Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => Off Topic => Topic started by: Sully on October 27, 2010, 01:26:52 pm
-
I think I am heading to the wild eventually. It's inevitable.
I want to go right now. Anyone interested in the same?
Killing that goose so easyy really opened my eyes a bit on how I could live off the land so easy.
-
I want to go right now. Anyone interested in the same?
Yeah, definitely!
-
Yeah, definitely!
I'm gonna do it probably in Europe somewhere.
-
Anyone interested in the same?
of course! we got to. will be awesome
-
That's an idea....
It might be a cool. We have a few 20 something year old guys, my self included who really want to go out into the wild and live off the land for a while.
I was thinking canada or alaska at summer or perhaps try to join an indigenous tribe somewhere, africa, australia.. Although that might prove difficult
So far I'm thinking Sully, me, Miles, Hannibal, YonYonson or something who are all similar age and find this interesting.
I know for a fact that me, Sully and I think Hannibal are in pretty great shape, so hunting is definitely possible.
I'm also studying filmmaking, so I could document the process and make a documentary. Could be fun.
-
So far I'm thinking Sully, me, Miles, Hannibal, YonYonson or something who are all similar age and find this interesting.
I know for a fact that me, Sully and I think Hannibal are in pretty great shape, so hunting is definitely possible.
haha. In that case i'll be Mrs. Howell.
Someone will have to carry around my foot massage tank, lounge chair and sun umbrella, and Prada suitcases filled with all the latest outdoor fashions.
-
So far I'm thinking Sully, me, Miles, Hannibal, YonYonson or something who are all similar age and find this interesting.
I know for a fact that me, Sully and I think Hannibal are in pretty great shape, so hunting is definitely possible.
That's my shape.
-
That's my shape.
You look fit miles, you look ready to hunt, build shelters, and make tools.
I know some of you guys are in Europe which sucks.
This is getting off topic, is there a way you could move it to a new thread "living in the wild"
isn't there an exising thread?
-
What about me?
(http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/4475/img6130i.jpg)
-
Nice build Hannibal, next time crop it above your underwear LOL ;D
But I like the idea of this to be honest. I've always wanted to do this, but the plan has always been to go alone. Wouldn't be shabby to have a few like minded people coming along. Is anyone genuinely interested?
And as you can see I'm fit for fight aswell and I've hunted since I was kid, although always with a firearm
My idea has always been to survive in some abundant wood area for a few months.
(http://imgur.com/Jvd2C.jpg)
-
it sounds like a great idea but without women it'll suck big time.
-
Nice build Hannibal, next time crop it above your underwear LOL ;D
No next time wear smaller underwear! LOL
Is that you in the pic FTH? If so you look really fit, awesome!
I am probably going to be staying in the nature around Quebec for the next summer (not sure how long yet) and I was thinking I would try and live off the land there too. But it may be difficult to track down deer and rabbits for me there, there is so much trees and rocks, the land is very uneven lol, I am imagining it would be hard to run after those things in that environment. So I am going to probably fish instead, well most of the time, I'd have to bring a canoe and a fishing rod, and then I am set! There is lots of lakes there, there are also mussels, lots of mussels, and lots of frogs which are easy to catch, not to mention berries and mushrooms depending on the season. :)
EDIT: oh and lots of ducks and other water birds, I could bring a bow and have some tasty Quack! for dinner, mmm fish, duck and frog for dessert :D
-
it sounds like a great idea but without women it'll suck big time.
Ioanna, Yuli, Cinna, Raw... needed! 8)
-
Ioanna, Yuli, Cinna, Raw... needed! 8)
Yeah that'd be nice =>
Yeah Yuli that is me
-
Is that you in the pic FTH? If so you look really fit, awesome
That's definitely me, in the flesh :)
-
I'm gonna do it probably in Europe somewhere.
miles will be in US jungle
-
this sounds fucking awesome. I would be sooooo game for this, and was pondering what i wanna do for a career the most (i am 21) and it keeps coming back to this lol (aka no career). I can hunt and run with the best of em, though i am a bit underweight atm (6'0/140), but that can easily be changed if i decide to start working my upper body, (all i focus on is legs and core cause i bike/play soccer/raquet sports/ju jitsu so no real need for huge shoulders atm).
I am like those lanky lean african bushmen u see in national geographic (cept white lol)
-
I am like those lanky lean african bushmen u see in national geographic (cept white lol)
LOL...I am the female version of exactly that, tall & tiny but strong legs, a whiteafrican, even my hair is curly/frizzy but its light color, on a humid day I can put it as a Fro pretty easy...ha ha O0
Edit: what is your background?
-
miles will be in US jungle
I need to marry someone in the USA then, or I will become an illegal after 6months and they'll hunt me down! Or maybe they would forget?
Is anyone genuinely interested?
Wherever I go, I'm going to start by/in the Spring of 2011.
-
I've considered the idea of living in the wild. But I don't want to completely remove myself from society. As a first step, I would like to take a vacation from society, and live in the wild for a short while. But this isn't practical for me right now. I'm a student. Maybe in the summer I can take a month off, but not much longer.
I think that living on a farm is a good compromise between nature and society.
I'm too shy to post a photo, but my build is somewhere in between that of Miles and Hannibal.
-
We will need some women of course.
It may be wise for the men to get adjusted, then have women come.
I am sure it could work either way.
If your going to be only eating wild foods, away from domestic breeds of fruit. It would be wise to adjust to zero carb before setting off into the wilderness. Or start during the time when a fruit is in season, to make sure transition is easy.
I'm up for, fully in the wild, or even part farm too. Either or, I would be happy.
For a farm we will need investors, the only investment I can make is my ability to work etc.
It can be hard for someone when they first do it.
I am in school bt really, I would leave now if someone had some land and said lets do this.
School is useless for my goal in life, I am poor now, I am going to be poor with a degree too.
If your on skype add me, suleiman abu qdairi. I am down to relocate too. It's about makeing life better and healthier.
Also if anyone is addicted to modern exercise, benches etc, that obviously won't be there. I am preparing myself. I only do these exercise now along with martial arts, climbing trees, and I do the exercises bare footed now too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsPBRjQXbFg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Qc4u1EcARU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU5BO2ubOhI
I need no equipemnt for exercise. Its in nature.
My physique is changing, but actually for the better. I feel its tuned for living in the wild
-
Has anyone killed an animal with just simple tools or with hands?
That goose was the only thing I hunted primitivly. It was amazing. I feel truly connected with my food. The meat taste like pure blood.
A paleo farm sounds nice too. All I need is a place to lie my head. I would share a house with 10-15 people or even more. That actually sounds awsome. As long as they are raw paleo etc.
-
my arms and grip are definitly stronger, from my exercise, spear making is makeing me a beast
Edit: i hope we can do this in some way shape or form, you all sound like great people, it might be like meeting a clone, haha, finally meeting someone who eats raw meat and to share a meal,
i might start crying if i actuall get to do that,
-
this is romantic, but not serious. maybe short term but you can't make decent living out of it long term.
first of all you need private land, you can't live on federal land. or you can move to siberia, no one will ever be looking for you there.
second, remote places like these have no phones, hospitals, etc., even minor accidents can be deadly.
third, living primitive lifestyle, hunting and gathering, there is no entertainment whatsoever, unless you can dance and sing.
and lastly, even if you manage to find a woman who would be willing to go into such seclusion manage to have children, what kind of future is there? are you going to start a new tribe? those primitive tribes in amazon or similar, they don't do well when they meet civilization. and you can't hide forever.
there was a story of russian family that fled to siberia and lived there for 50 some years or something like that. when they got discovered they weren't doing too well.
cmon guys, be serious.
ask Ted Kaczynski if he had much fun living in the wild.
the right approach is to have lots of money, that way you can have any lifestyle you want and can have means to fall back to in case of emergencies or other needs. otherwise this is not doable.
-
this is romantic, but not serious.
I once read something that an explorer wrote I think. He said that the Eskimo/Inuit were one of the happiest people he came across, but they lived in the harshest of climates.
We all know its because of their diet.
People who know that they can survive off of raw meats and fats will definitly fair better as hunter gahterers.
It's not like I will be out there saying, "oh man, I wish I had a cheeseburger."
Although I'll admit, whats one to do if society discovers your tribe?
I guess, this is why having a community farm seems like the best option.
Entertainment? Hunting, gatherering, talking, connecting with the people in front of you. Like you said, singing, dancing, etc. A group of healthy people will ahve stronger minds than someone who eats sad and says, "oh gee, I want to live in the wild"
-
Well a good way to start would be to do it for the summer or even a couple of months.
You can stay in a pretty wild place but with a small town within a reasonable hike away, in case you run into emergencies. If you bring some equipment for emergencies too, its very possible and doable. Even if its not private land its pretty wild no one will be there to notice you, or that you're living there, no one will really give shit about you lol. As for entertainment I spent a month almost in the wild and I was never bored, and I live in the city so it was quite a change, trust me if you're in a beautiful place there's no time for boredom, in the summer anyway haven't tried it in winter.
My ideal life is working in the winter, and living in nature in the summer, best of both worlds ;)
-
For me the idea was never to start living in the wild, long term. My idea was more in the lines of a survival holiday. Perhaps a month.
Now that being said I would never ever do it for the first time with out proper planning, modern amenities such as fire, shelter, GPS, satellite phone etc.
If anyone was thinking we could just walk into a forest and survive then yeah, that's quite naive.
-
I thought of renting a place with a fellow raw meat eater.
Or even a few. If you pay only like $150 each a piece.
You could save money fast for some land in the future, and only have to work part time.
