Were Viking societies hypergamous?
(media.scored.co)
a sentence any modern whore has memorized well...
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You must log in or sign up to comment
43 comments:
Probably why they had to raid England and rape the local women there instead
what i meant was that the statement that "the woman is the one who is in charge of the relationship" is sooo typical of women that it really doesnt say anything about the society she is actually living in...
Nah,local women spreaded their legs for them. Guys were clean chad conquerors unlike all those poor and dirty saxons.
But how local woman shall chose "the best" ? It all changed non-stop. Riches and money ? Easy to get and easy to lose with your own life. With known husband and position with him sure and clear.
Idea of harem of many concubines competing for one husband ?
In the society where women were allowed to fight in the shield wall and where vengence were literal religious and honorable duty ? Those women would start to slaughter themselves soon without monogamy !
But how local woman shall chose "the best" ? It all changed non-stop. Riches and money ? Easy to get and easy to lose with your own life. With known husband and position with him sure and clear.
Idea of harem of many concubines competing for one husband ?
In the society where women were allowed to fight in the shield wall and where vengence were literal religious and honorable duty ? Those women would start to slaughter themselves soon without monogamy !
>In the society where women were allowed to fight in the shield wall
Sounds like you've been watching too much hollywood, bro.
Sounds like you've been watching too much hollywood, bro.
Seems you are not doing factchecking - i know it is still wokepedia but check the sources mentioned:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shield-maiden
It's NOT woke joke,that were really happening.
Multiple historical sources including Saxo Grammaticus.
Let's be clear: you WOULDN'T want to piss off your wife in those times if you were Viking. They were NOT fragile "princess",and some of them were able and strong enough to kill a male.
And by the way: you would be then fucking PROUD of having such wife anyway - not scared, as both strong parents (such women wouldn't chose a weakling for husband) = so great children (probably).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shield-maiden
It's NOT woke joke,that were really happening.
Multiple historical sources including Saxo Grammaticus.
Let's be clear: you WOULDN'T want to piss off your wife in those times if you were Viking. They were NOT fragile "princess",and some of them were able and strong enough to kill a male.
And by the way: you would be then fucking PROUD of having such wife anyway - not scared, as both strong parents (such women wouldn't chose a weakling for husband) = so great children (probably).
>from Nordic folklore and Norse mythology.
>are considered fictional
>cited a lack of evidence for trained or regular female warriors
All from your source. Bro, testosterone is a performance enhancing drug and synthetic versions that can boost one's levels haven't even been around for a century yet. Even an extreme outlier strong woman is going to be weaker than an average man.
>are considered fictional
>cited a lack of evidence for trained or regular female warriors
All from your source. Bro, testosterone is a performance enhancing drug and synthetic versions that can boost one's levels haven't even been around for a century yet. Even an extreme outlier strong woman is going to be weaker than an average man.
Doubtful.
While I'm sure you'd see some women-sharing in (specifically) viking culture, just due to a mich higher mortality rate in the men, we don't see any wide-spread practices like harems, and slaves tend to come from outside, not within.
In hypergamous cultures, with no checks, women will seek the top 1% of men and form harems. The other 99% of men will have a much higher chance of being rapists, slaves, or sent to die to get them out of the way because the focus of their lives will be getting women. We don't see this in Norse cultures.
I wonder what the prompt for this quote was? Something like "Don't your men get jealous when they see women walking in public with their faces showing"?
While I'm sure you'd see some women-sharing in (specifically) viking culture, just due to a mich higher mortality rate in the men, we don't see any wide-spread practices like harems, and slaves tend to come from outside, not within.
In hypergamous cultures, with no checks, women will seek the top 1% of men and form harems. The other 99% of men will have a much higher chance of being rapists, slaves, or sent to die to get them out of the way because the focus of their lives will be getting women. We don't see this in Norse cultures.
I wonder what the prompt for this quote was? Something like "Don't your men get jealous when they see women walking in public with their faces showing"?
i member the video, some arabic scholar and his jew friend went to scandinavia and wrote how about the lives and traditions of these "barbarians" they were utterly shocked that the wives of the vikings weren't shackled like livestock
they also accused them of being addicted to alcohol which to be honest--they are
i can't for the life of me remember which channel uploaded the video, was it voices from the past? kings and generals?
Invicta? fire of learning? or someone else?
now you've plagued me with a yearning to find the video
they also accused them of being addicted to alcohol which to be honest--they are
i can't for the life of me remember which channel uploaded the video, was it voices from the past? kings and generals?
