Who decides when a Society Should Evolve? A Case of Kenya in the 1800s…

Three intriguing cases made it before the lethargic Kenyan judiciary this week, all three representative of the hypocrisy of our moral (or immoral, if you will) culture, and our pathological tendency to yell generic arguments whenever we are faced with issues that are ‘new’. We are always ready to tell off such things as ‘foreign’ despite the fact that they have been in our society all along. What we do, as a 21^st century country stuck in a 19^th century mindset, is mistake lack of information for absence of such phenomena. We think that despite Africa being the cradle of man, that that man left and floated on dug-out trees to other continents and got sick before coming back with that sickness which we, as those left behind, now have to grapple with. Are we evolving?

No, that is not how ancestors did it, we know how those symbols of morality and sacred barbarism lived. Trust us, we know.

Case #1 was filed by a transgender, Audrey, who is seeking to compel the educational system to recognize transgenders. This debate has gained significance over the last few decades, as feminism and liberal ideas on sexuality have spread to the edges of our tiny, polluted planet. If you decide to change your gender today, surgically or just decide to, say, change your name from John to Joyce, the legal process, though lengthy, is permissive.

The process itself is unnecessarily lengthy, perhaps to convince you to quit midway as the wheels of government turn as they did in 2^nd century China. The simple switch of the (M/F) is, however,  impossible by current laws. The reasons for this are broad, but the primary one is that the framers of the constitution ‘did not envisage a scenario’ where one could simply switch from being a man to a woman. Never mind that this constitution was drafted at the same time the LGBTI movement was gaining traction and recognition. Kenya, are these your sons and daughters too? The ‘cultural’ background excuse makes for a compelling case.

One is either born a man or a woman, with respective genitalia, as evolution and/or creation has seen fit to divide us as a species. Only, that definition is very limited, it assumes that having certain genitalia automatically assigns you a gender, and ignores the fact that gender is as much a cognitive development process as it is a biological one. It also explains why those born with ‘undefined’ genitalia were either killed or ostracized by our morally upright but seemingly barbaric ancestors.

Case #2 is seeking to have the government decriminalize homosexuality [If you open this link, do not even read the article, jump to the comment section]. This one is not new, it is just that with a judiciary that has had to reel under accusations of being lethargic in its jurisprudence, it should make for an interesting case. The common defence we have is that ‘homosexuality is unnatural, it was brought to Africa by the colonialist, it is a western decadence.’ WRONG! Homosexuality has been rampant in all human society since time immemorial, it is not even limited to human beings, it is present in animals and most probably, extra terrestrials.

This misconception is based on two things. One, that we know all about our ancestors despite the fact that we have made no significant effort to know how our ancestors lived before 1890, and two, that homosexuality and sexual ambiguity can be ‘shipped.’ Are we mistaking the lack of information (about sexuality circa 1800) with the absence of a phenomenon in our culture? In case #3, eleven women were arrested and charged with ‘engaging in unnatural acts.’ Their crime? They had engaged in bestiality with a dog, probably a pimp among equals now, while acting in a porn movie proving once again that Pwani si Kenya. Ignoring the fact that the law on which the charge itself is based is archaic and subjective as to what cultural benchmark we are using, as one man’s best friend is another’s love [sic!], the outrage about the case has been indicative of our collective hypocrisy.

Since January 2013, there have been at least three cases of bestiality but none of them has received as much attention as that of ’11 Women 1 Dog.’ Perhaps the number of participants in this cross-species orgy is the reason why we have made memes and exalted a dog that now has to be an unwilling prosecution witness. In the context of this discourse, I offer that it must be something deeper. In each of the aforementioned cases, the human beings were male, and the animals were either goats or some other domesticated animal. (In Sudan, you are caught loving a goat, you marry it, even pay dowry).

The cases are so common that all you have to do is Google search ‘Bestiality in Kenya‘ and then you can pray to whichever deity you give money about how an imperfect society he created. All these cases are where the person is caught, whether it is with sheep, a cow, a donkey, or (another) goat in April 2013, how many do you think go unreported, or undetected?  In our patriarchal society, the act of a man having sex with an animal is seen as moral depravity, but surprisingly, not at the same level as that of a woman engaging in bestiality. Read this ‘dossier’ on female sex workers being paid a handsome figure for engaging in bestiality. Yes, dear reader, that blog post is about bestiality in porn movies, in Kenya, in 2008!

