sex is not used for group cohesion
- This topic has 145 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Subhaditya wrote:Mass media could have helped but its controlled by the capitalist class who seem to prefer promoting monogamy and hatred of promiscuous females, come to think of it religion also seems to promote the same thing.Its the same way it will come about as communal control of resource generation… when most people start wanting it.We must encourage this… discouraging this will be same as discouraging socialism.I dont think socialism can succeed as long as men continue to fight with each other over women.
Maurice Briton's 1975 pamphlet "The Irrational in Politics" sort of touches on this theme in relation to Wilhelm Reichhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/brinton/1970/irrational-politics.htm#h8 Wasnt there an SPGB member based in Denmark who specialised in Reichian psychoanalysis. I vaguely recall he wrote an article on the subject in the now sadly defunct World Socialist journal
You're thinking of Ernst Fleishman. His article is here:http://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/sex-in-free-society.htmlNot sure, though, that Reichian psychology is valid, though, as it posits a mysterious "sexual energy" which nobody has been able to find but then any talking therapy works whatever the theory behind it.
robbo203 wrote:Maurice Briton's 1975 pamphlet "The Irrational in Politics" sort of touches on this theme in relation to Wilhelm Reichhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/brinton/1970/irrational-politics.htm#h8Thanks robbo203 for pointing out the article…I didnt knew all that happened in Russia regarding sexual politics.Made me realize its probably a bad idea to let someone else determine what your needs are… seems like Russians especially the young were trying bring about a sexual revolution and the leadership led by Lenin smothered it.I cant figure out why would they shut down the communes young people were forming to move away from the patriarchal family and experience more sexual freedom.Even if resources being generated was not enough to provide security to all and people had to rely on the family to survive isnt a commune better than a patriarchal family ? People will get more love and kids would have more adults to look after them…. and it resembles the communes of 10,000 years ago, the default mode of our existence until agriculture came along.Also Lenin seems to think we would just sit on our asses all day long and have sex and do nothing else if our sexuality was freed up… weird.The Tahitians seemed to be pretty well fed when europeans first came in contact with them … and their attitudes to sex as described in "Sex At Dawn" blew my mind away… and the Tahitians had private property and chieftains they had to submit to…. the key thing that allowed them to be sexually free was matrilineal inheritance of property from mother to daughter… seems like patriarchy is the biggest cause of our sexual misery.Also wasnt Soviet Union supposed to be like a union of communes ?
ALB wrote:You're thinking of Ernst Fleishman. His article is here:http://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/sex-in-free-society.htmlNot sure, though, that Reichian psychology is valid, though, as it posits a mysterious "sexual energy" which nobody has been able to find but then any talking therapy works whatever the theory behind it.I would doubt you find many mainstreeam counsellor or psychotherapists taking Reichian psychotherapy particularly seriously. By the end of his career he was selling what were effectively large metal boxes that people could sit in , which he said were orgone accumulators. He ended up being jailed, effectively for repeatedly selling quack remedies. (The orgone accumulator was said to be the inspiration for Woody Allen's Orgasmatron, in the film The Sleeper and also the inspiration for Kate Bush's video for her single Cloud busting). I actually have an Orgone Accumulator, cunningly disguised as a large metal document cupboard. Obvioiusly these are now very rare, due to US law enforcement, however I would be willing to sell it to anyone interested in taking up Reichian Psychotherapy, due to its rarity, it would be very expensive. All monies would go to the party.A friend once went on a course through work developed by a trainer with a Reichian background, which worked on the concept of "body awareness, being in touch with feelings, etc.". As part of it he was given a leaf from a tree and asked to concentrate on the leaf, become "in contact with it" and then think about how it felt to him. When he asked for to give his his feedback to the group about how the leaf felt to him, he said "leafy"I wouldn't necessarily agree that "any taking therapy works whatever the thory behind it". There are some examples of very dangerous "therapies" that have actually made people a hell of a lot worse. Examples include Attachment Therapy (not to be confused with Attachment Based Therapy), and some talking therapies have been shown to exacerbate problems for people who self harm. Also some theoretical approaches to talking therapies appear to be more successful than others in relation to particular difficulties, for instance Dialectical Cognitive Therapy appears to be more effective for people diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder, than other talking approaches.
jondwhite wrote:What about a particular woman's (or man's) consent?Jon I dont know if the Mosuo people of China will be able to answer this question, but I am going to try…The Mosuo women have total control over who they have sex with and there is no pressure on them to have sex with one man as they dont marry, the brother acts as the father and helps bring the children up. Like the Tahitians were before the Mosuo are matrilineal with property inheritance happening from mother to daughter.To have sex you have to be invited by a woman to her house at night and it may be for the whole night or a specific hour with other hours being reserved for other men. So women can have as much sex with as many men as they like during the night in their flower rooms i think their room are called. And the only way men are going to get any sex is if a woman invites him to her home for a night or an hour of the night…. and the Mosuo dont have a word for rape or murder or war. And apparently the suicide rate for men is lower there than in a similar patriarchal community.From James W. Prescott's research the lack of violence seems to suggest that the Mosuo men are getting plenty of physical pleasure in their lives and not from just one woman either or they would have gone violent.Seems to me when women get to have sex with whoever they want without any pressure to limit their sexual activities to just one man, like they are under in a patriarchy, the men are better off by which I mean they are getting more sex with more partners.So its patriarchy again that seems to be the root of the problem… and I dont know of any capitalist place that is not a patriarchy.
