• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Sex and Religion

linwood

Well-Known Member
Can you expound on this? I don't know that using sex in ritualistic worship is any less hazardous than making sex taboo.

I don`t know that using sex in ritualistic worship is any less harmful either.
But that`s the point "I don`t know".
I do know that making sex taboo hasn`t been a good idea.

I`m just curious about the alternatives.
:)


Wow! I'm right? I gotta go tell my wife! :run:

She`ll just accuse you of hacking my account to make that post.
They never believe you when you`re right.
:)

As we seem to be on the same page let me ask if you think there was some political or religious power somewhere back on the edge of recorded history which intentionally used patriarchy to combat the more feminine cultural norm for supremacy in some manner.
Or
Do you believe it was some kind of "natural" evolution that set patriarchy on the pedestal?

I realize any answer to the question is extremely speculative but I haven`t wildly speculated about anything since yesterday.

If you do care to answer please mention any evidence no matter how strong.
Could you cite it for me?

If you do care to answer I promise there`ll be even wilder speculation in my next post.

:)
 

Trey of Diamonds

Well-Known Member
She`ll just accuse you of hacking my account to make that post.

Wow, you know my wife. :D

As we seem to be on the same page let me ask if you think there was some political or religious power somewhere back on the edge of recorded history which intentionally used patriarchy to combat the more feminine cultural norm for supremacy in some manner.
Or
Do you believe it was some kind of "natural" evolution that set patriarchy on the pedestal?

I realize any answer to the question is extremely speculative but I haven`t wildly speculated about anything since yesterday.

If you do care to answer please mention any evidence no matter how strong.
Could you cite it for me?

If you do care to answer I promise there`ll be even wilder speculation in my next post.

:)

Hmmmm. Ok, I think it was intentional but... you knew there was a but right? It may still be viewed as a natural evolution of human culture. Anyway, as to the how and why. The Abrahamic religions especially were very jealous of their power and intentionally set about to destroy other religions. The fact that their culture was very male oriented and viewed women as little more than property meant that women oriented religions were especially dangerous to their power and I think they set out to destroy them totally while allowing other religions to merge or at least co-exist for a longer period. Now I do find it strange that the Romans became so anti-multireligion as up until the 3rd century they were pretty tolerant. Of course Paganism was widely accepted until the crusades started up. I think it was in the 11 or 12 hundreds that Pagans were treated as heretics in Europe. The crusades seemed to have created a bloodlust in the church and it affected all of so called civilized world.

Anyway, I've rambled on a bit and I hope offered some insights.
 

Trey of Diamonds

Well-Known Member
Judging by the implications of the Wiki link it would seem the Yahweh cult (and later Constantine)were the chief rivals of the matriarchal culture.

Yes and I think that is probable, but it is also probable that the wiki link is highly influenced by the DaVinci Code. Still, I tend to blame the Abrahamic religions for the destruction of women oriented religions.
 

Carico

Active Member
Ok, I have a theory on the origins of the various sexual taboos within religions. Lets see what folks here think of it.

Humanity has the bizzare need to exert control over their fellow human beings. I think that in the olden days when priests ruled the people they wanted to maintain control of the population. Now the easiest way to control people is to control what makes them happy. That is why money is such a good method of control, in enables happiness. So, go far enough back to when money wasn't used enough to exert total control and you're once again looking to control what makes people happy. Well, sex makes people happy. So, control sex and you control people. Priests came up with elaborate rules concerning sex in order to exert control over the population, they did it for personal power, not for God.

Just a semi formed theory but I'm curious to know what folks think and I'd also like to here any personal theories you may have. Maybe together we can shed light on the mystery.

No, people don't want to control other people. People simply know in their subconscious mind what's right and wrong. But their human desires contradict what's right and wrong. So the human conscience is constantly in conflict with their desires and their knowledge of right and wrong. Some cultures give up the battle and act out on anything they desire just like unreasoning animals. Other cultures make up their own gods which are created objects like statues of animals and humans, and try to justify sex by imagining a fertility god who wants them to act on their sexual desires. But all cultures make laws to protect humans from ourselves since all humans know that humans want to act on our desires and rationalize them as being right. ;)
 

Trey of Diamonds

Well-Known Member
No, people don't want to control other people. People simply know in their subconscious mind what's right and wrong. But their human desires contradict what's right and wrong. So the human conscience is constantly in conflict with their desires and their knowledge of right and wrong. Some cultures give up the battle and act out on anything they desire just like unreasoning animals. Other cultures make up their own gods which are created objects like statues of animals and humans, and try to justify sex by imagining a fertility god who wants them to act on their sexual desires. But all cultures make laws to protect humans from ourselves since all humans know that humans want to act on our desires and rationalize them as being right. ;)

A nice wide sweeping generalization. This thread is devoted to discussing ancient religions and their impact on human sexuality. Do you have something to offer?
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
Yes and I think that is probable, but it is also probable that the wiki link is highly influenced by the DaVinci Code. Still, I tend to blame the Abrahamic religions for the destruction of women oriented religions.