Edit: I amsure this only applies to people around my age. lol
Since many of you have solid jobs and prob laugh at that.
-
I thought of renting a place with a fellow raw meat eater.
Or even a few. If you pay only like $150 each a piece.
You could save money fast for some land in the future, and only have to work part time.
Edit: I amsure this only applies to people around my age. lol
Since many of you have solid jobs and prob laugh at that.
I think you should consider becoming a farmer Sully. Sounds right up your alley.
My personal dream is to pursue my career in filmmaking and eventually live on a ranch and be totally self sufficient, grow my own meat, milk and veg whilst working as a director.
-
I think you should consider becoming a farmer Sully. Sounds right up your alley.
My personal dream is to pursue my career in filmmaking and live on a ranch and be totally self sufficient, grow my own meat, milk and veg whilst working as a director.
Dude that sounds great, I was thinking to switching my major to filming. It's one of my many passions. I can edit films, good camera man, etc.
I just need a degree.
-
I'm going to go and live in the wild in the Spring. Who knows how long I will be out there for, it's not the end of the world if I end up back where I started. I'll have had that experience and can then make my next move.
If I come to an alternative, which I can start on before the spring, then I may go for that. However I won't wait beyond that, so if I have not decided on some alternative before then, that's what I'm doing.
-
I've done the farm half-step. One thing one immediately notices is
it gets cold.
after awhile since there is no 'inside' that gets kind of old.
if months pass and a branch falls on your tent in a rainstorm inverting it, you might actually trade even a woman for a hot shower, a rusty cot, and some college credits :)
I think what would be the most realistic and involve less commitment, would be to try to get a bunch of people involved in the same WOOF program (probably in Europe) and then go on week/2 or so long excursions and document everything. from there hell..you might be able to get some kind of funding.
another thing I imagine would be important would be having some kind of meditation practice, or just having a really strong sense of self, as mentioned there is not all that much to do at times to occupy the mind the way modern civilization 'conveniently' does for us. :)
-
I would sleep together naked like the INuit and many other people did. I house made by Tee peeing sticks and insulating with animal skinds with fur. Or a snow den *(depends on where you are, even a cave will do)
Sleeping on layers animal skins and using them for blankets and being with other naked people will surely keep you warm.
Like I said along these lines before, thinking like the average person will get you killed in the true wild.
-
wwoofing together would actually be an awesome idea! i can't believe i hadn't thought of that. i've wwoofed multiple times and loved it. would be awesome to team up with another rpder. would make take some of the edge off eating raw in front of the owners too. i'd be down for wwoofing if anyone else is. would be a good start. then we could move on to the wild.
-
If you want to live in the wild, then I think the best place would be a tropical island. No need for warm clothes, warm shelter, or fire. Lots of fruit, coconuts, seafood, and meat. Rain isn't so bad if it's not cold. And you can go swimming for entertainment. That would be paradise. Something like Pangaia (http://www.pangaia.cc/).
My personal dream is to pursue my career in filmmaking and eventually live on a ranch and be totally self sufficient, grow my own meat, milk and veg whilst working as a director.
My dream is similar to yours. I would like to live on a farm/ranch and work in my spare time as an independent scientist. I would make a living by selling grass-fed tenderloin and other lean meat, while feasting on the fat and organs that nobody wants :)
-
and being with other naked people will surely keep you warm.
you are really ambitious ;D
sometimes it is really difficult to be with just one naked woman, and you talking lots of naked people.
-
Whatever we do, we should try to live wild, or as wild as possible this summer and then report our adventures here after! That would be fun ;D
-
wwoofing together would actually be an awesome idea! i can't believe i hadn't thought of that. i've wwoofed multiple times and loved it. would be awesome to team up with another rpder. would make take some of the edge off eating raw in front of the owners too. i'd be down for wwoofing if anyone else is. would be a good start. then we could move on to the wild.
I would do that. What did you do when wwoofing? Where at?
It be cool to try an once a year thing too like Yuli is mentioning.
First testing are wits in summer or warm climate would be wise.
-
LOL...I am the female version of exactly that, tall & tiny but strong legs, a whiteafrican, even my hair is curly/frizzy but its light color, on a humid day I can put it as a Fro pretty easy...ha ha O0
Edit: what is your background?
english/scottish/german. ya basically im all legs and core, pure forager without the big belly some of them have.
Anyone know y they have those bellies?myb some grains.../dairy?
-
Whatever we do, we should try to live wild, or as wild as possible this summer and then report our adventures here after! That would be fun ;D
I am serious into doing this for like 1month to see what its like. If we start planning this now would u guys actually wanna c if it could take off? We'd have to have a good spot scoped with lots of wildlife like a good inhabited natural park, and what about hunting tools like bows ect?
Im quite stoked if we could get like 6-10ppl or w,e to seriosuly do this.
-
For me the idea was never to start living in the wild, long term. My idea was more in the lines of a survival holiday. Perhaps a month.
That's exactly the same idea that I'm thinking about.
I don't see living in the complete wild for the rest of my life as the best option.
But periodically, far away from civilized worild - that's really enticing.
If you want to live in the wild, then I think the best place would be a tropical island.
I think the same - wartmth, a lot of sun, wild fruits, animals. Besides you can hunt and kill wild animals without any risk of beinig held accountable; in Poland, there are huge fines for killking wild animals without a permission.
-
haha. In that case i'll be Mrs. Howell.
Someone will have to carry around my foot massage tank, lounge chair and sun umbrella, and Prada suitcases filled with all the latest outdoor fashions.
LOL... I shall be Mary Ann.
-
Ioanna, Yuli, Cinna, Raw... needed! 8)
So kind of you to remember us women, Hannibal... :)
I'll come visit you wild folk - for drum circles and haflas, for sure... I'll be an intermediary between you and civilization. Maybe I will produce simple shows to entertain you - or I will bring in small audiences so you can entertain us. It will give you something artistic/creative to work towards/on. :) If you build a yurt, I will consider staying overnight. ;)
-
If you build a yurt, I will consider staying overnight. ;)
You won't be disappointed ;)
-
Dude that sounds great, I was thinking to switching my major to filming. It's one of my many passions. I can edit films, good camera man, etc.
I just need a degree.
Camerman is a pretty cool job. You will probably start with some country TV station and work your way up to maybe even filming documentries and stuff, people I went to school with have done this.
Getting a job really is the way to go, when you get older you'll understand this more.
-
If you want to live in the wild, then I think the best place would be a tropical island. No need for warm clothes, warm shelter, or fire. Lots of fruit, coconuts, seafood, and meat. Rain isn't so bad if it's not cold. And you can go swimming for entertainment. That would be paradise. Something like Pangaia (http://www.pangaia.cc/).
Sounds like my country. The problem would be mosquitoes and possibly malaria. So bring mosquito nets.
-
malaria.
That's a good oportunity to detoxify oneself, get rid of degenerative tissues and strengthen oneself. 8)
-
Just get used to the mosquitoes, after a week of getting bit it didn't affect me so much...you'll build up a tolerance after a while...you can also jump in the lake to get some quick relief, or make a small fire at night (they don't like the smoke).
Some summers I have more mosquitos in my yard and flying into my house (no one ever closes the doors) then when I'm camping ha ha
-
I also find that mosquitoes don't bother me much. Probably because a good diet causes the immune system to function properly.
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/journals/sully%27s-journal/msg40169/#msg40169
In Canada, the hysteria is not about malaria, but west nile virus. I don't worry about it at all.
-
Bacteria are not the same as parasites.... getting a normal midge bite is not the same as getting a bite from a malaria infected mosquito... etc...
-
I also find that mosquitoes don't bother me much. Probably because a good diet causes the immune system to function properly.
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/journals/sully%27s-journal/msg40169/#msg40169
In Canada, the hysteria is not about malaria, but west nile virus. I don't worry about it at all.
I agree with this, but I would still bring modern mosquito nets in a tropical setting.
-
I think I am heading to the wild eventually. It's inevitable.
I want to go right now. Anyone interested in the same?
Killing that goose so easyy really opened my eyes a bit on how I could live off the land so easy.
That's great!There's a lot to learn in the wild in terms of good health.
-
You guys are dreaming. There’s isn’t much hospitable wilderness left intact anywhere and even supposing you find some without numerous settlers, we were born and have grown up in civilization, so it would be extremely difficult to adapt and live more than a few weeks in total wilderness. It may be possible for a while in a favorable season, but there’s also a rain season in the tropics and it’s not funny.
By the way, falciparum malaria is deadly without medication, 100% raw diet or not. Water fasting is ineffective as well against it.
-
Precisely. Much of what we call wild is anything but. A good example are the Highlands of Scotland which look deceptively wild but are merely the result of foolish humans having wiped out the vast primeval forests that existed there before men came along.
-
Camerman is a pretty cool job. You will probably start with some country TV station and work your way up to maybe even filming documentries and stuff, people I went to school with have done this.
Getting a job really is the way to go, when you get older you'll understand this more.
Yeah, cameraman would be a nice job. I understand the importance of a job in today's world, I'll need a degree to fall back on.
Any who, we should all at least go on a hunting trip or go camping etc. With modern supplies, just to meet and hang out. Or do meet ups like GS and Yon did.
-
Besides you can hunt and kill wild animals without any risk of beinig held accountable; in Poland, there are huge fines for killking wild animals without a permission.
You can get a hunting license and a fishing license. You can probably survive with just the fishing license, and not all animals in Canada require a hunting license to be hunted, check the region/country and its rules. For example in Quebec you don't need any license to hunt hares, eastern cottontails, leopard frogs, green frogs and bullfrogs...only for migratory birds and larger game you do.
