Re: Incest taboos
Gil Hardwick (gil@landmark.iinet.net.au)
Mon, 08 May 1995 05:10:27 GMT
In article <jbask1.260.2FAC4D55@MFS06.cc.monash.edu.au>, Joseph Askew (jbask1@MFS06.cc.monash.edu.au) writes:
>Could be but so could a husband sleeping with another other wife.
>At least a daughter has been conditioned to accept her role as
>the child and so might pose less of a challenge to the wife in
>the way a younger woman might. I believe that one of the Ptolemies
>married both his Sister and her daughter (his step-daughter on
>both sides) but this is not strong evidence for my case.
That would be quite OK among the polygynous, Joseph. Or maybe you
had intended "another man's wife". Even then that may not be so bad,
and may very well enhance his esteem in both her husband's and his
own wife's opinion.
Assuming he had managed to have the lucky girl moan with pleasure
sufficiently loudly for the good news to be broadcast. Else the
dreamy, wistful smile upon her face next day.
So provided both her children and his own were well cared for.
>I agree but consider the Chinese practise of "minor" marriage (in
>the sense of the lesser of the two forms) In such a marriage the
>daughter-in-law would be adopted into the family at a young age,
>often while breast feeding, and raised within her future family.
>Then when she turned seventeen or so she and one of the sons would
>be "pushed together" (lovely phrase really) This had a lot of
.
.
.
Problem being, as the current batch of propaganda movies against the
practice openly emphasise, his little boy's rubber weenie contrasted
against her luscious thatch. A dreadfully frustrating circumstance for
both of them, and the source of no end of arguing within the family.
And yes, it was ALWAYS her fault . . .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He who refuses to qualify data is doomed to rant.
+61 97 53 3270
|