I tend to have the same bias.
That`s probably why I`m enjoying this convo so much.
:)

Ok, well I promised even greater speculation so since we seem to be tracing the rise of patriarchy back through the Abrahamic religion/culture do you care to take it back as far as the Yahweh cult and it`s hypothesized immigration out of Egypt?

Where did it come from?

Egyptian culture at the time was heavily influenced by at least an equitable male/female based Pantheon of deities.

Do you have any knowledge of what the common Egyptian family unit might have been like?
What were the gender roles in their culture like?

Who washed the cat?
Who watched the kids?
Who brought home the bacon?

I`m fairly knowledgeable about the major geopolitical/religious forces that shaped this area on a grand scale but haven`t really looked into what the cultures must have been like at a very small basic everyday level.

It`s always interested me but really trying to understand it is a bit intimidating as there are so many possible influences to consider.
 

Sahar

Well-Known Member
No, I'm being very very general here and speaking of ancient religions where this may have started. No offense but I believe that the modern religions were very heavily influenced by the ancient religions. So the Abrahamic religions need to control sex is probably rooted in a more ancient cultural taboo. And no, I don't think God had anything to do with it, God doesn't care about sex.
I'd like to speak from the Islamic perspective here, if you don't mind.
You said when "the priests ruled", this didn't happen in the Islamic history unless this could involve the Prophet. You said this has to do with cultural taboo, well the Islamic rulings on sex corrected the practices and norms back then ie in the pre-Islamic Arabia.

You said sex makes people happy, then I guess married couples can have sex as much as they want and it will make them happy too.
Putting the sexual desire and sex in its right place, is like many other issues when it comes to religion, I mean religion encourages to control many desires: love of power, money, the desire of food and drink...umm greed, envy, pride...etc.

I believe your theory has no nothing to do with Islam. :D
 

Trey of Diamonds

Well-Known Member
do you care to take it back as far as the Yahweh cult and it`s hypothesized immigration out of Egypt?

I would love to but I'm afraid I know little about it. I would love to hear your thoughts on it though as I suspect this is where the origins are. I know the Eqyptians had a fairly equal male female representation in religion but wasn't the Yahweh cult the religion of the slaves who were of another race and culture entirely? What was the regional origin of the race who were slaves to the Egyptians and followers of Yahweh? This might tell us a lot.

It is assumed that the Abrahamic religions rose from nomadic sheep herders. I think that animal husbandry is linked to the idea that women are property. Could this have something to do with the religions view on sex? Women were considered property to be used for breeding, just like the sheep they tended.
 

Trey of Diamonds

Well-Known Member
I'd like to speak from the Islamic perspective here, if you don't mind.

You may, I don't mind but you can't take what I said and relate it to Islam. I was speaking of religions far older than Islam so my statements have no relevance to your reply.

I believe your theory has no nothing to do with Islam. :D

Not directly. I'm speaking of the source, the religions that existed even before Abraham. However, the link to Islam is still there.

If you only wish to speak of Islam then this thread may not be the place to do it, however, if you have anything to add or ask about the peoples and religions that formed Islam please join in.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
It does seem obvious that "the priestly class" has long sought to control people's sexuality.
 

blackout

Violet.
Its simple isnt it? sex is like money or nice things the unwashed masses have no right to any of it .so rulers and priests like to control it and ration it.Rulers and priests went hand in hand suppressing ordinary folk.and enjoying lots of it themselves while telling us we shouldnt have it.

Isn't that always the way? :sarcastic
 

Mr Cheese

Well-Known Member
I'd like to speak from the Islamic perspective here, if you don't mind.
You said when "the priests ruled", this didn't happen in the Islamic history unless this could involve the Prophet. You said this has to do with cultural taboo, well the Islamic rulings on sex corrected the practices and norms back then ie in the pre-Islamic Arabia.

You said sex makes people happy, then I guess married couples can have sex as much as they want and it will make them happy too.
Putting the sexual desire and sex in its right place, is like many other issues when it comes to religion, I mean religion encourages to control many desires: love of power, money, the desire of food and drink...umm greed, envy, pride...etc.

I believe your theory has no nothing to do with Islam. :D

Well there are only 2 or 3 revered women in the whole of the qu'ran...
Islam focuses so much on the transcendent nature of God...that women as a whole kind of get left behind.....

Outside of Mary mother of Jesus, Mohammed's wife and one maybe two Sufi saints (who co incidentally many muslims dont acknowledge as Sufism is heresy, not monotheistic enough etc) who in islam, that is female is well thought of?

