Gisela Bleibtreu-Ehrenberg
Gisela Bleibtreu-Ehrenberg (born 2 August, 1929) is a German sociologist, ethnologist, sexologist, and writer further specializing into the fields of psychology, Indo-European studies, religious studies, philology, linguistics, and philosophy, since 1980 also increasingly anthropology. Being especially active in the fields of sexuology, homophobia, and prejudice studies, she was until her retirement a leading member of the German Society for Social-Scientific Sexuality Research.
Quotes
[edit]Tabu Homosexualität (1978)
[edit]- Wo die "Beleidigung sittlichen Gefühls", wo "moralische Begriffe" höher gestellt werden als die eigene, auf rationaler Basis erarbeitete Strafrechtstheorie, dort darf man mit voller Berechtigung von einem totalen Sieg des Vorurteils über die Vernunft sprechen.
- Wherever people prefer to call upon "offenses against moral sentience", upon "moral terms" rather than adhere to one's rationally derived scientific criminological approach [dividing irrational, ethnocentric "moral offenses" from actual crimes], one is fully justified in speaking of prejudice's total victory over reason.
- Tabu Homosexualität - Die Geschichte eines Vorurteils (1978; reprinted in 1981 as Homosexualität - Die Geschichte eines Vorurteils), p. 321.
- Wherever people prefer to call upon "offenses against moral sentience", upon "moral terms" rather than adhere to one's rationally derived scientific criminological approach [dividing irrational, ethnocentric "moral offenses" from actual crimes], one is fully justified in speaking of prejudice's total victory over reason.
Der pädophile Impuls (1985/88)
[edit]- Als Ursachen für die so oder so vorgefundene Bewertung [einer bestimmten] Sexualität [...] lassen sich generell folgende ausmachen: Die jeweilige Stammestradition mit ihren Mythen, Ursprungs- und Fruchtbarkeitssagen und ferner die kulturellen Charakteristika der fraglichen Gruppe, nun aber geographisch großräumiger betrachtet und im Zusammenhang mit Rasse, Sprache (Sprachfamilie), Erbschaftsverhältnissen (Vater- oder Mutterrecht) sowie ihren ökonomischen und ökologischen Besonderheiten gesehen. Religion, wirtschaftliche Verhältnisse, natürliche Ressourcen sowie das ökologische Umfeld insgesamt (auch dessen Veränderungen im Zeitablauf!) erweisen sich überall als direkt aufeinander bezogen.
- As cause of any particular evaluation of [any particular] sexuality [...], the following may be agreed upon in general: The respective racial traditions with their myths, their genesis and fertility legends, and further the cultural characteristics of the groups in question, treated as geographically spread out as viewed in connection with race, language (language families), lineal descent (patriarchal or matriarchal), as well as their economic and ecological particularities. Religion, economic relations, natural resources along with the ecological environment all together (also their changes in the course of time!) prove themselves to be directly related to one another everywhere.
- Der pädophile Impuls - Wie lernt ein junger Mensch Sexualität? (The Paedophile Impulse: Toward the Development of an Aetiology of Child-Adult Sexual Contacts from an Ethological and Ethnological Viewpoint, transl. Hubert Kennedy) (1985/88).
- As cause of any particular evaluation of [any particular] sexuality [...], the following may be agreed upon in general: The respective racial traditions with their myths, their genesis and fertility legends, and further the cultural characteristics of the groups in question, treated as geographically spread out as viewed in connection with race, language (language families), lineal descent (patriarchal or matriarchal), as well as their economic and ecological particularities. Religion, economic relations, natural resources along with the ecological environment all together (also their changes in the course of time!) prove themselves to be directly related to one another everywhere.