You guys are dreaming. There’s isn’t much hospitable wilderness left intact anywhere and even supposing you find some without numerous settlers, we were born and have grown up in civilization, so it would be extremely difficult to adapt and live more than a few weeks in total wilderness. It may be possible for a while in a favorable season, but there’s also a rain season in the tropics and it’s not funny.
Of course not as a permanent thing, but its very possible, especially if you don't go without equipment, be smart enough to bring a canoe, fishing rod and a bow, and obviously just in the summer-time...I wouldn't do it in the tropics either, too many weird & poisonous things, I'd have to be very familiar with the tropics and I'm not, I have a feeling I'd get bit by something deadly or touch some poison plant. lol
I already almost did it last summer except the fact I didn't fish, if I fished I wouldn't have had to go to the little town and buy food :P
-
I would do that. What did you do when wwoofing? Where at?
i wwoofed in france (near pierefort, auvergne) a couple summers ago for two weeks mainly just gardening and pulling weeds. i also wwoofed two summers ago in oregon at a grassfed beef and lamb farm. mostly herding the animals to new pastures, mending fences, etc. did that for a month and got all the grassfed meat i wanted. i also sold their stuff at the farmer's markets. i wrote about that experience in the 'pacific northwest here i come' journal (pics too). and then recently i've been going out to this wwoof farm near my home whenever i have access to a car. so far it's only been two days but they raise ducks and lots of fruits and veggies. i was mostly bailing and stacking hay though when there.
it's a lot of fun and not too much work. plus you get food and a place to stay. would be really fun with another rpder. we should try and do that. when are you off school sully?
-
i wwoofed in france (near pierefort, auvergne) a couple summers ago for two weeks mainly just gardening and pulling weeds. i also wwoofed two summers ago in oregon at a grassfed beef and lamb farm. mostly herding the animals to new pastures, mending fences, etc. did that for a month and got all the grassfed meat i wanted. i also sold their stuff at the farmer's markets. i wrote about that experience in the 'pacific northwest here i come' journal (pics too). and then recently i've been going out to this wwoof farm near my home whenever i have access to a car. so far it's only been two days but they raise ducks and lots of fruits and veggies. i was mostly bailing and stacking hay though when there.
it's a lot of fun and not too much work. plus you get food and a place to stay. would be really fun with another rpder. we should try and do that. when are you off school sully?
That sounds great, especially the one on the grass fed farm. My first semester will be over I think by the end of November. Or until I finish my online pie for math 95, (I am takeing basic math now just to get it over with).
Is there any possibilty getting a job through the farm, or maybe an apprenticeship?
this is going to be awsome.
Do you have skype
-
That sounds great, especially the one on the grass fed farm. My first semester will be over I think by the end of November. Or until I finish my online pie for math 95, (I am takeing basic math now just to get it over with).
Is there any possibilty getting a job through the farm, or maybe an apprenticeship?
this is going to be awsome.
Do you have skype
cool! im still in contact with the grassfed farm in oregon. they are really cool people and i bet i could persuade them to let two hard working young men work on their farm. they actually called me a few weeks ago to try and persuade me to come up again (even said they'd pay for the plane ticket!), but i've been trying to make other contacts at home so haven't taken them up on the offer. i could definitely talk to them though if you seriously considering it. i was thinking of going up there mid november anyway. i could just wait for you to go or meet you on the farm. here's their website fyi: http://www.meadowharvest.com/ (http://www.meadowharvest.com/)
i do have skype. we should chat! i can talk tonight probably. mine is knightericm i think. ha, not sure. i think i actually tried to add you as a friend a while back after one of the threads about people wanting to talk on skype. haven't checked it in a while though. wanna plan on getting on around 10:30? i think we're in the same time zone
haha, this should probably be a pm. fuck it, let the people know that plans are in the works! for real. this will be easy
-
haha, this should probably be a pm. fuck it, let the people know that plans are in the works! for real. this will be easy
This is more exciting than hunting geese like a chimpanzee, Haha. Hopefully we will get this thing rolling.
-
the plan for living in wild is real. i don't understand why it is impossible to live in jungle. here, u all can see in 60 acres hawaii jungle how they are living. i'm planning to do this on 75+ acres... ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRurlbRCBe8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqkRkwJB1Q8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZ9q-nym8Uw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYWu_AxPoNI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAFWptBeuw8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNILOoJ9AGU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g3Z-zOxOQg&feature=related
-
it sounds like a great idea but without women it'll suck big time.
in my paleo village, no man can live with a woman without getting married. i'm talking from a fact where outside of the village, people might think that bunch of hippies are living. peace is countable... :)
-
in my paleo village, no man can live with a woman without getting married.
Marriage is a Neolithic thing.
-
Marriage is a Neolithic thing.
Yeah! ;D
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRurlbRCBe8
oh noes, they have open air toilet (min 5).
-
Marriage is a Neolithic thing.
there's no prove that marriage is a neolithic thing. well, i can count to have a paleolithic life where i live in nature, eat raw wild animals and embrace the simplicity of life. babies will be born and they will live very close to their parents, uncle and aunts. that's good enough!!
-
oh noes, they have open air toilet (min 5).
there's nothing wrong with open toilet. that's one of the best options to live a paleolithic life. of course, the winter time is considerable. but the bottom line is, bathroom's supposed to be little far from the sleeping area. i use open toilet many times in my life in back home (south east asia) and love that.
-
Marriage is a Neolithic thing.
the marriage ceremony is most likely neolithic, but marriage as way of life is probably not neolithic. there are many examples in the animal world of strictly monogamous relationships and human case could be just like that. in any case there is no evidence for and against, so please indicate this is your personal opinion and not some kind of universal fact.
-
the marriage ceremony is most likely neolithic, but marriage as way of life is probably not neolithic. there are many examples in the animal world of strictly monogamous relationships and human case could be just like that. in any case there is no evidence for and against, so please indicate this is your personal opinion and not some kind of universal fact.
i agree. personally, i want security of my own life and my child's life. so, if i build a raw paleo community, i do want some family structure in that community where there will be married couple and they take care of their children sincerely. if i don't do that, than what's the difference between me and hippies?
-
the plan for living in wild is real. i don't understand why it is impossible to live in jungle. here, u all can see in 60 acres hawaii jungle how they are living. i'm planning to do this on 75+ acres... ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRurlbRCBe8
Wow, they are pretty complex with it. I like to squat when I poop. I lift up the lid, stand on the rim. Squat and poop.
Edit: That lady in the green dress must be lactating.... :0
Not looking at it sexually. But her breasts were huge.
-
Wow, they are pretty complex with it. I like to squat when I poop. I lift up the lid, stand on the rim. Squat and poop
very good sully. u're the man! :D in asia, squat toilet is very popular. so, this is nothing new to me. definitely a better choice for a paleo lifestyle.
That woman doesn't have any babies. i kinda know her, 'cause i was almost joining with them (my raw vegan days). most of them are into weight loss program. they also have classes where they teach how to prepare raw food and permaculture and other stuff. they have some young families their too. my son was very small baby and our plan was to raise him diaper free.
in paleo village, there'll be a martial arts class and hunting and sports club. we'll focus on to raise bison and other wild native animals.
-
the marriage ceremony is most likely neolithic, but marriage as way of life is probably not neolithic. there are many examples in the animal world of strictly monogamous relationships and human case could be just like that. in any case there is no evidence for and against, so please indicate this is your personal opinion and not some kind of universal fact.
It’s not my personal opinion, there’s a lot of anthropological evidence showing that social organization changed drastically with the Neolithic from nomadic hunter-gatherers tribes to sedentary families of farmers. True, some animal such as birds have strictly monogamous relationships, but it’s not the case for primates.
Hunter-gatherers have no senses of private property, they share everything. It was still the case for Polynesians and Inuits a few decades ago. Marriage is a contract of exclusivity (possession of the spouse) specifically introduced by sedentary Neolithic farmers and so called “civilization”.
i agree. personally, i want security of my own life and my child's life. so, if i build a raw paleo community, i do want some family structure in that community where there will be married couple and they take care of their children sincerely. if i don't do that, than what's the difference between me and hippies?
There’s no safety in an exclusive family structure: if one of the parents goes away, is injured or killed, what happens in the absence of any kind of organized (civilized) social security? On the contrary, there’s much more security in a tribal structure where the children are welcome everywhere, with every body, no matter who are the father and mother. As a matter of fact, the biological father is usually unknown.
Marriage and exclusive couples are a disaster. It has led to sexual dissatisfaction, divorces, adultery, jealousy tragedies, prostitution, pornography, and most important : failure of love. >D
A main difference between hippies and us is that hippies fed on cooked food, grain and dairy. Those food contain opioïds and other noxious molecules causing sexual over-excitation. With strict raw paleo diet, the sexual obsession due to inappropriate food disappear. Therefore, in the wild with raw paleo food, in principle there would not be genital relations without love. ;)
Francois
-
It’s not my personal opinion, there’s a lot of anthropological evidence showing that social organization changed drastically with the Neolithic from nomadic hunter-gatherers tribes to sedentary families of farmers. True, some animal such as birds have strictly monogamous relationships, but it’s not the case for primates.
Hunter-gatherers have no senses of private property, they share everything. It was still the case for Polynesians and Inuits a few decades ago. Marriage is a contract of exclusivity (possession of the spouse) specifically introduced by sedentary Neolithic farmers and so called “civilization”.