Invicta? fire of learning? or someone else?
now you've plagued me with a yearning to find the video
Don't waste your time. You're wasting time to find out what a jew and some goatfucker said. They're liars. They don't have credibility. They are not real scholars.
Therefore, i can't even upvote this post because i don't even know if it is credible or accurate.
Therefore, i can't even upvote this post because i don't even know if it is credible or accurate.
It was voices of the past and the guy's name had "Ibn" in it. I watched the same vidya about 6 years ago.
Probably "ibn Kaldun" (sp?), who was a very prominent Arabic scholar. I'll listen to what these people had to say regardless of their race.
As I said elsewhere, I think this very plausible. Swedes have always been like this. It's basically no fault divorce in the 10th century. A woman can leave her man if she "doesn't like him". This just means that the man doesn't own her like was the case it Islamic societies of the time.
There are other sources (De'toqueville) which describe American women of the early 19th Century similarly. Living out on the frontier the woman must be equal with a man in terms of effort toward survival. This gives her higher status in the marriage. She is still a woman, but she is given respect for the things she does. De'toqueville (a Frenchman) contrasted this with European women with their pearls and fainting couches where every luxury was provided. I can see the same psychological effect taking place in the tribal societies of the 9th and 10th century Norse populations.
If you're interested in De'toquevilles' book, which is excellent, it's called "Democracy In America". It's a must read, imo. It's one of the most interesting books I've ever read and is mega based on blacks and Indians. They don't teach these things in school and it's the best first hand account of early life in the American Republic. He approaches it like an anthropologist and it's fascinating.
Just to throw it out there, you should also read "The Histories" by Herodotus, which is my other favorite ancient text. Modern scholars hate Herodotus and disparage him at every turn, but there is shit in there that will blow your mind. He basically gives a rundown of the known world in great detail at the year 450 B.C., Egypt, the Greeks, and all the little tribes that populate the planet. It's also fascinating. This is the pre-Alexandrian ancient world. Give it a shot if you're into it.
As I said elsewhere, I think this very plausible. Swedes have always been like this. It's basically no fault divorce in the 10th century. A woman can leave her man if she "doesn't like him". This just means that the man doesn't own her like was the case it Islamic societies of the time.
There are other sources (De'toqueville) which describe American women of the early 19th Century similarly. Living out on the frontier the woman must be equal with a man in terms of effort toward survival. This gives her higher status in the marriage. She is still a woman, but she is given respect for the things she does. De'toqueville (a Frenchman) contrasted this with European women with their pearls and fainting couches where every luxury was provided. I can see the same psychological effect taking place in the tribal societies of the 9th and 10th century Norse populations.
If you're interested in De'toquevilles' book, which is excellent, it's called "Democracy In America". It's a must read, imo. It's one of the most interesting books I've ever read and is mega based on blacks and Indians. They don't teach these things in school and it's the best first hand account of early life in the American Republic. He approaches it like an anthropologist and it's fascinating.
Just to throw it out there, you should also read "The Histories" by Herodotus, which is my other favorite ancient text. Modern scholars hate Herodotus and disparage him at every turn, but there is shit in there that will blow your mind. He basically gives a rundown of the known world in great detail at the year 450 B.C., Egypt, the Greeks, and all the little tribes that populate the planet. It's also fascinating. This is the pre-Alexandrian ancient world. Give it a shot if you're into it.
>you should also read "The Histories" by Herodotus
I have already read it in full and pieced through a few of the books a couple more times.
>If you're interested in De'toquevilles' book, which is excellent, it's called "Democracy In America".
I'll take a look at it. Finding obscure texts about infant America is nice. Thanks for the suggestion.
I disagree with your assessment a little. When the state isn't around to protect women, the man is the ultimate decider of any issue. There's exceptions where a community would protect a wife and hide her away from her husband but society wasn't very accepting of "I just don't like him anymore" when it came to divorce. Plus when you have conditions where husband and wife work every waking hour of the day, there's not a whole lot of time to think about frivolous nonsense like romantic attraction.
I have already read it in full and pieced through a few of the books a couple more times.
>If you're interested in De'toquevilles' book, which is excellent, it's called "Democracy In America".
I'll take a look at it. Finding obscure texts about infant America is nice. Thanks for the suggestion.
I disagree with your assessment a little. When the state isn't around to protect women, the man is the ultimate decider of any issue. There's exceptions where a community would protect a wife and hide her away from her husband but society wasn't very accepting of "I just don't like him anymore" when it came to divorce. Plus when you have conditions where husband and wife work every waking hour of the day, there's not a whole lot of time to think about frivolous nonsense like romantic attraction.