Vom Schmetterling zur Doppelaxt (1990)
[edit]- Alle Menschen gehören als Gattung zu den gruppenhaft lebenden Geschöpfen, was lebensgefährdende innerartliche Aggression von vornherein ausschließt. Mit anderen Worten: Hätten schon in der Vergangenheit unserer Spezies solch schwere Konflikte [...] geherrscht wie während der letzten rund viereinhalb Jahrtausende und noch gegenwärtig, dann wären wir niemals zu Menschen geworden, sondern längst vorher ausgestorben. Denn Wesen, die als einzelne Individuen im Vergleich zu den vielen Raubtieren, die ihnen nachstellen, derart schwach und hilflos sind wie wir, brauchen Deckung und Rückhalt von anderen der gleichen Art, um überleben zu können. Wir haben weder Klauen noch Reißzähne, noch genug Muskelkraft, um allein unseren großen Freßfeinden erfolgreich Widerstand zu leisten, doch in der Gruppe gelingt es, wenn auch nie ohne selbstlose Opfer und Mut. In jener fernen Frühzeit, als unsere vormenschlichen Ahnen anfingen, in Trupps zu leben, um sich bei Gefahr zusammenzuschließen und einander beizustehen, haben sie ein Verhalten entwickelt, das man 'soziale Intelligenz' nennt: Die Fähigkeit, mit Angehörigen der eigenen Gattung zusammenzuwirken, um das Gedeihen aller zu gewährleisten. Dies Potential haben wir auch jetzt noch, aber es erweist sich als nachhaltig gestört.
[...]
Es muß sich um eine friedliche Welt gehandelt haben, weil die frühen Siedlungen zumeist nicht gegen menschliche Feinde gesichert sind. Für ein, zwei Jahrtausende [nach der letzten Eiszeit] haben Menschen in solchen Lebensverhältnissen offenbar ein glückliches Dasein verbracht.- Humans belong to the category of herding animals, due to which intra-species aggression at a life-endangering level is obviated. In other words: If, for some reason or another, severe conflicts [...] of the kind common since the last circa four-and-a-half millennia would have occured during the time of our hominisation, our ancestors would have completely eradicated each other and homo sapiens would have never set foot on earth. For a species that in its individuals was so weak when confronted with many predators preying after them required support from its kind in order to survive. We possess neither claws nor fangs nor the strength to successfully withstand the larger carnivores all alone, however it is as a group that we may survive together though never without sacrifice and courage. When our non-human ancestors began living in packs in order to stand together when facing hazards, they developed a behaviour that we may term 'social intelligence', which is the ability to co-operate with one's species in order to maintain the well-being of all. Modern homo sapiens still possesses this potential, however our culture has effectively damaged it.
[...]
It must have been a peaceful world, for early settlements at large exhibited no fortifications regarding human attacks. For maybe one or two millennia [after the end of the last glacial epoch] , humans obviously lived an untroubled life under these social conditions.- Vom Schmetterling zur Doppelaxt: Die Umwertung von Weiblichkeit in unserer Kultur (1990), p. 9, 11.
- Humans belong to the category of herding animals, due to which intra-species aggression at a life-endangering level is obviated. In other words: If, for some reason or another, severe conflicts [...] of the kind common since the last circa four-and-a-half millennia would have occured during the time of our hominisation, our ancestors would have completely eradicated each other and homo sapiens would have never set foot on earth. For a species that in its individuals was so weak when confronted with many predators preying after them required support from its kind in order to survive. We possess neither claws nor fangs nor the strength to successfully withstand the larger carnivores all alone, however it is as a group that we may survive together though never without sacrifice and courage. When our non-human ancestors began living in packs in order to stand together when facing hazards, they developed a behaviour that we may term 'social intelligence', which is the ability to co-operate with one's species in order to maintain the well-being of all. Modern homo sapiens still possesses this potential, however our culture has effectively damaged it.
- Um es vorwegzunehmen: Jene dargelegte 'kultische Dominanz' der Frau ist kein Matriarchat oder Feminat gewesen; zu der Sozialstruktur, die wir heute 'Patriarchat' nennen, hat es niemals ein weibliches Pendant gegeben. [...] Nichtsdestoweniger sind einige der Befunde, worauf die alten Ethnologen und Soziologen (und Sozialisten) ihre falschen weltumspannenden Theoreme aufbauten, tatsächlich wahr und in der Realität bei einigen Naturvölkern heute noch vorfindbar, nur müssen sie besser gedeutet werden als vordem, nämlich objektiver. Und insofern sollte eher von maternalen denn von matriachalen Kulturelementen gesprochen werden, wenn man solch kulturell-soziale Zusammenhänge unter globalem Aspekt anspricht. [...]