There’s no safety in an exclusive family structure: if one of the parents goes away, is injured or killed, what happens in the absence of any kind of organized (civilized) social security? On the contrary, there’s much more security in a tribal structure where the children are welcome everywhere, with every body, no matter who are the father and mother. As a matter of fact, the biological father is usually unknown.
Marriage and exclusive couples are a disaster. It has led to sexual dissatisfaction, divorces, adultery, jealousy tragedies, prostitution, pornography, and most important : failure of love. >D
A main difference between hippies and us is that hippies fed on cooked food, grain and dairy. Those food contain opioïds and other noxious molecules causing sexual over-excitation. With strict raw paleo diet, the sexual obsession due to inappropriate food disappear. Therefore, in the wild with raw paleo food, in principle there would not be genital relations without love. ;)
Francois
if there is not going to be any genital relation without love then there is no reason why marriage should not be a requirement. This is not something that we should take lightly in any society. Probably as we become more mature, in the society we may decide that it is not that much important but for now we want to start on the right foot with as much care as possible. There are many thing right now that is associated with sex and that can degrade any society. it is best to avoid these things for now. We are just babies now learning how to walk and as we take one step at a time, we learn from the miss steps that we make. we don't forget. we learn. The same there are many things that we have learned from this world that is very beneficial, like the danger in promiscuity. It is best to avoid all danger for now until we can run.
-
Therefore, in the wild with raw paleo food, in principle there would not be genital relations without love. ;)
That is beautiful... :)
-
That is beautiful... :)
it's easy to say, but never forget about the other human emotions.
-
Unfortunately I see more married couples having problems and divorcing lately then anything, alternately I know many couples who are together long time and happy without marriage (I am one of them ;)). Even if you want to discourage promiscuity there is better ways to do it then imposing a ceremony that has nothing to do with a person learning about true, real relationships. It just doesn't work that way, I see it time and time again :'(
ps. I am not saying all married couple are unhappy, quite only that marriage has nothing to do with the fact that they are happy or not
-
Unfortunately I see more married couples having problems and divorcing lately then anything, alternately I know many couples who are together long time and happy without marriage (I am one of them ;)). Even if you want to discourage promiscuity there is better ways to do it then imposing a ceremony that has nothing to do with a person learning about true, real relationships. It just doesn't work that way, I see it time and time again :'(
ps. I am not saying all married couple are unhappy, quite only that marriage has nothing to do with the fact that they are happy or not
until we learn how to control emotions like anger and jealousy. It is best that we stay in monogamous relationship. Yes, there are many example of married couple who are having problems but that is because they got married for the wrong reasons and there are also more example of those that are happy. In this society where a couple only get to spend time together on the weekend and on the week days they are too tired from working at least 8 hours a day, there is not time for the relation to grow, there is not time for love to grow. They grow apart from each other and then they forgot what love is all about. I see many couples who have forgotten about love because their focus has changed. It is hard for coupled in this society to stop thinking about the material they need for tomorrow. There is no time for that which is important, Love. Using the way the family structure is involving in this society is probably not a good example of marriage. You see that is what we need, we need to start to remember what love is. we cannot say paleo = love that is just too simplistic. We know that the family is the building block of any society. we can't just disregard all the things that we learn.
-
I once read that before the age of vaccines etc., the average lifespan of a marriage was only 11 years so more easily put up with. This was because, despite divorce being practically nonexistent(except for the likes of Henry VIII), husbands would often die in wars, while women would often die in childbirth, plus there were epidemics, malnutrition and a generally shorter lifespan due to increased hardship.
-
I once read that before the age of vaccines etc., the average lifespan of a marriage was only 11 years so more easily put up with. This was because, despite divorce being practically nonexistent(except for the likes of Henry VIII), husbands would often die in wars, while women would often die in childbirth, plus there were epidemics, malnutrition and a generally shorter lifespan due to increased hardship.
You can't concentrate only one part of the world. This is not a strong point. Try to see other part of the world too.
-
You can't concentrate only one part of the world. This is not a strong point. Try to see other part of the world too.
If by the other part you mean hunter-gatherers, nomads or paleo people, I don't think they had marriage, they had no need for it. Marriage is something that sprouted out of the same society that sprouted relationship problems, sexual problems and other mental & physical issues we have today.
In a truly happy paleo environment there should also be no need for requiring a marriage contract for people that love each other and want to be together... Maybe some people can if they want, to celebrate being together, then thats cool! ;)
It's one thing celebrating your love and taking time to grow your relationship, its another thing if marriage HAS to occur in order to do that acceptably. Once comes this, then other rules, rituals and ceremonies will start to follow, and it will be hard to follow a paleo type society then.
-
@ Tyler, you see, this is the exact reason why we need to spend time to learn what love is. To say that after 11 years (so more easily put up with), you are tired of your partner only shows how little you know about love. Therefore before we start passing judgment we need to know exactly what love is. We hear that love is this wonderful thing that every body is looking for everywhere. It is valuable. You cannot just look at a book and name a few statistic and dismiss it. Science is at the point now where most things can be proven to be good or bad. It is full with confusion. Therefore I say first know what it is before passing judgment. Instead of concentrating on physical pleasure let us take the time to figure what love is first. This can't be achieved with so much confusion that exist between sex and Love. Sex is sensual but Love is a fall. To fall in love is to forget yourself so that you can experience something greater than this physical existence. It is the fall of the physical, it is more profound then what we currently understand. Therefore let's learn before we jump into sensual pleasure. Sex degrades but Love up build, sex is with love is beyond all imagination. It is a union, the division is broken (ecstasy). Love is best practice in a monogamous relationship, such as marriage.
-
If by the other part you mean hunter-gatherers, nomads or paleo people, I don't think they had marriage, they had no need for it. Marriage is something that sprouted out of the same society that sprouted relationship problems, sexual problems and other mental & physical issues we have today.
In a truly happy paleo environment there should also be no need for requiring a marriage contract for people that love each other and want to be together... Maybe some people can if they want, to celebrate being together, then thats cool! ;)
It's one thing celebrating your love and taking time to grow your relationship, its another thing if marriage HAS to occur in order to do that acceptably. Once comes this, then other rules, rituals and ceremonies will start to follow, and it will be hard to follow a paleo type society then.
It seems that there is great confusion about what it means to be human and even more confusion about what it means to be happy. What is a truly happy paleo environment? Would you run in front of an approaching truck? Paleo don't know what truck is. So would you do it or would you use the common sense that you have learned from living in this society. We still have all of the bad habits, until we take them away it is best that we protect ourselves with the knowledge that we have. What is not a ritual? don't you eat every day, don't you sleep? these are rituals that you perform every day. They are your ritual. We know that we all seem to think that there is something beyond the physical, it is hard wired in us. Therefore we can 't say that we are going to completely go back because that is contrary to evolution. We can't really go back, we can't go back to the exact paleo time.
-
I want to have at least one woman to care for, and/or have kids with.
How you do it is up to you (cerimonies etc.).
I don't beleieve there is a right or wrong way.
In truth though, some things work well, some things don't. Just like with diet.
Back in the paleo days, you would know or at least know of the person you married(had kids with).
We live in an ever stranger world today. All because of the advent of grains.... That is amazing.
-
It's one thing celebrating your love and taking time to grow your relationship, its another thing if marriage HAS to occur in order to do that acceptably. Once comes this, then other rules, rituals and ceremonies will start to follow, and it will be hard to follow a paleo type society then.
Then it will become a cult ;)
___________________________
Love is just when someone gives you something you want, and you give them something they want, and because it goes both ways it feels strong, and you don't want to lose it. This could be with a doubles team in tennis, or marines in war. The love is just usually much stronger in sexual relationships because passing on your genes is such a big and important thing. A very strong love could develop between two men, who both work together and benefit each other in staying alive. The one man wants the other man to stay alive, because they stand a better chance of survival together(e.g. in war), and over time as they build a trust between each other that they will always look out for them, it becomes love. This has nothing to do with sex. But it is the same in a sexual relationship.. When you find someone you want to have a child with, and they want to have a child with you, there is the same mutual benefit.. And over time they begin to trust more that the other will always want this(or something else), and it develops in to love. They each feel that the other person will always be there for them, because they feel there is mutual benefit. Especially before they have had their first child, they will be very worried about what could happen to the other person, and not want to lose them. Of course this can then develop in other ways, as they take care of each other and what not.. If one person no longer sees the same benefit from the other, then the love will disappear, or parts of it will disappear and it will change.
-
A very strong love could develop between two men, who both work together and benefit each other in staying alive.
That's called a bromance, lol, my friend taught me that last week ;D
I also believe it is possible to have even romantic love for more then one person and still be happy, but you have to learn let go of feelings like jealousy and be happy in your life. Its not something everyone can do or will do.
Iit is best that we protect ourselves with the knowledge that we have. What is not a ritual? don't you eat every day, don't you sleep? these are rituals that you perform every day. They are your ritual....Therefore we can 't say that we are going to completely go back because that is contrary to evolution. We can't really go back, we can't go back to the exact paleo time.
I agree we can't completely go back and should use our knowledge to improve our life...one knowledge I gained is that love goes much deeper then marriage, its also difficult to define and describe, this is why I prefer marriage to be unnecessary for any relationship.
As for eating and sleeping everyday, sure that's part of my daily ritual, as is being with my love! But I do not need to have a ceremony or contract for doing any of these rituals with great enjoyment. That is why I feel in a paleo society, one where we try to live a simple, happy and healthy life we shouldn't have to make people get married.
-
... All because of the advent of grains.... That is amazing.
lol, that was a large part of the problem but its not the only one ;)
-
I also believe it is possible to have even romantic love for more then one person and still be happy
It's called a spitroast.
-
It's called a spitroast.
