Revolting Rebel
25th December 2011, 01:26
In the approach to woman as the spoil and hand-maid of communal lust is expressed the infinite degradation in which man exists for himself, for the secret of this approach has its unambiguous, decisive, plain and undisguised expression in the relation of man to woman and in the manner in which the direct and natural species-relationship is conceived. The direct, natural, and necessary relation of person to person is the relation of man to woman. In this natural species-relationship man’s relation to nature is immediately his relation to man, just as his relation to man is immediately his relation to nature – his own natural destination. In this relationship, therefore, is sensuously manifested, reduced to an observable fact, the extent to which the human essence has become nature to man, or to which nature to him has become the human essence of man. From this relationship one can therefore judge man’s whole level of development. From the character of this relationship follows how much man as a species-being, as man, has come to be himself and to comprehend himself; the relation of man to woman is the most natural relation of human being to human being. It therefore reveals the extent to which man’s natural behaviour has become human, or the extent to which the human essence in him has become a natural essence – the extent to which his human nature has come to be natural to him. This relationship also reveals the extent to which man’s need has become a human need; the extent to which, therefore, the other person as a person has become for him a need – the extent to which he in his individual existence is at the same time a social being. In 1844, Marx argued that the drive for human freedom, and the drive for woman's freedom were intertwined. Anthropolists seem to agree there is no evidence Matriarchy in the sense of the opposite to Patriarchy, the rule of women, never existed in our recent evolutionary tree; but the further you go back in human history, we find a more egalitarian relation of society to women, leading Engles to wrongly argue there was a would historic defeat of women.
On the contrary, what this implies is a world historic defeat of men, and that women's labor has not only been the basis of society, but the struggle for women's freedom was the pre-condition for the existence of humans. Patriarchy is the counter-revolution within the revolution. While monogamy and the human family provided more freedom than the forms given other female primates, it also leads to women being made into property, and women lost some of their collective power against male abuse.
Marx's theory of evolution was that we still live in pre-historic times. Any species that is in conflict with it's natural environment is in a stage of transition; it must either evolve or go extinct. Society is the mode of human evolution, and the technology we must evolve through if we are to survive as a species, thus we will become Homo Socialist.
Just wanted to get a discussion going.
On the contrary, what this implies is a world historic defeat of men, and that women's labor has not only been the basis of society, but the struggle for women's freedom was the pre-condition for the existence of humans. Patriarchy is the counter-revolution within the revolution. While monogamy and the human family provided more freedom than the forms given other female primates, it also leads to women being made into property, and women lost some of their collective power against male abuse.
Marx's theory of evolution was that we still live in pre-historic times. Any species that is in conflict with it's natural environment is in a stage of transition; it must either evolve or go extinct. Society is the mode of human evolution, and the technology we must evolve through if we are to survive as a species, thus we will become Homo Socialist.
Just wanted to get a discussion going.