0
0

[–] feral-toes ago 

When I see the word Immigration I imagine a Frenchman who likes beer moving to England and an Englishman who likes wine moving to France. Or maybe a German engineer who wants to work on nuclear power moves to France, a French engineer who wants to work on hydro-electric power moves to Norway and a Norwegian engineer who wants to work on the baffling technical difficulties of solar power under cloudy skies moves to Germany.

I imagine a two-way flow, with people redistributing to where they belong. It is not a one-way flow, with unpopular places emptying out, and popular places getting ruined by over-crowding. It reinforces the destination culture, as the Englishman drinks a glass of Rhône in Lyon and the Frenchman drains a pint of bitter in Boulton.

Meanwhile, some cultures allow men to take up to four wives. That creates the standard problem of polygamous cultures: what do the surplus young men do? They could travel far, going to a monogamous culture. Perhaps one with late marriage and lots of apparently single women. There they can compete for women against the native men.

Is that immigration? It seems very different. It is a one way flow that undermines the destination culture. Merely using the word immigration for this flow makes a dubious factual claim that two apparently different things are really pretty much the same.

The video missed something big with its discussion of "same sex marriage". Before say 1960, in the UK, the taboos around sex still held with moderate force in the conformist, white-bread, middle-class. Maybe 90% of the population. You had to get married before you could have sex. But getting married was fraught. You were stuck with your spouse for life! There was a fair bit of pressure and guilt to stop you having an affair, and if you did you hid it, so I don't really know how common it was. I think divorce was accepted in the USA much earlier than the UK so my 1960 date might seem late for the social changes. But think of Edward and Mrs Simpson and the abdication crisis in 1936. Maybe the UK date should be a range: 1936 to 1960.

Fornication always happened covertly. From 1960 to 1980 it came out of the shadows as a "try before you buy" kind of thing. Young men and women were supposed to be aiming for a life-long marriage, so you had better make sure that you were compatible before you committed. Cohabitation before marriage moved from being shocking to being recommended. But the sexual revolution of the 1960's didn't slow down. "Try before you buy" was over by 1980. After 1980, young women want fun. That is, to ride the cock-carousel for ten years, before settling down to a brief "marriage" to start the first family and qualify for alimony and child support. And after that?

Before 1960, the word marriage was a synecdoche; not just a ceremony with an expensive white dress, but a name for an idealist vision of how society was supposed to work. No sex before marriage. No divorce. No adultery.

Today, all that is left is the expensive white dress. The new vision is that marriage lasts until the wife gets bored or the husband loses his job or, well, with no-fault divorce there isn't a reckoning of what went wrong. There isn't even the belief that something did go wrong.

Marriage has been abolished. If we were honest we would find a new word for the modern, and very different, social arrangement. Call it tempriage. The first half temp alludes to the temporary nature of the successor to marriage, while the second half iage harks back to the ancient origins of tempriage.

First marriage gets abolished and replaced by tempriage. Then, with acceptance of homosexuality, comes same sex tempriage. I don't understand why Christian churches are upset about gay tempriage. The thing that was important to them was marriage and that has gone. If Christians are to get upset, it should involve recognizing that they have been fooled. Today the word marriage has been re-purposed as the proper (and only) name for tempriage. Christians have been deceived into thinking that we still have marriage, because we still use the word, when in fact we use it as the name for something new, only tied to old use by a long history of small changes. Many small changes that have added up to a huge total change.

The video focuses on the game of coming up with new names, euphemisms, for old things. But deceiving people by using old names for new things is also important.

0
0

[–] derram [S] ago 

https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=K-58HoTHWQk :

Control the Words, Control the Culture - YouTube


This has been an automated message.