LOL, thats assuming they have a threesome....and I learn another new word....yay
-
That is why I feel in a paleo society, one where we try to live a simple, happy and healthy life we shouldn't have to make people get married.
There's so many examples of this kind of relationship. Most of them ended up an unhappiness, where a child is born and no one knows who is the father. Living a paleo life doesn't mean that u completely cut off from society, that could still be emotional dispute among members. And that can result end some people living from the community. Than what will happen to those children? That's why allowing multiple partners without some social contracts among them is very risky. Not only for the paleo community but for all other community in general. Therefor I say the focus can't be just on sensual pleasure. So, we gotta think about the welfare for everybody, including the children who may be born in the community. And the same time we need to think about the long term survival of the community.
-
A very strong love could develop between two men, who both work together and benefit each other in staying alive. The one man wants the other man to stay alive, because they stand a better chance of survival together(e.g. in war), and over time as they build a trust between each other that they will always look out for them, it becomes love. This has nothing to do with sex. But it is the same in a sexual relationship.. When you find someone you want to ...
Love can develop between any two living things. And that doesn't have to be sexual. But love is a fall, whether lover forget himself; he's willing to give everything and doesn't expect to get anything back. It is possible that one person fall in love for someone who doesn't love him/her. But that person may like only sexual pleasure or anything that the lover is willing to give. We know that the society we living now, some people have many partners and they have to lie to some of the partners. so, until the community is mature, they can't rely solely on the trust between people. so we have to take the responsibilities of all our actions and not to be burden on any other people.
-
Oh, I thought that thread was dead !
We know that the family is the building block of any society. we can't just disregard all the things that we learn.
It’s a building block only in the Neolithic and industrial societies that spoiled the planet, not in tribal hunter-gatherers sustainable societies - as already said. In Paleolithic era, the society’s building block was the tribe, as far as we know.
If by the other part you mean hunter-gatherers, nomads or paleo people, I don't think they had marriage, they had no need for it. Marriage is something that sprouted out of the same society that sprouted relationship problems, sexual problems and other mental & physical issues we have today.
In a truly happy paleo environment there should also be no need for requiring a marriage contract for people that love each other and want to be together... Maybe some people can if they want, to celebrate being together, then thats cool! ;)
It's one thing celebrating your love and taking time to grow your relationship, its another thing if marriage HAS to occur in order to do that acceptably. Once comes this, then other rules, rituals and ceremonies will start to follow, and it will be hard to follow a paleo type society then.
Exactly. Well said.
Love is best practice in a monogamous relationship, such as marriage.
Being confined by force in a closed, exclusive and jealous relationship is a love killing situation.
Francois
-
Being confined by force in a closed, exclusive and jealous relationship is a love killing situation.
Is it possible that marriage, much like optimal diet, is different for everyone?
I believe you've mentioned before that you are divorced Francois. It's quite possible that this experience has defined your ideas of what is good and what is bad in a relationship. This is not to say that your particular experience must therefore preclude marriage from other peoples viable ways to express there love for each other.
Marriage is a neolithic convention. I do not believe monogamy is solely a neolithic invention. I believe the paleo era had monogamous and polygamous relationships and both can work.
For the record I have been married for two years myself. There are times where my wife is a difficult woman to live with, as I can be difficult for her, but I feel our union is beneficial to the both of us. We both have a best friend, confidant, support base, and sexual partner who we know will be there for us when we need them. I am not so naive to believe that this would continue growing stronger, as it has since we first met, without lots of work and compromise. Nor am I so naive to believe that marriage will always work out between two people. I do believe it's an incredibly strong bond when nurtured by two people who belong together and I fully expect us to spend our lives together much the same as my parents have through all of their internal & external hardships (30 years in the spring). :)
-
All of this is getting to be amusing.
I'll chime in with my 2 cents being pro-life and pro-natal.
This love from my point of view is all genetic, for genetic future, propagation.
I love all my parents, grandparents, all my siblings, all my children and their mothers.
People cooperate for the sake of their genetic future. Those who don't "love" have doomed genetic futures.
Hell, you'd be forced to love one another if you had 4-10 kids relying on your love to cooperate, feed and raise them.
I believe in extended family co habitation
-
what GS said is good.. love is for the passing on of your genes, whether that be survival or reproduction.
But love is a fall, whether lover forget himself; he's willing to give everything and doesn't expect to get anything back.
Of course 'he' expects something back, that's why he loves them, because they provide something which is valuable to 'him'. Whether because he wants to mate with a woman, or it's a person who watches their back and keeps them alive, whatever.. But when they love, they have got used to that person providing whatever it is, or got used to the idea that they will.
-
Is it possible that marriage, much like optimal diet, is different for everyone?
Sure, it must be so. Everyone is different, every marriage is different. I was talking in a general way, as marriage is usually seen as a contract of exclusivity, which ends up of being a kind of jealous possession of the spouse. This is not love. If you really love someone, you want that person to be free and happy, and it means that she or he can also be loved by and love someone else, in case it happens…
...and that happens always after some years of living in a binary couple. The common, “civilized” way of thinking is that the third party intrusion is going to break the initial couple and hence should be repealed. This proves to be a terrible mistake. The third party arrival, on the contrary may well be a good luck, bringing new energy and information into the initial couple – of course under the condition that all three accept each other.
Hunters-gatherers seem to know that since they gladly accept and welcome foreigners, even often to the point of intimately including them in their couples. That was still the way of life for peoples who had not yet fallen into grain and dairy consumption, such as Pacific Islanders and Inuits.
I believe you've mentioned before that you are divorced Francois. It's quite possible that this experience has defined your ideas of what is good and what is bad in a relationship. This is not to say that your particular experience must therefore preclude marriage from other peoples viable ways to express there love for each other.
Yes, I’m divorced. It may have influenced my ideas to some extend, but my case is not at all an exception. It’s rather the closed couples working fine that are an exception. After some years of living together in a closed couple, the relationship wears out, the passionate love of the beginning inexorably goes away and the couple usually and at best settles in a kind of affectionate routine. Some people may be satisfied with such a situation, which thus may last for all the rest of the live of both partners.
But some other people feel that something is missing in their live and they start to long for something else, something fulfilling their deepest aspirations. One day, they fall in love with a third party. That seem to be the normal suit of events. But unfortunately it looks like that since the advent of agriculture, adoption of a sedentary lifestyle with grain and dairy as staple food, at the beginning of the Neolithic era, something went wrong with the human sexual instinct and way of thinking. Private property appeared and it extended to the possession of the partner, the third party being ever since considered as an enemy coming to plunder the crop and steal whatever it could… including the partner.
The grain had to be protect behind ramparts, fortified cities appeared, everyone enclosed his property behind fences and walls. The tribal structure disappeared and was replaced by the family structure. Finally, chastity belts and other horrors such as stoning to dead for adultery were implemented.
Marriage is a neolithic convention. I do not believe monogamy is solely a neolithic invention. I believe the paleo era had monogamous and polygamous relationships and both can work.
Yes, to a certain extend. Monogamy can work fine for a while, and perhaps for the whole live in a few cases…
For the record I have been married for two years myself. There are times where my wife is a difficult woman to live with, as I can be difficult for her, but I feel our union is beneficial to the both of us. We both have a best friend, confidant, support base, and sexual partner who we know will be there for us when we need them. I am not so naive to believe that this would continue growing stronger, as it has since we first met, without lots of work and compromise. Nor am I so naive to believe that marriage will always work out between two people. I do believe it's an incredibly strong bond when nurtured by two people who belong together and I fully expect us to spend our lives together much the same as my parents have through all of their internal & external hardships (30 years in the spring). :)
My parents lived together more than 60 years – till my father’s death. Marriage can work under some conditions, but it would work much more often and much better if it was considered as an open relationship, open to others in case of love with a third party.
Francois
-
This love from my point of view is all genetic, for genetic future, propagation.
I have good reasons to think there's also something else, Edwin. I'll explain it latter if someone is interested. ;)
-
I have good reasons to think there's also something else, Edwin. I'll explain it latter if someone is interested. ;)
Please share this theory.
-
jesus. while it is almost impossible to define love, virtually all human beings would associate love as being entirely separate than propagation, with love defining almost every indescribable positive aspect of human interaction other than pure copulation and raising of the species. Most would also say love does not exist in single celled organisms that are non-sentient and reproduce a-sexually for their own benefit. Love is very often experienced in animals and people of the same sex, and also between animals (pets) and humans without propagation (I believe) , not to mention experienced often between platonic friends or 'premature' relationships that never result in marriage, nevermind reproduction.
as for life time commitments and exclusivity of partnerships being neolithic, again total fantasy as its not even a human trait or a hetro one.
-
I read that romantic love(re hormones) has been proven to last c. 2 years, but gets extended for another 2 years after the birth of a child.
-
as for life time commitments and exclusivity of partnerships being neolithic, again total fantasy as its not even a human trait or a hetro one.
No, it's not a human trait: it's a peculiarity of humans in troubled societies.
GS, sorry I don't have the will to go further tonight since it would need a lot of writing.
-
No, it's not a human trait: it's a peculiarity of disturbed humans.
again with the extremes without acknowledging your opinion. How can you comment on the entire human race and species and disregard countless animals that unequivocally have life time unions and expect for anyone to take your comments seriously? Marriage is a ceremony, monogamous relationships are ubiquitous throughout place/time and species.
In my observations for all the time I've been exposed to the internet, I'd have to say the people promoting polymory etc..as some kind of intrinsic right or solution to socialites' failed pacts are often the most dysfunctional people, not to mention they inevitably and hypocritically eventually have the desire to get into (short term) monogamous relationships, which of course do not workout because they lack the ability to compromise towards another person which is usually the desire in the first place -ego.