Again, because the only male in this ’11 Girls 1 Pup’ case is ‘foreign’, we heaped all the blame on the ‘mzungus who bring us such moral decadence’. We transfer our locus of responsibility to other people, as we do in politics and civil society despite the fact that as slaves of Breton Woods Institutions and now China, we are all as foreign-funded as can be…Another likely reason is that the females now considered the junk of our upright and moral society are young curious college girls who were using their bodies, which by right belong to our upright and moral socially acceptable institutions of marriage, whether as a rightful partner or a third party, for money/employment.

Our common ‘Kenyan’ perspectives on prostitution are interestingly stupid, please, do indulge (and perservere the bad grammar) in this Wikipedia entry on the topic. Prostitution is the oldest lasting profession, given that everything else has evolved into something else, such as thieves to politicians, and priests to sodomites (on the one hand, on the other anti-contraceptive, anti-condom messengers). If you think about it, all ofhuman employ is a form of prostitution, you use something you have to provide someone, or society, with something he/she/it needs or wants. It is the same for the blacksmith who uses both his skill and experience as it is for the woman or man who uses her/his genitalia to do the same.

We validate more the person who meets another in a social gathering or on social mediaand they do as they will only if neither gets paid out rightly. If anyone pays you, you are a prostitute….if you listen to the myopic arguments against prostitution, such as those that contributed to the crucifixion the former Nairobi mayor after he suggested legalizing and taxing prostitution and ‘sex work’ in the city, you will constantly hear the argument that it is ‘un-African.’ Prostitution has been present in all of human society since people learnt that these genitalia fit into those ones, and that sex is a human need and want, perhaps the only one that truly matters. It was in African culture before the ‘mzungu’ , perhaps not at the same level of limelight, and certainly not paid incurrency, handbags, or rent as it is now, but certainly in some way… (We sold Mt. Kenya to John Boyes for four goats, go figure the math).

Me, right now, evolving this article.

Did bestiality exist in Kenyan societies? Of course it did! Was it rampant? We don’t know. How can we know if we do not investigate? ‘Other people’ seem to be doing a better job at analyzing our sexuality history than we are. It is much easier for us to blame ‘the West’ for the breaks in our moral façade because it makes us feel less responsible for ourselves. It also helps deify our ancestors as the symbols of ‘morality and good manners. Generations of individuals who had defined sexuality and gender roles and who would never, ever, look at an animal in an amorous way’ TOTAL BS! Human beings are human beings, whichever planet we came from, and whichever theory of man you believe in, our homogeneity as a species is significant.

We are animals at a basic level, with our own thoughts on our ‘heightened cognitive senses’ which makes every subsequent generation feel superior to the last, and hence, more foolish….and, it is Christianity and other ‘new’ religions that are ‘UnAfrican.’ If we were being purist Africans, we would still be swearing oaths and consulting with seers instead of burning them (Yes, 21^st century symbol of progress, we torch to protect society, hhhhmmmm, burning human flesh, the smell of singeing immorality).

So what is the façade? That we have accepted all this ‘Western cultural values’, including religion, fashion, food, and greed (another human instinct, but indulge me for a minute) while hoping that the ‘liberal thinking and moral decadence do not have transferability.’

We want to atone for our blindness by saying that homosexuality, undefined sexuality (cognitive and biological), and such things as bestiality did not exist before the white man explored Africa and brought guns, cocaine, HIV/AIDS, and capitalism.

On the one hand we are willing to do anything for money, including stepping over each other in the process despite the fact that our real African culture was communal. It explains why there was no outrage amongst court poets when the feudal prince went to the Queen’s land where the Prime Minister made all effort to hide him from the media and seemingly, being seen with him.

In our African culture, the true one, not this hybrid one in which we purport to have found an equilibrium between the past and the future, such a slight would not be taken lightly. If your host does not want to show you off, then you are the sidekick hidden in the closet when the wife comes home unexpectedly. As a communal people, a guest got first class experience. In fact, whenever a prominent guest visited your home, you let him sleep with your wife! Okay, just one of your wives…It is how we got Wangu wa Matheri the misogynist from just another wife of a local chief…it is also why your mother will show you off to her chama and slaughter her healthiest chicken when you go to visit.

It is why you had sets of china and cutlery designated for guests only…but thousands of Kenyans bombarded the articles with half-witted, incoherent, fallacious, regurgitated comments and expressed their ‘moral outrage’ at the fact that some media had seen the slight and reported it. In the article about the comments, you can see more comments because, well, we are a vigilante nation.