Subhaditya wrote:jondwhite wrote:What about a particular woman's (or man's) consent?So its patriarchy again that seems to be the root of the problem… and I dont know of any capitalist place that is not a patriarchy.
No, and you won't find such a place because it's capitalism which is the root of the problem and it's patriarchy which is an inextricable result of the social relationships which ensue.See these links for explorations of the relationship between capitalism and patriarchy:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/pamphlets/women-and-socialismhttp://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1980s/1985/no-968-april-1985/sex-and-socialismhttp://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/audio/radical-feminism-and-communism
i don't know how relevant this is to the topichttp://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/having-sex-believe-in-god-research-religion-duke-university-patty-van-cappallen-a7330076.html
Quote:Hormones released while having sex can increase spirituality and belief in God, scientists have claimed.It seems it is not monks who should be celibate but atheists !!
.. is that not just the moment of orgasm."Oh gawd".
Subhaditya wrote:I forgot where I read it but the article talked of an experiment where a pile of food was given to an adult chimp, what did he do… he kept it for himself. When it was given to an adult bonobo it called the others and started sharing the food with them.Chimps and bonobos are showing the same pattern James W. Prescott noticed in human societies where to turn a society violent you deny it physical pleasure and to subdue violent behavior you enhance physical pleasure people are getting. Here is the thing he included monogamous societies among violent ones… clearly one man / woman isnt enough for most.Maybe you're refering to the research on the baboon tribe that got most of it's food from a garbage dump. all the alpha males horded the meat from the garbage dump and wouldn't let less dominant males eat from it. Then someone dumped tainted meat in the garbage dump and all the alpha males died off. The result was a remarkably more peaceful baboon tribe for a short while. here's more. . The Baboon Troop that Mellowed Out After the Alpha Males Diedhttp://bobsutton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/11/the-baboon-troop-that-mellowed-out-after-the-alpha-males-died-the-sapolsky-and-share-study.html
alanjjohnstone wrote:i don't know how relevant this is to the topichttp://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/having-sex-believe-in-god-research-religion-duke-university-patty-van-cappallen-a7330076.htmlQuote:Hormones released while having sex can increase spirituality and belief in God, scientists have claimed.It seems it is not monks who should be celibate but atheists !!
Those" scientists" must be Evangelicals. It is like a comedian said, that women think that he is a god, because when they have sex with him, they say: Oh my God !!!
alanjjohnstone wrote:i don't know how relevant this is to the topichttp://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/having-sex-believe-in-god-research-religion-duke-university-patty-van-cappallen-a7330076.htmlQuote:Hormones released while having sex can increase spirituality and belief in God, scientists have claimed.It seems it is not monks who should be celibate but atheists !!
Its kind of speculative with researchers themselves saying its not conclusive… and yet mass media has to write a nice big article about something that researchers themselves arent sure of.
Steve-SanFrancisco-UserExperienceResearchSpecialist wrote:Maybe you're refering to the research on the baboon tribe that got most of it's food from a garbage dump. all the alpha males horded the meat from the garbage dump and wouldn't let less dominant males eat from it. Then someone dumped tainted meat in the garbage dump and all the alpha males died off. The result was a remarkably more peaceful baboon tribe for a short while. here's more. . The Baboon Troop that Mellowed Out After the Alpha Males Diedhttp://bobsutton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/11/the-baboon-troop-that-mellowed-out-after-the-alpha-males-died-the-sapolsky-and-share-study.htmlNo it was definitely about chimps and bonobos… I managed to find a link to it… http://www.livescience.com/9882-humans-lot-learn-bonobos-scientist.htmlChimps not sharing with fellow chimps while adult bonobos continue to share with other bonobos.While it says abundance of food allows their cooperation to be a successful strategy… it does say they
Quote:"use sexual activity to maintain a peaceful collective temperament ".So it is saying the same thing about bonobos as James W. Prescott said about humans… even in an environment of abundant food there would be war, violence if the males arent getting enough sex. Since the chimps and bonobos are our closest living relatives it could be they are showing the same patterns of behavior as us humans. The selfishness is not just about food… its about sex as well… and monogamy isnt going to be enough to meet our sexual needs going by JWP's research or Christopher Ryan's research he highlighted in his book "Sex At Dawn".
Why are we talking about the behaviour of chimps, baboons, etc when what distinguishes humans from these and other animals is that our behaviour, including sexual behaviour, is not just governed by biology but is overwhelmingly culturally-determined? We have a wide range of possible behaviours. They don't.
Subhaditya wrote:So it is saying the same thing about bonobos as James W. Prescott said about humans… even in an environment of abundant food there would be war, violence if the males arent getting enough sex. Since the chimps and bonobos are our closest living relatives it could be they are showing the same patterns of behavior as us humans.I'm not at all convinced by arguments from related species. Apart from the fact that the conclusions you come to depends very much on whether you draw your observations from chimps or bonobos, the argument from genetic relatedness is itself a dubious one. It isn't the percentage of genes we share with another species that matters, it's which genes. A tiny genetic change can make huge differences across the genome if the genes affected are those which turn other genes on and off.Once this is acknowledged, it becomes clear that the phenotypical distance of the human species from chimps and bonobos and the other apes is enormous. If, for instance, anthropologists are right and the social relationships of the earliest human beings around 200,000 years ago are mirrored in existing hunter gatherer groups then our earliest social relationships are light years away from those of our nearest ape relative, or any of the apes for that matter.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.