-
I have to admit I am always envious of people who can make a marriage last lifelong, even in current social cirucmstances. Such people definitely display far greater maturity than others.
-
I read that romantic love(re hormones) has been proven to last c. 2 years, but gets extended for another 2 years after the birth of a child.
I believe love is an emotion way too complex for any study to comprehend.
What the study describes is probably more about physical infatuation.
-
My playboy solution is to love them ALL forever.
-
@ Iguana, you can't bicep human being in a laboratory and look at the parts and think that you know everything of human being. Human has very complex emotions and behaviors. As far as we know the tribes fight among each other and that could be for women, for food or many other unknown things and I'm sure they fight among members of the same tribes. You can't just bring a group of people together in a jungle, eating raw meat and assume that you could have a sexual relationship with every single women and just assume that's what tribes members do in a paleolithic time. Once you talking about paleolithic, than you probably talking about the Darwinisms, which is survival of the fittest. So, the strongest guy can beat you up and take women away. Is this the kind of society you wanna live in? It sounds like a very nice idea for the males to display their hormones. That means you are not learning anything and just want to step back in a brutal world where there is no law. It looks like your lawlessness nature is becoming stronger in every posts you make. I think humans are more than just brutes. Without the proper structure, there could not be any respect and trust among members. This is not just to fulfill you fantasy.
-
Please, think of the children. What about the children?
-
Please, think of the children. What about the children?
(http://www.myhealthblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/pronatalbanner091.jpg)
(my blog banner)
Awesome, I always think about children myself.
Living in the wild requires entire families: grandparents, aunts, uncles, parents, siblings, children... the extended family... plus the extended family of the co parents. It takes 2 extended families to raise the children they have in common with.
Relying on just 2 parents to raise children has a low probability of success.
-
(http://www.myhealthblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/pronatalbanner091.jpg)
(my blog banner)
Awesome, I always think about children myself.
Living in the wild requires entire families: grandparents, aunts, uncles, parents, siblings, children... the extended family... plus the extended family of the co parents. It takes 2 extended families to raise the children they have in common with.
Relying on just 2 parents to raise children has a low probability of success.
Just beautiful!!
-
But some other people feel that something is missing in their live and they start to long for something else, something fulfilling their deepest aspirations. One day, they fall in love with a third party. That seem to be the normal suit of events. But unfortunately it looks like that since the advent of agriculture, adoption of a sedentary lifestyle with grain and dairy as staple food, at the beginning of the Neolithic era, something went wrong with the human sexual instinct and way of thinking.
Francois
Your testicles are talking. This is very unusual act. I don't know they can talk. Hopefully your brain will get at least some control soon. :D :D :D :D :D :D
-
Your testicles are talking. This is very unusual act. I don't know they can talk. Hopefully your brain will get at least some control soon. :D :D :D :D :D :D
yeah, honestly I don't think one can talk about polygamy in a natural setting if they cannot at least carry a 125 lb doe more than 50 yards back to their wive(s) and fight off some aggressive muscley suitors. Wasn't this thread about what it would take to actually survive in the wild? what a bunch of I-can_type_this_up_on_my_computer dreamland bullshit.
-
KD has a point re wishful thinking. Yet, I recall a documentary or two re Mormon Fundamentalists/Polygamists where the husbands, surprisingly, were not the
wife-beating dominating patriarchs I expected them to be, but actually quite placid types.
-
Yes, I’m divorced. It may have influenced my ideas to some extend, but my case is not at all an exception. It’s rather the closed couples working fine that are an exception. After some years of living together in a closed couple, the relationship wears out, the passionate love of the beginning inexorably goes away and the couple usually and at best settles in a kind of affectionate routine.
Francois
Passionate sex not "LOVE"
-
hmm, for me its not whether polymory is good or bad. I do tend to think its by an large a bad thing for individuals and society, but either way, to say it is a natural impulse is false and that is actually proven. If anything, the impulse to be free and to explore options are based on the options presented by not only neolithic but modern societies, even though much of the strains in staying monogamous are made more complicated by modern problems. To say one is going to have extended families and people watching bastard children and all the other crap that has come up in the past with polymory chat- IN THE WILD...please! Yeah grandma skin the reindeer and watch these snots while I go romp. The reason Mormons and such can be successful is because they have physical wealth and resources beyond which they create themselves, which only exists in civilized societies not wild-independent hunter/gatheres that have to provide all for their own.
-
Well, even tribal HGs had some polygamy. Granted, polygamy was only really available to tribal chieftains/elders with most other tribesmen being restricted to monogamy for obvious reasons. Polyamory, on the other hand, appears to be a totally modern phenomenon, which was not prevalent in the past.
-
Passionate sex not "LOVE"
Yeah... Exactly... But if the desire to have sex(reproduce) with someone goes then it would be natural to find someone else to have sex(to reproduce) with... He would still love his baby-momma( :D), and his children. He would want them to do well, he would not want them to be lost, or that would defeat the whole point of it all in the first place, would be a waste of time.. i.e. he loves them... But if he was coping enough with supporting them, then he might naturally become attracted to another female... And so if he did become so, and he could he would want to copulate with her also.. Then he would have two wives whom he both loves, with two sets of children whom he loved.. They would be joined together and he would look after them both. Like GS said, others in the family could help look after these children. If he has energy to do so he'll want to keep having more children.
{{{*The love is not wanting to lose something... The sexual attraction is wanting to pass on genes, mixed with that person. So if you find someone you want to pass on your genes with, you will not want to lose them.. I.e. if you have sexual attraction to someone, you will develop love for them, and then you will love the children. The mother is taking care of the children whom you love so you wouldn't want to lose her, and you likely want to have more children with her. Even shared experiences/memories will make you not want to lose them, i.e. love them.
*It's simple.. The most simple thing.}}}
-
Monogamy, polygamy, polyamory, who cares, as long as everyone is at peace and happy!
Living in the wild is simple, you wanna be able to hunt, to fuck and to raise children to be able to do the same, however its done is not important as long as they can survive well in the wild.
None of these other things like love and marriage are important in the wild, you can do whatever you want as long as you can survive and nature doesn't care...
None of these things encompass living in the wild, unless you want to build a village or mini-society, but thats no longer living in the wild, people live in small villages today, go and look at how they live.
-
:( I’m sad about the turn this discussion has taken. I painstakingly tried to start making my point of view clear and understandable, but it looks like I failed, triggered a lot of passionate words and got insulted instead of being thanked and amiably asked questions. So, I'll let you discuss amongst yourselves. Sorry GS, I feel useless to go further in such an excited and provocative ambiance.
-X >:
-
Living in the wild is simple, you wanna be able to hunt, to fuck and to raise children to be able to do the same
Perfect way of life 8)
-
:( I’m sad about the turn this discussion has taken. I painstakingly tried to start making my point of view clear and understandable, but it looks like I failed, triggered a lot of passionate words and got insulted instead of being thanked and amiably asked questions. So, I'll let you discuss amongst yourselves. Sorry GS, I feel useless to go further in such an excited and provocative ambiance.
-X >:
Don't let 2 monogamy die hards spoil your day. You know I'm pro-natal. So I'm all ears.
-
Don't let 2 monogamy die hards spoil your day. You know I'm pro-natal. So I'm all ears.
hmm no. there are two things here, whether one prefers some kind of polymory/polygamy (which technically refers to a religious framework or tribal hierarchy as pointed out) and if it is natural and monogamy is unnatural. You can't disguise a preference in a bunch of bullshit science/anthropology and then keep the same argument running when pointed out otherwise. As for the preference, what people are pointing out is that this also is totally out of touch with reality unless one wanted to actually face the real consequences of how this would look like without modern creations.
What :raw: says is absolutely true as the proportion of females to males would not even be remotely equal in primitive societies and the males that would even find mates in such a setting (if they were lucky) would be the biggest and the strongest or otherwise most usefull. Speaking otherwise is to capitalize on both artificial wealth and advantages of artificial constructs.
on a biological level, of course the advantage of having variety of mates is obvious to just about anyone (that is male!), but I can say for certain that as someone fully capable of attracting a variety of females in a modern or probably traditional setting - not to mention per topic a larger probability of survival, I would trade constant shuffling between partners for a true committed love. This is the love that makes us human and not an amoeba. Just about the majority of all humans believe this way, which is why despite the obvious problems, all the otherwise deemed 'alphas' seem to be drawn into at least a series of monogamous relationships, even when they have all the looks and resources to have basically whatever they please in our modern world 24/7.
-
Human gestation period is long.
-
I would trade constant shuffling between partners for a true committed love.
Me too.
Humans Are Not Made Monogamous (http://news.softpedia.com/news/Humans-Are-Not-Made-Monogamous-83227.shtml)
Of course, when Hollywood stars or politicians have extramarital affairs, the whole world rumbles. But if we peek into human biology, anthropology and sociology, the monogamous human appears as a very weird notion. We are mammals, and if we look to the mammalian world, just 3 to 5% of the about 5,000 species of mammals form lifelong, monogamous bonds.
Others points :
Bonobo Society: Amicable, Amorous and Run by Females (http://www.unl.edu/rhames/bonobo/bonobo.htm)
Matriarchal tribal system (http://sociologyindex.com/hunter_gatherer_society.htm)
The hunter gatherer society is among the early societies believed to have had a matriarchal tribal system. (…) Hunter-gatherer societies have non-hierarchical, egalitarian social structures. Hunter gatherer societies there is sexual parity. Egalitarianism is common in hunter-gatherer groups. Hunters will share meat with the rest of the group.