Che ‘The Ape’ Guevara…

So, who determines that it is time for a culture to evolve? If a 21^st century country validates stupidity by referring to their version of a 19^th century mindset, is it evolving or static? How long does it take for a hybrid culture to become mainstream? Is the same culture that considers itself progressive, but laughs when men strip down a woman for wearing as she wills, and is her right to, evolving?

The validation is often that it goes against our African ideals yet our ancestors were by and large comfortable while naked. If you watch that video in the last link, you will hear a woman saying ‘usichukue hiyo kitu‘ [do not record this] and you can tell its more of ‘do not show the rest of the world how evolved we are‘ than ‘save this woman from the animal instincts of a mob.‘ A people so evolved that we have to train people ‘not to strip women.’ Clothes, and this extreme sense of having to be dressed all the time, are the western cultural elements, not the wearing of ‘skimpy clothes.’

The mentality itself is rooted deeply in religion, especially in rural areas where this seeming hybrid culture is still foreign. It validates our common misogyny, unless there has been a case of a man in short shorts’ having to lose them for being irresistible to women, and other men. The act of stripping someone is the height of this misogyny where the validation is that ‘we are teaching her a lesson.’ Such stupidity, in this 21^st century Kenya, is the reason why the three cases above will be determined on a non-existent ‘cultural benchmark.’

The same ‘Africanness’ to which we owe clitoridectomy, or as we like to call it, Female Genital Mutilation, to which we quickly revert when we need to pull down ads that are ‘too revealing to children.’ To that culture, the same one where boys pleasuring, nay, masturbating each other was a ‘normal cultural thing’, but was given up at initiation (yes, Kenya, these are your ancestors, the real African ones, not you hybrids). You can read more about just how ‘sexually liberated’ they were here.

These same issues we are facing now are still troubling the Western states we love to hate. Truly evolving societies are breaking down these issues and critically assessing them by first making them mainstream issues and not hiding behind  a façade of moral uprightness. They are first agreeing that for any meaningful debate to take place, all human beings who successfully navigate the arduous journey of a sperm towards the ova, and subsequent imprisonment, have certain inalienable rights and responsibilities.

You can yell that such individuals should be burned at the stake, or burned like this ‘purported witches’ in Kisii (I would request that you watch that video in its  5-minute entirety, it is brutal, but that is Kenya in 2013 where three people are being burned as hundreds watch and cheer). The ‘witch-burning is also so common in modern-day Kenya that you only need google it too.

We can yell all we want, but homogeneity in the human species, or this moral cocoon we think we live in, will never be…

When we decide to first agree that all human beings have free will, and that what one man or woman does in the comfort of their own homes should be between him and his deity, if he is stupid enough to believe in judgement beyond that of his fellow men and women, we might then begin the real, painful, tideous, ‘unnecessary’ process of evolving from 1800 to at least 1903.

We are not evolving; we are merely acquiring technology and more information, and actively making all effort to live in a past that never was, or never existed as we think it did. If anything, we are just robots of consumption, actively swallowing propaganda and advertisements, as we have sermons and religion, without thinking for ourselves.

It is the 21^st century since Christ alright, but we are living in our romantic version of Africa in 1850, but we are ‘moving on’ [sic!].  Kenya, are these not your sons and daughters? Who said that nature is one thing, or has one single outcome, preferably the one that the mob agrees with so it can sleep better at night? Isn’t nature the same source to which we owe all that is wrong in our ‘perfect, often-forward-moving society?’ A society that does not evolve, my beloved Kenya, dies.

Owaahh, 2013.

 

Hate speech on Social Media: A Case of Misplaced Locus of Responsibility

Social media only features on our daily plate of bad places to hate on each other because it is sexy. It is sexy for the government to be seen as working to inculcate (not restore, we have never been united) true national cohesion and the warm fuzzy feeling of hating each other beyond  tribe and gender. Social media offers the older bureaucrats a chance to show the younger online generation whose boss. The sad thing is that in our peace lobotomy, we have validated it. We feel that the limits of the Bill of Rights apply to situations where we have a responsibility to be responsible. Incitement does not shift the locus of responsibility from the actor unless he or she is a young child or has a mental disability. The end decision of whether to hate your fellow man lies with you and your environment (and if you are religious, your respective deity).