Just to clarify, Democracy in America isn't obscure. It's widely known as one of the best first hand accounts of the United States, it's just most people aren't interested in these types of things. People who know, know.
Cool for reading Herodotus. I also dip back into it every few years just because it's so good.
>There's exceptions where a community would protect a wife and hide her away from her husband but society wasn't very accepting of "I just don't like him anymore" when it came to divorce. Plus when you have conditions where husband and wife work every waking hour of the day, there's not a whole lot of time to think about frivolous nonsense like romantic attraction.
I don't disagree with you, but I think Nordic societies, being White, and also given the temperament of modern Scandinavians, I can see a woman being able to leave her husband if she chose. I think this freaked ibn Kaldun out when he compared it to Islamic society. I think a lot of people here think that a woman back then was like modern women now where they need to go whore it up or something, which is ridiculous.
You talk about "community" but all community was in that time was probably a dozen families. If the woman was being abused or whatever "I don't like him" reason was applicable back then, I'm sure her father, brothers, cousins, etc., would take her in and probably find her a new husband. I think you also misrepresent the era with the "work every hour of every day" mindset. These were still people and there was plenty of room for fun and romance, just like today. They probably worked less hard than we do overall, except during critical points of the year like the harvest.
Cool for reading Herodotus. I also dip back into it every few years just because it's so good.
>There's exceptions where a community would protect a wife and hide her away from her husband but society wasn't very accepting of "I just don't like him anymore" when it came to divorce. Plus when you have conditions where husband and wife work every waking hour of the day, there's not a whole lot of time to think about frivolous nonsense like romantic attraction.
I don't disagree with you, but I think Nordic societies, being White, and also given the temperament of modern Scandinavians, I can see a woman being able to leave her husband if she chose. I think this freaked ibn Kaldun out when he compared it to Islamic society. I think a lot of people here think that a woman back then was like modern women now where they need to go whore it up or something, which is ridiculous.
You talk about "community" but all community was in that time was probably a dozen families. If the woman was being abused or whatever "I don't like him" reason was applicable back then, I'm sure her father, brothers, cousins, etc., would take her in and probably find her a new husband. I think you also misrepresent the era with the "work every hour of every day" mindset. These were still people and there was plenty of room for fun and romance, just like today. They probably worked less hard than we do overall, except during critical points of the year like the harvest.
There is no woman who doesn't experience jealousy.
Right,but you know - that were different times. Times when another women would put her axe in forehead of the bitch trying to steal her husband :P
And by the way - woman were not so easy to be dissapointed then. You were chad viking (even if you were a bit ugly you were a warrior who were giving her some cool stuff) and married,or you were dead viking so...
And by the way - woman were not so easy to be dissapointed then. You were chad viking (even if you were a bit ugly you were a warrior who were giving her some cool stuff) and married,or you were dead viking so...
Arabic writing looks like what an epileptic dog leaves behind while it is shitting.
You ever scare the living shit out of a small yappy dog like a Taco bell dog or a Jack Russell, and they run off screeching and shitting themselves? That is what their writing looks like,
Viking runes are more square and blocky, this shill godless progressive cunt is trying to gaslight us into thinking Arabs be Vikings n'sheeeeiiiit.
So Jewish.
You ever scare the living shit out of a small yappy dog like a Taco bell dog or a Jack Russell, and they run off screeching and shitting themselves? That is what their writing looks like,
Viking runes are more square and blocky, this shill godless progressive cunt is trying to gaslight us into thinking Arabs be Vikings n'sheeeeiiiit.
So Jewish.
Modern Swedes are like this, and also the French I think.
It might have been a sign of the times, but as a young man I was in Paris (around 25 years ago) and a girl asked me to pretend to be her boyfriend because another guy was bothering her. I told the offending guy to back off because this french girl was my "woman". He said "Your woman? Like you own her?" and I said, "Yes."
It doesn't seem so bad until you realize that Europe has been conquered, ironically Sweden was first, and France is basically destroyed. So you tell me how far this ideology gets you.
It might have been a sign of the times, but as a young man I was in Paris (around 25 years ago) and a girl asked me to pretend to be her boyfriend because another guy was bothering her. I told the offending guy to back off because this french girl was my "woman". He said "Your woman? Like you own her?" and I said, "Yes."
It doesn't seem so bad until you realize that Europe has been conquered, ironically Sweden was first, and France is basically destroyed. So you tell me how far this ideology gets you.
Toast message
Be it a conquering army, or some guy she perceives as more dominant [not just physically] than you
Also, at those times, the Vikings were more groomed and bathed than the British men, so women very much preferred them.
u/Fabius post bellow explained this.