2 photos for Yuli :
(http://www.unl.edu/rhames/bonobo/sci-bonobo-ape_4.jpg)
(http://www.foxnews.com/images/344586/0_61_080213_gorilla_sex.jpg)
In bigger size here (http://www.newswise.com/images/uploads/2008/02/12/fullsize/GorillaCopulationImage.jpg)
Humans, bonobos, dolphins and perhaps whales are particular in that they have perennial sexual and genital relations, I mean even the already pregnant women and children not yet able to reproduce also have sexual drives or even genital relations. Why is that? Sexologists and psychoanalysts answer is “for the pleasure”. That’s like telling the purpose of eating is just and only for the pleasure.
It would be more logical to admit that the pleasure we have when doing something means we’re doing something useful for our survival, because animals spending their energy to do useless things are placed in a state of inferiority and would have been eliminated by natural selection. So, we must infer that there’s likely another purpose than reproduction to our sexual drives, a purpose useful to the specie survival.
We feel that a loving relationship bring us happiness and energy. We can feel this energy transfer flow when we touch and caress someone we love. There’s in fact a transfer of particles (mostly electrons) with any physical contact. Energy / information can flow this way between partners being “in tune”. Many people experience extra-sensory perceptions (ESP) and/or have premonitory dreams and such things when in love. So it could well be that the second purpose of sexual relations (other than reproduction) is the structuring of our extra-sensory perception capabilities. The lost of it diminishes our chances of survival in the wild and leads to the denial of the existence of something non directly observable as “material”.
At the beginning of a real love relationship, the exchange of energy is very intense, passionate, but it diminishes with time – most probably because all the information has been exchanged and the same is re-circulating over and over again. Usually, after a while in this unsatisfactory situation, one of the two partners falls in love with a third party. This person coming form outside can bring new information and “recharge the batteries” of the initial couple. She or he is not at all an enemy of the couple, she or he is instead the savior of the couple.
This person being most often included herself in another couple, the energy / information can therefore flow between the initial couple and the rest of the society, which forms a kind of honeycomb. That’s how I see the structure of a harmonious and sustainable tribal society.
Closed and exclusive couples insulate themselves from the rest of the society and loose the most important thing in live.
Francois
-
ok, even i'll admit you've redeemed yourself here in some sense and brought in more cases of poly type behavior than I was aware, but there is a HUGE difference between polymory and serial monogamy. You still seem to be presenting a case more for short lived monogomous relationships. Especially given the factors and stresses of our world I would probably agree that might be the best many switched on and evolving people can hope for. But little of this translates as supporting multiple relationships at a single time (for humans) other that some specific monkeys who have their own unique monkey purposes. Just because it is present does not mean it is fair to both sexes either. Even the dynamics of early man or of animals, would essentially be considered to be unfair to both sexes in terms of independence and choice of role.
There seems to be intrinsic discomfort to a male human in the situation of the female mating with other males simultaneously - even if present in SOME monkeys - to be entirely a convention of societies brainwashing. The answer here is just the simple difference that we are not apes. My favorite part was how in the rare cases amongst humans, this polyandry (the far more likely occurrence in primitive society due to emale/male ratios) was used as birth control (gross) of course because the female would already be pregnant. Lets face it, when males are speaking of poly, they are largely speaking of polygyny or spreading their seed around, and a largely uncomfortable with sharing females, unless thats their best option I suppose.
-
Wasn't this thread about what it would take to actually survive in the wild? what a bunch of I-can_type_this_up_on_my_computer dreamland bullshit.
back to the topic: KD, why do you portray living in the wild so negatively? just curious on your reasoning. thanks
-
back to the topic: KD, why do you portray living in the wild so negatively? just curious on your reasoning. thanks
the quote you selected was referring to the fact that if we were taking these relationship contracts out of the context of what would actually be feasible in nature (for a male to acquire and support/'hold on to' a female etc without money, status, and assistance of course..) then we are entering into a fantasy. Part of me agrees that living in the nature -today- entirely is somewhat of a fantasy, but I believe it was Iguana oddly who first mentioned that. So I guess we agree on something somewhat.
seems to be the contrary..I think I had positive things to say about practical things for the most part here till it was derailed. In other words I was sort of saying we were now off topic - to get back to talking about living in nature, not further conceptualizations. I was talking more about my example of functional strength for instance as being sort of a requirement for an opinion. If people here could not survive in nature they obviously could not outmatch someone who could never mind have more than one wife, in terms of the brute competition of primitives as 'raw' mentioned.
yeah, honestly I don't think one can talk about polygamy in a natural setting if they cannot at least carry a 125 lb doe more than 50 yards back to their wive(s) and fight off some aggressive muscley suitors. Wasn't this thread about what it would take to actually survive in the wild? what a bunch of I-can_type_this_up_on_my_computer dreamland bullshit.
basically it was just frustration with an obvious contradiction of the topic. If we can't hunt/kill/carry a relatively small animal and build a fire and so forth yet are talking about extended families living outside eating all raw?
-
2 photos for Yuli :
(http://www.unl.edu/rhames/bonobo/sci-bonobo-ape_4.jpg)
(http://www.foxnews.com/images/344586/0_61_080213_gorilla_sex.jpg)
In bigger size here (http://www.newswise.com/images/uploads/2008/02/12/fullsize/GorillaCopulationImage.jpg)
Humans, bonobos, dolphins and perhaps whales are particular in that they have perennial sexual and genital relations, I mean even the already pregnant women and children not yet able to reproduce also have sexual drives or even genital relations. Why is that? Sexologists and psychoanalysts answer is “for the pleasure”. That’s like telling the purpose of eating is just and only for the pleasure
Francois
I remembering seeing that show, where they are having sex , for God's sake, there is no recognition for who's the father, mother, children, uncles or aunts. everyone's involved in sexual activities among themselves . Why don't you just join with chimps?
-
There seems to be intrinsic discomfort to a male human in the situation of the female mating with other males
This seems intrinsic to most men in our actual culture; not for Pacific Islanders, not for Inuits, not for most hunter-gatherers... and not for me as long as the other guy is or becomes a friend of mine. As already said: if I love her, I want her to be happy and free and I want our love to last. Thus I don't lock her in chastity belt.
Shall we split the topic and open a new one about marriage and so ? I don't know, I just ask.
-
This seems intrinsic to most men in our actual culture; not for Pacific Islanders, not for Inuits, not for most hunter-gatherers... and not for me as long as the other guy is or becomes a friend of mine. As already said: if I love her, I want her to be happy and free and I want our love to last. Thus I don't lock her in chastity belt.
Shall we split the topic and open a new one about marriage and so ? I don't know, I just ask.
ok, since this cannot be determined, i'll give you that its possible, but the very article you posted that had a specific theory/bias said it is 'extremely rare" in traditional human tribes and associates it largely with specific function. I can't claim that you are being disingenuous, but I can say from the exposure i've had to this concept that many seem enthusiastic about such things but inevitably decided otherwise. Perhaps the cultural conditioning is too much (I mean that non sarcastically) but I suspect not.
---
I guess a poll of who would welcome someone screwing the pregnant mother of their child seems about right.
-
thanks for the clarification kd. i didn't realize you were mainly talking about relationships
-
Why don't you just join with chimps?
Because sexual activities are such an awful and destructive thing. I prefer to burn diesel fuel in my car, pay taxes useful to improve our military equipment and police force, have nuclear generated electricity at home and travel by plane sometimes to fill my CO2 emissions allowance.
;)
Perhaps the cultural conditioning is too much (I mean that non sarcastically) but I suspect not.
It’s extremely powerful, very difficult to get out of it. We have been conditioned in it ever since early childhood.
I guess a poll of who would welcome someone screwing the pregnant mother of their child seems about right.
Sexual doesn’t necessarily mean genital. There can be sexual, physical relations without any penetration.
-
It’s extremely powerful, very difficult to get out of it. We have been conditioned in it ever since early childhood.
Sexual doesn’t necessarily mean genital. There can be sexual, physical relations without any penetration.
the problem with that theory is if it is an innate desire suppressed by civilization, it would occur pretty much unilaterally amongst both animals and primitive peoples. Particularly since it has such obvious benefit, and since I believe you and others are also arguing it is better for propagation, the childrens' upbringing etc...
I don't quite agree with sexual not meaning genital. I think it means someones genitals are involved somewhere, but yes possibly lacking vaginal penetration. The article you posted made it seem like the purpose was to have as much genital sex as possible during pregancy in polyandry as a major bonus.
-
the problem with that theory is if it is an innate desire suppressed by civilization, it would occur pretty much unilaterally amongst both animals and primitive peoples. Particularly since it has such obvious benefit, and since I believe you and others are also arguing it is better for propagation, the childrens' upbringing etc...
All primitive populations cook their food today. So it’s difficult to know exactly what was the human sexual behavior prior to the mastery of fire and food cooking.
I don't quite agree with sexual not meaning genital. I think it means someones genitals are involved somewhere, but yes possibly lacking vaginal penetration. The article you posted made it seem like the purpose was to have as much genital sex as possible during pregancy in polyandry as a major bonus.
I quickly found this article by Google and didn’t event read it attentively. I linked it just to show that monogamy is not so ubiquitous amongst mammals and primates. There is a lot of literature about it, this is just a sample.
“Sexual” is very vague. We all have sexual attributes, there’s sexual differentiation. What is exactly a sexual relation? There can be something sexual in a stare, in a handshake, in a pat. We are of the same sex, aren’t we? So, properly speaking, our relation on this forum is… homosexual! But no, we don’t want to sleep together, do we?