African governments are scared of social media. Social media brought down Hosni Mubarak in less than three weeks despite his desperate attempts to block its use. So now African governments, beginning in Malawi, Zambia, and now Kenya, are now seeking to follow the China model, with less glamour and innovation (The Chinese have the decency to provide Baidu and other alternatives  to control ‘subversion’).

You don’t say?

Hate speech assumes that the reader does not have a responsibility to decide whether to pick up a machete and slaughter his neighbor and burn a church full of people. It assumes that you, as the reader, do not have a choice to decide to stop reading this and close the tab. I owe you a responsibility to be politically correct and to be sensitive to what might read like revolutionary material. You owe me as much responsibility for understanding this, for example, as I owe you for choosing these words. They would be ineffective if you could not understand them, contextually.

In the ‘Mau Mau’ War, hate speech took the form of propaganda pamphlets that were distributed by both sides, and included many forms of expression, including the content of oaths and war songs, this evolved into the implied hate speeches that drove the intrigues of the first government under Kenyatta the Elder, and was perfected under Moi. We lost the script when society kept quiet as Ngugi wa Thiong’o, Koigi wa Wamwere, Wahome Mutahi and others were detained for ‘sedition’ and other such ridiculous crimes. To the people, the state was not to be questioned, peace and sustainability (read self-preservation) were king, the same thing we are going through right now. Until the Second Liberation took place and we all temporarily realized that the ones who say ‘bad things’ need protection. Our view is largely libertarian and communitarian. Libertarians believe that the right to free speech may be limited only for compelling reasons such as fighting words. Communitarians believe in the community’s ‘well-being.’

We all know what happens when we let the government, or anyone in a position of power, infringe on the rights of a few people. At first, it is all bliss and calls of ‘JAIL THE TRAITORS OF OUR COSMETIC PEACE AND NATIONAL COHESION!’ ‘JAIL THOSE MYOPIC BACKWARD PEOPLE WHO ARE ONLY TELLING US WHAT WE THINK OF IN THE COMFORT OF OUR OWN HOMES AND MINDS.’ Before long, all is lost, and now a typographic error that accidentally connects someone’s name with the word ‘stupid or incompetent’ qualifies as a capital offence. Is this it? This cannot happen? It already is at an advanced stage. The press is now too tainted by corporate influence to matter, the civil societies are no longer civil or focused on society, the government is just being well, the government (the garb has changed, the body is still the same despite going on mandatory ‘cabinet lift and devolution’ cosmetics). We have so much coffee we should be waking up to but we are busy uprooting it to build gated communities. Voltaire said that if you want to know who controls you, just check whom you are not allowed to criticize.

Grumpy cat needs no caption.

Are we saying that it is okay to think this things at home and probably kill your neighbor while at it, but never ever post it online? It is the same misguided logic that has validated misogyny in rap culture; the idea that the representation owes more to the source than the source does the idea. We have a personal responsibility in how we relate to the rest of society. However, numerous studies in cognitive influence have shown that we all tend to move towards what the environment offers. We need to move from what is the influence of social media on Kenyan culture to what is the role of Kenyan culture in influencing and shaping social media. We are so afraid of ourselves that we are willing to risk making hardcore criminals of everyday Kenyans who need therapy in diversity and forgiveness.

When a blogger’  was hauled in the courts for allegedly mentioning ‘specific names with specific allegations’, we all kept quiet and validated it despite the subliminal warning. The King’s courtiers know how powerful a tool it can be  and will now use it to gain mileage and traffic

In the letter alluded to in the link above, the NCIC supposedly wrote “You have been posting threatening messages on your face book account which are intended to cause hatred/violence among communities in Kenya.”  A lethargic NCIC  is now considering going after those using ‘sign language and symbols’ to “..spread offensive remarks that could lead to violence..” The operational word there is ‘could’,  because that is what our peace lobotomy has come to. It also means that before long, someone will be standing on the dock answering to charges of showing another the middle finger. Who knows, maybe someday we will jail the dead victim too.

Being responsible is two-way. It does not only mean reporting those you do not agree with-however myopic, backward, stupid, and wrong it might be-it also means controlling what you read online. The mark of the free mind is whether yone can read without being influenced. You do know that no one is coercing you to ‘Read More’ or hit ‘Share’ or ‘RT’? Better still, no one is holding a gun to your head to prevent you from blocking anyone who posts things you do not agree with. Actually, that is precisely the reason those buttons exist. Ours is partly due to the fact that we are all Moi Orphans, education-wise, and we feel like we now have too much freedom. Social media offers us all an outlet, but it is just that, an outlet. The real hate speech is in our minds, in our homes, in how we secretly think of each other.