Jedenfalls zählen zu den kulturellen Zügen, um die es hier geht, zusammengefaßt etwa folgende, die heute nurmehr selten irgendwo alle gleichzeitig auftreten:
In der Erbfolgereglung wird die mütterliche Linie gewählt, Kinder gehören stets zur Mutterseite. Eigentum, gelegentlich auch Rechte werden in der mütterlichen Linie vererbt (entweder von der Mutter auf die Tochter oder vom Mutterbruder auf den Schwestersohn). Es herrscht sog. matrilokale Wohnfolge, d. h. der Ehemann tritt in die Sippe der Frau ein und wohnt dort. Bei beiden Geschlechtern herrscht voreheliche sexuelle Ungebundenheit, bei den Mädchen weitgehende Freiheit in der Gattenwahl und große Selbständigkeit in der Ehe mit leichter Scheidungsmöglichkeit für die Frau. Die weibliche Stellung in Kult und Religion ist relevanter als die der Männer. Der biologische Vater gilt als mit seinen Kindern nicht verwandt; seine Stelle nimmt, was Erziehung und Fürsorge betrifft, der Mutterbruder ein: Er ist der soziale Vater für alle Kinder seiner Schwester, auch wenn diese von verschiedenen Vätern stammen. [...]
Das ganze Denkmuster, das hier nur extrem knapp umrissen wird, gibt im Grunde keinen Hinweis darauf, daß die betreffenden Menschen die Zusammenhänge zwischen Zeugung und Geburt gekannt hätten.- Let it be said in advance: This 'ritual dominance' of females was by no means whatsoever a matriarchy, for there never existed a female aequivalent to the social structure we refer to as 'patriarchy' today. [...] Yet, a number of the findings which 19th century ethnologists and sociologists (even socialists) based off their figments of a proto-historical global matriarchy are certainly valid, and some of these features are empirically observable in primitive peoples even today. These findings only require to be interpreted more reasonably, that is less biased to one side or the other. Thus, one is more justified in speaking of maternal rather than "matriarchal" cultural elements when addressing these socio-cultural affairs. [...]
The cultural traits we are dealing with here, and that in the modern period have become extremely rare in this combination, may be summarised as the following:
Lineal descent was maternal, children were regarded as descendant from the mother. Property, at times also authorisations were passed down the maternal line, either from mother to daughter or from maternal uncle to the son on the sister's side of the family. Residential affairs were matrifocal, i. e. a husband joined the bride's family and he moved in with them. Both sexes were free to be promiscuous prior to marriage, whereas females were free to choose their marital spouse, they were entitled to wide-reaching rights even as wifes, and it was easy for them to get a divorce. The ritual and religious role of females was more relevant than that of males. Biological fathers were not considered related to their children, their role as educator and caretaker was held by the mother's brother who was the social father for all of her children, even if they were fathered by different men. [...]
Having only briefly summarised the dominant social order above, none of these traits we know hint in the slightest towards the idea that the people [of the Maternal Megalith Culture] in question were at their time aware of the causal relation between sex and giving birth.- Vom Schmetterling zur Doppelaxt, p. 16-18, last sentence p. 15-16.
- Let it be said in advance: This 'ritual dominance' of females was by no means whatsoever a matriarchy, for there never existed a female aequivalent to the social structure we refer to as 'patriarchy' today. [...] Yet, a number of the findings which 19th century ethnologists and sociologists (even socialists) based off their figments of a proto-historical global matriarchy are certainly valid, and some of these features are empirically observable in primitive peoples even today. These findings only require to be interpreted more reasonably, that is less biased to one side or the other. Thus, one is more justified in speaking of maternal rather than "matriarchal" cultural elements when addressing these socio-cultural affairs. [...]