The qu'ran itself does advocate beating women under the right conditions. To msulims this is fine, in the west we find this abhorrent
 

Mr Cheese

Well-Known Member
Judging by the implications of the Wiki link it would seem the Yahweh cult (and later Constantine)were the chief rivals of the matriarchal culture.

Sacred prostitution inevitably got abused...surprsingly

I think we should be carefulto think there was a past romantic time where women were in charge and men were 2nd class citizens... I think the balance of power has shifted constantly.

An alternative "idea" to the rise of patriachy is the rise of the exoteric. Patriachal or so called, Abrahamic religions decided to keep the secrets among fewer and fewer people. The priests had the keys to heaven, the people were given crumbs from the table.

Thus it is common and easy to assume that any female aspect of the divine was thrown away. Indeed amongst Jews, due to the fall of the 2nd temple, it has often been said that the Shekinah abandoned the jews. But my point being, that the female aspect became hidden, and UBER special. For it is in the presence of the feminine,. the Shekinah that Abraham is transformed, not "Yahweh" but the Shekinah. Arguably Islam concetrates on a one aspected transcendant God, and has little to no place for the feminine.

Much of our society is also built on ancient Greece. We have to remeber they considered women incapable of rational thought.. A lot changed in our society of course when they invented the pill. Although of course, they have found condoms made out of clay from ancient egypt, Egypt of course, supposedly had a brief period of sexual equality under Ankhenaten and Nefratitti (spelling nazi).... but then the priests came back.....:thud:
 

Mr Cheese

Well-Known Member
Isn't that always the way? :sarcastic

Not always....
If one sticks to the bible, there have been plenty of alternatives...

look at the story of Esther....
Essentially this is a story of a woman who said...

"Hey mean mister king guy, if I spread my legs and you can have my body, don't kill my people" So the "savior" of the Jews essentially was a "whore"

The Bible also relates how women (Abraham's wife???? I think) insisted on getting married, refused to have sex, then got upset when the mistress got pregnant...even though she refused to spread her legs....

In summary, the story of sex in abrahamic religious texts haven't all been about supression.....

At least one author of course relates the story of samson and delilah as a story of the divine feminine versus patriachy. Although I myself assume this is more about sticking the knife in the essenes, who didnt cut their hair (hippies!)

Of course then there's good old David, beloved of God.... you just know he was much like a typical arab Sheik... had his many wives...and maybe men lovers....

...

Of course the romans advocated manogamy, but practiced public orgies and state run brothels....:flirt:
 

ManTimeForgot

Temporally Challenged
Point of fact: there has never been a strictly matriarchal society in history; ever. "Amazon society" is a complete myth. There are plenty of societies which are matrilineal and one's that value the wife's family as being of foremost importance, but none that value the woman chiefly amongst the genders (and yes this does include societies with atypical genders as well: third or fourth gendered societies).


Organized religion didn't create patriarchy. It reinforced it by institutionalizing it. Primitive religions served as early man's world view; the len's through which the world was understood covering their body of "knowledge" on cosmology, philosophy, nature (science), and ethics.

But institutions are not static. They are intimately tied to the changes in the society they are a part of. So when society changes from a nomadic or hunter-gatherer life style to one of sendentism you see a change manifest in religion. And yet again once society changes from a family-based polity and low population density to a legal polity (citizenship is required) and a high population density. As your society becomes subject to greater and greater population and selection pressures your institutions have to become more and more rarified/specialized. Traits which your society found "successful" in the past tended to be selected for specialization.

Once "war" became a "successful" inclusion into the body of institutions female orientation was on the out-swing. War preferentially selects traits which are more common for males (including needing less numerically for the preservation of the species) and if you look at historical trends as soon as societies began adopting warlike behavior somewhere between most and all societies started becoming more male dominated.


MTF
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
Point of fact: there has never been a strictly matriarchal society in history; ever. "Amazon society" is a complete myth. There are plenty of societies which are matrilineal and one's that value the wife's family as being of foremost importance, but none that value the woman chiefly amongst the genders (and yes this does include societies with atypical genders as well: third or fourth gendered societies).
This is part of what I was saying: matrilineal cultures don't necessitate matriarchy.

I don't know enough to categorically deny the existence of a matriarchal culture.
 

Mr Cheese

Well-Known Member
Once "war" became a "successful" inclusion into the body of institutions female orientation was on the out-swing. War preferentially selects traits which are more common for males (including needing less numerically for the preservation of the species) and if you look at historical trends as soon as societies began adopting warlike behavior somewhere between most and all societies started becoming more male dominated.


MTF

well there are exceptions....

Ancient celtic women went into battle bare breasted.....they were such big softies

there are roman accounts of female savergy amongst such peoples...

need we mention Boudicea adn the female group of druids that romans mention were rather nasty when they needed to be killed (by the romans)
 
Top