We need not look further than the people whose government structure and social habits we have so blatantly aped. The US Supreme Court in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992) ruled in favor of the youth who had burned the cross-sign of the KKK on a front lawn of a black family. It ruled that by prosecuting him on a law that limited free speech rights, the state of Minnesota had violated his rights. The implication? The court did not rule on the act, which was criminal and should have fallen on the class of ‘willful destruction of property’ but ruled that the law cannot focus on motivation, the thinking that results in criminal behavior.

The truth about ‘hate speech’ on social media

While we have hurled about 10 people in court for hate speech on social media, whatever that is, we have prosecuted one person for the (modest estimate) of 1, 100 deaths in 2007/8? …and I really want to point out our validation in the recent elections, but I know you are already thinking it. Had we already punished any of the people who committed the 2007/8 genocide, because that is what it was, perhaps we could have asked them if they were ‘driven to kill by hate speech’ or they are just downright brutal and senseless murderers who are still walking free. In no time, we will not breathe online on any social policies that are poorly implemented for fear of being on the wrong side of political correctness. Make no mistake, if this were the 1980s, we are on the government side, cheering on while it starts by plucking out, with our help, people whose only crime is perceived stupidity, as it rubs its hands and prepares to tell us how much we don’t need these freedoms we enjoy.

The joke is that most of the people spewing hate speech on social media are actually Kenyans in the Diaspora . What are we going to do, wait for them to disembark from JKIA and haul them before our lethargic justice system? Are we going to block them? We should, but are we helping anyone? Won’t they just adopt other pseudonyms and call us names? Most of these people live in countries where ‘hate speech’ is not what we think it is, expression is everything. The governments of most of those countries have followed a different model, choosing instead to be efficient in how they deliver services to the people, focusing less on cosmetic surgeries, and investing into efficient propaganda machinery.

Keep calm.

Free thought/speech is not love, it is not about feeling the warm fuzzy feeling inside for your neighbor or brother. Free thought is not about supporting the government or the opposition, or simply opening your mouth to avoid halitosis. It includes these, but it is not all about them. Hate is as much a part of free expression as love is. Hate cannot be washed away by shocking the ‘hater’ into silence by jailing a few ‘like-minded’ individuals. Hate is taught, it is acquired from our environment, our educational process, our social and political history and structures.

So, go ahead dear reader, think about killing someone, and hating them, and hating the politicians they support and the way they conduct their everyday lives, hate on their cultures and the way they breath but do not post it. That is the new Kenya for you, think it, but do not say it (you can do it though, we do not care much about that).

 Owaahh

 

Ritual Sex, Orgies and Lessons from Bizarre Cultural Practices

     At every stage in the history of man, every generation has viewed itsel as more advanced and civilized than the last one. Yet it is all a matter of perspective; every subsequent generation, especially in matter’s coital, will adopt and adapt to realities and beliefs. Although anthropology teaches us several things about the evolution of cultures, the position of sex and orgies within a primitive context is not comparable at all to the modern madness. Using history as a reflection, it is easy to trace most modern sexual fetishes and practices which goes to prove that we never really evolve, we just learn how to behave in public.

        Among the Kikuyu and several other Kenyan tribes, initiation ritual sex was allowed and expected. In fact, according to this article, parents would talk freely with the children on all matters sexual, including the pre-initiation masturbation which was ‘right and proper’ for boys but ‘wrong’ for girls. Ngwiko was a post-initiation ceremony of incomplete sex-play that disappeared during the colonial era while some such as kuhuurwo mbiro ya rwenji’ (wiping off the soot of the circumcision knife’) are still present among some rural Kikuyu. This was full sexual intercourse, different from the intercourse during the initiation ceremony itself. Suffice to say that in addition to the knives, the tetanus and the bleeding, initiation ceremonies were big orgies.

Other elements of sexuality included mutual masturbation among young unmarried adults. Full intercourse was discouraged before initiation but they could pretty much engage in anything else.