- Die Feste der frühen Epochen waren stark sexuell betont. Ihr Höhepunkt war oft das, was man heute Gruppensex nennt und als sozial rein negativ einstuft. Allerdings vermag Sexualität tatsächlich soziale Spannungen abzubauen, und sie 'befriedigt' nicht nur, sie befriedet auch. Der Mensch ist anthropologisch auf viel mehr Sexualkontakte angelegt, als unsere rigide Kultur uns erlaubt, ja, nur als 'menschenwürdig' hinstellt. Die als sogenannte unnennbare Unsittlichkeit abqualifizierten Sexualbräuche vieler Naturvölker wurden von den weißen Kolonialherren oft als willkommene Vorwände instrumentalisiert, um die betreffenden Stämme guten Gewissens zu drangsalieren und zu dezimieren. Künder des Islam im Orient und Vertreter des Konfuzianismus in China bemühten sich ihrerseits ebenso wie Weiße zwecks christlicher Mission, sexuelle Riten möglichst total auszurotten, wo immer sie noch auf sie trafen: Was vordem Kult war, wurde zur Unzucht umdefiniert. Die Praxis hat bei den meisten Naturvölkern dazu geführt, daß die betreffenden Rituale erloschen. Vergleichbare Sitten sind in der Frühzeit auf dieselbe Art verschwunden, zwar nicht aus denselben, aber aus ähnlich strukturierten Gründen, denn in allen patriarchalischen Ethnien gelten orgiastische Riten als sozialschädlich.
- The proto-historic religious festivities [of the Maternal Megalith Culture] were strongly sexual in nature. They commonly culminated in what today is referred to as group sex and is socially regarded as extremely negative nowadays. In fact, the inherent potential of sexuality is to decrease social conflict, for indeed sexual activity not only gratifies, it pacifies as well. Our biological anthropological heritage disposes humanity to far more diverse varieties of sexual behaviours than our modern repressive culture permits or deems 'socially acceptable'. Abhorring them as unmentionable immoralities, white colonial masters often gladly took to using all the sexual customs of many autochtonous peoples as excuses to oppress and severely decimate the tribes in question, even doing so with a perfect peace of conscience. Islam's campaigners in the Orient, pioneers of Confucianism in China, and Caucasian Christians used their best endeavours to destroy root and branch of all surviving sexual rites they came across; that which had priorly been sacred practice became re-defined as sinful lewdness and perversion. These religious processes yielded widespread absence of such customs even in many primitive cultures by the modern period. Similar proto-historic customs [of the Maternal Megalith Culture] were wiped out in a comparable fashion [by Indo-Europeans], with structurally similar yet not identical reasonings given, for all patriarchal ethnics regard orgiastic indulgences as corruptive to their social fabric.
- Vom Schmetterling zur Doppelaxt, p. 22-23.
- The proto-historic religious festivities [of the Maternal Megalith Culture] were strongly sexual in nature. They commonly culminated in what today is referred to as group sex and is socially regarded as extremely negative nowadays. In fact, the inherent potential of sexuality is to decrease social conflict, for indeed sexual activity not only gratifies, it pacifies as well. Our biological anthropological heritage disposes humanity to far more diverse varieties of sexual behaviours than our modern repressive culture permits or deems 'socially acceptable'. Abhorring them as unmentionable immoralities, white colonial masters often gladly took to using all the sexual customs of many autochtonous peoples as excuses to oppress and severely decimate the tribes in question, even doing so with a perfect peace of conscience. Islam's campaigners in the Orient, pioneers of Confucianism in China, and Caucasian Christians used their best endeavours to destroy root and branch of all surviving sexual rites they came across; that which had priorly been sacred practice became re-defined as sinful lewdness and perversion. These religious processes yielded widespread absence of such customs even in many primitive cultures by the modern period. Similar proto-historic customs [of the Maternal Megalith Culture] were wiped out in a comparable fashion [by Indo-Europeans], with structurally similar yet not identical reasonings given, for all patriarchal ethnics regard orgiastic indulgences as corruptive to their social fabric.
