Matrist and Patrist Religion

[Illuminaughty]

In a book I was reading yesterday the author was discussing the theories of the sociologist G. Rattray Taylor. He claimed that societies constantly swing back and forth from matrist periods, in which motherly love dominates, and patrist periods.

He considers the following things to be definitive of the Matrist mind set:

1. Permissive toward sex
2. Freedom for women
3. Women have high status
4. Chastity is not valued
5. Egalitarian
   
6. Progressive
7. No distrust of research
8. Spontaneous
   
9. Sex differences minimized
10. Fear of incest
11. Hedonic
12. Mother Goddess

And the following of the Patrist :

1. Restriction toward sex
2. Limitation of freedom for women
3. Women have low status
4. Chastity highly valued
5. Authoritarian
6. Conservative
7. Distrust of research
8. Inhibitions
9. Sex differences maximized
10. Fear of homosexuality
11. Ascetic
12. Father God

I tend to see the same thing in religions as well as societies. Where does your religion fall on this spectrum ? Is one of the two orientations more positive than the other? Is a balance between the two called for? Is it possible to transcend both Patrism and Matrism or are they hard wired aspects of human personality, religion , and society?

Personally I see religions like modern Wicca as tending strongly toward the Matrist and some of the more conservative branches of the Abrahamic faiths (especially Islam) as falling more in the Patrist wing.

I find myself most drawn to the Matrist.

 

[awitch]

Mine path is well described by the Matrist qualities, however I try to strike a balance on placing importance of the male and female deities.

Edit: Qualifying the properties noted above:

1. Permissive toward sex - Involving consenting adults. All parties involved should understand the risks.
2. Freedom for women - As much as for men
3. Women have high status - This is too ambiguous
4. Chastity is not valued - Nothing wrong with it, but being overly promiscuous is potentially dangerous.
5. Egalitarian - yes
6. Progressive - yes
7. No distrust of research - Only if we're talking about the scientific community as a whole.
8. Spontaneous - this is too individual. I'm not a very spontaneous person.
9. Sex differences minimized - Maybe as far as roles in society, but personally, the ladies are nicer to look at.
10. Fear of incest - ew
11. Hedonic - Certainly with limitations. There's a goal about trying to minimize harm.
12. Mother Goddess - I subscribe to multiple male and female deities and try to place equal importance on them

 

[Arthra]

There probably should be more of a middle ground between matrist and patrist.. Avoiding the extremes of both positions could be possible and more desirable in my view.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

What you describe here is pretty much the behavioural difference between bonobos and chimpanzees.

Arthra, which "extremes" do you object to, specifically? I must confess that I cannot find anything in the "matrist" position that strikes me as extreme, although some points could certainly use some additional qualifiers.

Here's how I measure up against this dichotomy:

1. Permissive towards sex: we could add the qualifier of "responsibility" here, but frankly, that applies to ANY behaviour, and I do not see any reason to treat sex as exceptional in this regard. Almost everything we do demands responsibility, especially when other people are involved.

2. Freedom for women: Yes, the restrictive norms of the agrarian age have no place in this world any longer.

3. Neither: My societal ideal conceives of both sexes as equals, and (as per #9) seeks to minimize the gender divide.

4. No chastity: I do not regard sexual repression/abstinence as a value in and of itself, and the whole cult of female virginity is extremely distasteful. Loyalty and trust are important - but these can exist within an open or polyamorous relationship as well.

5. Egalitarian: yep.

6. Progressive: yep.

7. Research: yep, there's nothing to fear from new knowledge. Why cling to the misconceptions of the past?

8. Uninhibited: not as much as I'd like to be (I used to be an exceptionally shy teenager and young adult, and some traces of that time are still lingering), but I don't repress my feelings.

9. Gender divide: as mentioned, I'm not a particular fan of traditional gender roles, neither WRT men or women.

10. Incest taboo: yes, of course. There are several instincts in place that keep us from falling in love with close relatives. That said, I would not wish to criminalize or ostracize the few deviant individuals who are engaged in a consensual relationship with such relatives. Nature makes sure that there's just a few of them around, and the threat of genetic defects alone cannot really justify the way most societies treat incestuous couples.

11. Neither hedonic nor ascetic: I do not believe in ascesis, nor do I treat pleasure as something "unclean" or not worthwhile. But blunt hedonism would be a dead-end street.

12. Archetypal deities and/or asexual overarching Reality.

 

[Arthra]

I think I'd have to read more about Rattray Taylor before coming to any conclusions on this... Ancient societies did have matriarchy but they also had definite rules...

http://www.ehow.com/info_8260922_matriarchal-societies-history.html

and to equate ancient cultures with say modern ideas about chastity and sexual identity might not be that accurate... not to mention our ideas about liberals and conservatives or research.

But in terms of Baha'i Faith there is an emphasis on educating women and enabling women to have equal opportunities with men.

Abdul-Baha in 1913:

In this Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, the women go neck and neck with the men. In no movement will they be left behind. Their rights with men are equal in degree. They will enter all the administrative branches of politics. They will attain in all such a degree as will be considered the very highest station of the world of humanity and will take part in all affairs. Rest ye assured. Do ye not look upon the present conditions; in the not far distant future the world of women will become all-refulgent and all-glorious,...

(Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, p. 181)