    Then there’s this article with more racist rants than a KKK dream. Before you read it, I should warn you that the comments are worse. The stated facts are, however, exactly that, facts. Among the Samba of West Africa, a boy must copulate with the older men orally during the first stage of the initiation ceremony. Interestingly, this has nothing to do with feminization but with turning the boys into fierce warriors by ingesting the semen of the older more accomplished men, or, euphemically  ‘inseminators.’

    The Fourth Stage of Initiation has an interesting element. The young man, now turned from being ‘inseminated’ to being an ‘inseminator’ marries and is taught how to protect himself from the odor of a woman’s genitalia. He must, “…while having intercourse with her, not penetrate too deeply because if it (you will not believe this) enters her urethra it might make him ill…” HUH? The upside is that the young woman has been taught fellatio and she must swallow the semen “…to later be able to provide her child with milk and strong bones..” because the Samba believe “…semen is transformed into breast milk…”

He does look quite manly but, question is, how much can he swallow?

     You have probably heard the argument that homosexuality is not only African but the first recorded case was actually right here. Archeology proves the point, with a 4390-year old Saqqara tomb in Egypt. In it, two men, Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum are buried together, a practice only related to lovers. The walls of the tomb depict them nose kissing and in an intimate embrace.

    Generally, gay people in traditional socieities were classified in a neutral manner, with lesbians making up most of traditional healers and astrologers in some South African tribes. In some tribes in Gabon and Cameroon, homosexuality was believed to have a medicinal effect. Among the Meru of Kenya, crossdressing medicinemen called ‘Mugawe’ were known to engage in homosexual relationships, although the social dynamics viewed them as women despite their male genitalia.  

    Sexual orgies of yore were dark events, and future generations will perhaps think the same too of our coital madness. Joseph Campbell writes about the ritual love-death in a book called Primitive Mythology, a part of the series ‘The Masks of God. ‘The Marind-anim of South Guinea had one ritual that combined everything from cannibalism to sexual orgies.

In Page 171, Campbell writes:

“The particular moment of importance….which terminates in a sexual orgy of several days and several nights, during which everyone in the village except the initiates makes free with everybody else…-until the final night, when a fine young girl, painted, oiled, and ceremoniously costumed, is led to the dancing ground and made to lie beneath a platform of very heavy logs. With her, in the open of the festival, the initiates cohabit, one after another; and while the youth chosen to be last is embracing her the supports of the logs above are jerked away and the platform drops, to a prodigious boom of drums. A hideous howl goes up and the dead girl and boy are dragged from the logs, cut up, roasted, and eaten.”

That’s two different orgies, one with everyone in it except the select few and the other with the select few in a single girl who, with her last mate still at it, would be killed, roasted and eaten. And in the morning, they would feel as accomplished as the next guy.

Seconds to Disaster, the cuisine.

Before that grosses you out, the Mardurdjara Aborigines of Australia have a solution for all men who have trouble peeing with an erection in the morning. It’s simple, during male initiation, the boy would be made to cannibalize his own foreskin. He has to, essentially, swallow ‘his own boy”. Disgusted? Relax, later, the young man gets a second incision “…on the underside of the penis right from the frenulum, the head, all the way to somewhere near the scrotum…” This means that he has to squat to urinate so there gentlemen, problem solved? Anthropologists think it’s meant to simulate menstruation, essentially to sympathize with women. In the comments here , the commenter says that the nick was also used as a form of contraception because a pebble could be placed inside there to stop the semen from flowing into the vagina during intercourse.

    Marriage orgies are an interesting primitive cultural element, but it has not quite died down. In modern weddings, especially those done in the Western world, ‘gang kissing’ the bride is an accepted and expected part of the wedding ceremony. Gang kissing itself traces its roots to a tradition in some cultures where a marriage ceremony would end ‘…with people other than the groom being granted full sexual access to the bride’. Freud defined as the ‘..bride taking on all the men present.”

    Among the Dahari of India, however, exists a slightly different version where any woman married into a family (not a particular man) has to have sex with all the brothers. That means that a wealthy family is known by how many wives they own between them, as opposed to how many cars, acres of land, jet planes or even bank amounts.

   Among the Chickasaw matrilineal system, a man moved into his wife’s home after approval by her mother and sisters. Once accepted, he was culturally allowed to have sex with all her sisters, married or otherwise. I should probably end that part with a disclaimer that you should not try that at home, but you go ahead, refuse to give a fuck and go all Chickasaw on your wife and her sisters. Also, please like before you do it, in case they have an internet connection in the part of hell you will be relegated to after your wife chickasaw’s your behind!