Hi Tim,
In your reply to "An Awful Question" you can't possibly be making an excuse formale roaming, can you? I hope you don't think that women should accept a roaming mate for the privilege of being married to what is called a "good provider,"
and by you, a brave family defender? Even the acceptance of such a so-called biological imperative from the past won't lead to happy wives in our time and society, I feel sure of that. In fact in the west it is the leading cause for older women getting AIDS from their roaming old husbands. Of course, AIDS could be
given to husbands by their wives, too, but this doesn't seem to be the usual route for the disease.
We need to rise above ancient tendencies that don't work for humans any more, by
exercising self discipline for the good of ourselves and all. We aren't animals. We are humans. We'll hopefully rise to our own level, for our own good. Adultery has been historically, condemned religiously and otherwise, for both males and females. The commandment against adultery given by Moses and continued by
Jesus Christ is a religious example. The very word comes from the Romans and the basic meaning of to adulterate, or to spoil, meant, even in Roman times, "adultery" -- to spoil a marriage.
To know your own father, and for a father to know his own child has always been
important. It avoids people unknowingly producing children together with a nearrelative, which is bad for the strength of the gene pool. Native tribes in theAmericas had taboos and elaborate arrangements solely designed to avoid intermarriage between family members.
Historically it is usual among humans to find a formal way of protecting clarityof lineage for inheritance purposes, to protect against multiplying genetic mistakes, and for other reasons particular to human culture. In ancient Egypt in order to keep the line of inheritance in one family there were brother/sister marriages for Pharoahs. This was the case in Hawaii for their highest matrilineal rulers. In Hawaii any deformed babies were killed at birth, often by midwives who delivered them, in order to protect against degeneration in the health of the
line. There must have been a similar practise in Egypt and other places where there were family intermarriage patterns.
Another reason for insisting on female chastity is so husbands wouldn't be fooled into raising other men's children as their own. The saying "a cuckoo in the nest" is sometimes applied to illegitimate children. This imagery stems from the
ways of "a European bird that is a parasite, given to laying its eggs in the nests of other birds which hatch them and rear the offspring." -- Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. A man whose wife is unfaithful was known as a cuckold. The word comes from "cuckoo".
It isn't just men who have these ancient biological temptations. Women are faced with the challenge, too. Their chastity and faithfulness was always insisted
on by men during patriarchal times, so that a man could know his own children and not raise a cuckoo in his nest, or leave his wealth to one who was not his sonwhen he died.
A couple of years ago now, students in a U.S. high school did blood work in science class to study the pattern of inheritance from parents through to their children. Some in the classes didn't inherit from their ostensible fathers, indicating to all concerned that they weren't the biological children of their fathers.
There were upset children, marital discord and some divorces out of it. One unusual "father" decided he wanted the children anyway, although not the wife anymore. That study was discontinued in science classes.
Years ago my daughter's brother-in-law was studying to become a laboratory technician. As part of his work he needed to prepare a family blood lineage. He asked if our family would be willing to be his specimen family. We all allowed samples of blood to be taken and analyzed in detail. The study showed which of us
could give our blood to another. Luckily we each have one other family member with the same detailed blood type. It's nice to know that in case of need we canhelp our match. The study also proved that Ben is the father of all our children and also that none of them was secretly adopted.
The family lab student has a curious and mischievous personality. Some of our children don't clearly look like Ben. Two are dark and two are blond. Two have deep-set eyes and two have large, round eyes. Once there was a family acquaintancewho used to jokingly imply that our children had more than one father. His joking proved later to be a way of trying to get to me, when his remarks were not taken up they became plainer. So all you girls out there, don't take such joking
necessarily as a joke. It could be testing you for a weakness in your faithfulness to your husband.
I realize now that it could have been embarrassing to refuse to have the blood work done. I didn't even think of it at the time, not realizing in my more youthful innocence how mixed up things have become in our decaying culture.
The family blood study was interesting. An earlier child caused an antibody in
my blood that worked against a later child. I saw an odd condition before she was born that I know now must have been a sign of the trouble. Thank heavens she
was OK, and didn't need a whole blood change right after birth. The informationcame to light because of increase in knowledge. Many more things will come to
light through blood studies. We have a saying: "Your sins will find you out."
I expect more blood studies for other reasons will find a lot of sins.
Blood studies are being used now to find family genetic diseases, such as Huntingdon's, in the hope of eventually curing them. Genealogical blood studies are being done to track extremely ancient origins. More people will have it done fora variety of newly discovered reasons. Blood tells the truth. Old secrets will be exposed. Could it be that a "Pandora's box" is being opened?
It has been said "It is a wise man who knows his own father." No wonder women'schastity has historically been forced upon them. I wonder if any seducer of a
wife ever thought of himself as a "parasite", which, in accordance with the description of cuckoo birds by Merriam-Webster's, he is.
Of course now we have birth control. Does that make the whole thing any more morally defensible? Furthermore, if it's used so well, why are there so many new
cases of sexually transmitted diseases all the time. These are diseases that are catching, which can make a man or woman unable to make babies, and which can disease or kill unborn or newly born babies, as well as parents. Do you know that China is one of the countries that is in great danger of a terrible epidemic of AIDS?
What about what should be the deep and true bond of trust that exists, that between husband and wife. It is dedication of body, mind and soul to each other. Is it supposed to be only on the wife's side? I think not. And how terrible to
chance giving a loved mate or hoped for child a killing disease!
Whether or not there is a biological imperative on the part of both males and females to roam, now's the time to be chaste before marriage, and faithful in marriage -- for the good of everybody!
Warmly, Mary