:)
-
We all have cultural differences seeing we all live in different countries and different cultures.
My take:
Serial monogamy is destructive. Yuck.
Polygamy or the behavior of polygamy is all around you, it is human fact.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_Wars
The trick to making monogamy work:
- wives prefer their men visit prostitutes and use condoms so he can get his sexual fill
- wives will pay no mind to mistresses as long as the man has abundant money
But if wives think about it, prostitutes are usually dirtier than mistresses. But for the wives, prostitutes are better because there is an assumed no emotional commitment.
So even if mistresses are cleaner and healthier for men, wives don't like mistresses because they cost more in terms of child support and emotional commitment is assumed as well.
The trick for wives is:
- Accept this is fact. So there are no delusions.
Why do you think red light districts and mistressing is all around you? This is why.
-
We all have cultural differences seeing we all live in different countries and different cultures.
My take:
Serial monogamy is destructive. Yuck.
Polygamy or the behavior of polygamy is all around you, it is human fact.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_Wars
again, no. As I said, you can have your opinion on what you prefer personally, but as Iguana has basically accepted, no culture (an aspect of post symbolic thought i.e. civilization) ever on this planet to anyone's knowledge practices regular polygamy unilaterally as one would expect from something so obviously good. This also is apparently due to cooking. There is no cultural infulence on this issue whatsoever unless it comes from a religious order of some kind, probably located in Utah. Certainly no present secular cultures. As for serial manogamy, that was essentially the end synopsis of the information provided, it is neither good nor bad, just human natures statistical preference given freedom to choose, even with options between poly and indefinite monogamy. As for SW, you seem to bring this book in to rationalize many things it does not even support, not to mention most of the statistics and general hypothesis are basically wrong.
Which cultures have you perceived and experienced that apply this concept and deliver it to the children in such a way as to create a sustainable system of fulfilled individuals of both sexes? Or again is this just something you've theorized by reading it in a book or on the internet? Also where do you stand on the other side of the coin as has been discussed, with multiple male partners? or the lack of ease in achieving multiple partners in a natural setting or which non of these 'authors' would ever bother addressing because it is not their concern.
-
again, no. As I said, you can have your opinion on what you prefer personally, but as Iguana has basically accepted, no culture (an aspect of post symbolic thought i.e. civilization) ever on this planet to anyone's knowledge practices regular polygamy unilaterally as one would expect from something so obviously good. This also is apparently due to cooking. There is no cultural infulence on this issue whatsoever unless it comes from a religious order of some kind, probably located in Utah. Certainly no present cultures. As for serial manogamy, that was essentially the end synopsis of the information provided, it is neither good nor bad, just human natures statistical preference given freedom to choose, even with options between poly and indefinite monogamy. As for SW, you seem to bring this book in to rationalize many things it does not even support, not to mention most of the statistics and general hypothesis are basically wrong.
Which cultures have you perceived and experienced that apply this concept and deliver it to the children in such a way as to create a sustainable system of fulfilled individuals of both sexes? Or again is this just something you've theorized by reading it in a book or on the internet? Also where do you stand on the other side of the coin as has been discussed, with multiple male partners? or the lack of ease in achieving multiple partners in a natural setting or which non of these 'authors' would ever bother addressing because it is not their concern.
You live in a fantasy "ideal" world KD.
It's a dog eat dog world out there.
You may not like it, but I'm just telling you the way it really is.
People don't live up to your ideal and they never will and never have.
Wake up man.
Did your grandparents and parents give you a sanitized censored transcript of their lives?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_Wars
I agree to disagree with you.
-
what the hell are you talking about? what ideal am i presenting? i'm saying statistically people choose some form of monogamy over trying to balance multiple partners, and the ones who say that is what they want, cannot also avoid some monogamy. Even Igunna would agree with that, and probably blame it on our deranged cooking experiments. why arn't you yourself practing what you are saying? what examples of what you say are at all cultural? youre just grasping here.
-
please explain how the real world works and what I'm missing. dog eat dog means you actually have to compete for mates, I believe that is what I was saying earlier. If one can't actually compete, but needs wealth and infulence to hold on to women, who essential have no power in those societies, than how is that at all a reflection of nature or how 'it' really is?
-
Well, I would heavily disagree that women in a polygamous mariage have no power/rights. If one takes a closer look at independent, as opposed to FLDS etc. , mormon fundamentalist marriages, for example, one finds that the women in those marriages get surprising extra advantages that women in monogamous marriages don't get at all. For example, such women, are often able to work while leaving childcare to 1 of the other wives, for a period. Plus, with all the extra wives, they do not have to worry about their husbands leaving them to go with other younger women when they get too old etc. Plus, when one thinks about it , a man with several wives risks bcoming a seriously hen-pecked husband rather than some dominating patriarch.
As for wealth and influence, that is merely an aspect of GS's notions re survival of the fittest. I doubt he thinks ALL males have the right to be polygamous, only some(ie such as individuals like himself!).
-
please explain how the real world works and what I'm missing. dog eat dog means you actually have to compete for mates, I believe that is what I was saying earlier. If one can't actually compete, but needs wealth and infulence to hold on to women, who essential have no power in those societies, than how is that at all a reflection of nature or how 'it' really is?
What you are missing is that there is your ideal, how you want to live, how you wish everything was peaceful fine and dandy.
20 years ago this was my ideal. I even volunteer and still currently volunteer for www.prolife.org.ph so you know how idealistic I can be.
But the reality on the ground with the behavior of both MEN and WOMEN is just not the "ideal" monogamy fantasy. You may get 5% or less of people practicing that ideal honest monogamy. But for most people it is a combination. Up front it's monogamy, behind the scenes, woman has another inseminator, man inseminates many other women, women would rather share a good man than settle for a mediocre bachelor, it's all colorful...
But that's the way it is.
Everything in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_Wars
is true. You just have to be nosy enough with your friends and relatives as I was and still am. Just be happy that this is the way people are and accept people as they are.
Drop the strong male assumption, females are the more choosy ones and they will not settle for mediocre bachelors. Many of them are just so much more magnetized to attached men.
-
tyler: this could turn into an entirely other argument, but one essential aspect of power is the ability to actually refuse an arrangement or leave it entirely, which due to religious and other constructs, is fairly impossible for many of the women to take advantage of. Its quite possible that people are satisfied with their predicament, but they don't have power as an individual or as equal to the males in choosing mates themselves.
GS: it has nothing to do with how I wish to live. Its numbers. I'm saying yes largely everyone wishes to have multiple partners, I agree and clearly most people are not capable of that, otherwise there would be no reason to be mystified that people still maintain marriages or that everyone wasn't doing everyone. Give the fact that people have options, including yourself to indeed have things on the side or in the open, there is no doubt that there is an intrinsic desire to have long lasting partners, and that there are biological desires are worth sacrificing. Whether suppressing these desires results in problems is not really the same issue as whether we desire monogamy or not.
I understanding very well that your perspective is framed by anti-abortion and similar type philosophies. What I said was this isn't your culture....nor is it the culture of France that holds these beliefs so claiming that i think was fairly disingenuous . The only cultural thing might be that pro-life in the US means anti-abortion, as pro-choice people believe one can either have life or not, so they are the ones that are open to people doing what they wish with their bodies, whereas traditional religious groups that makes up most of the pro-life movement....not so much and fairly stuck on the monogamy end.
Just because there are plenty of problems associated with monogamy (most of which being augmented by modern situations) does not change that people don't function well with other arrangements either. As for the dog eat dog thing, that was your term and i'm expressed what it means in terms of this original topic. Rarely do I pull the 'how it is done in nature thing" but :raw: had a good point that I ran with which and Tyler concedes that in a small setting with very few available partners, not every person can be polygamous, so it can't very well be the absolute design for all humans prior to the formation into societies.
-
We're all thinking of "living in the wild" and we have to take into account the realities of human nature so the living in the wild idea becomes successful.
I like driving with the correct map.
-
I was talking more about my example of functional strength for instance as being sort of a requirement for an opinion. If people here could not survive in nature they obviously could not outmatch someone who could never mind have more than one wife, in terms of the brute competition of primitives as 'raw' mentioned.
To be able to live in the true wild, and in the way where these issues would occur, we would need to go back in time... And if we were to go back in time, none of us would have become the same as we are anyway, so what you are saying is pointless. Unless you are imagining we have a time machine, and can transport ourselves, as we are, into the past?
-
To be able to live in the true wild, and in the way where these issues would occur, we would need to go back in time... And if we were to go back in time, none of us would have become the same as we are anyway, so what you are saying is pointless. Unless you are imagining we have a time machine, and can transport ourselves, as we are, into the past?
huh? like I just said, I pull the "in nature we would do this" card less than anyone here, I usually do not care how ancient people lived in regards to most issues. one can today go out in nature and see if they can survive for even a week and if they can actually kill and carry an animal to a waiting person far away. What is speculative about that? People were claiming that having more than one partner was an original pre civilization regular occurrence, so they were the ones who need the machine because what they are speaking of does not exist currently. Most evidence - speculation yes- assumes the original packs were not very large and didn't have a hierarchy where some could lay around and not require strength, so I would wager individuals would need basic levels of fitness to survive in nature in any time period, not to mention to maintain a sense of manliness within a small tribe.
-
But none of us here do live in the past.. You can't say that this wouldn't work, just because GS, who lives in the modern world and earns his living on a computer, couldn't drag a 100kg animal for miles.. If he lived back in a time when this was even relevant, then he would not be the same GS...
-
But none of us here do live in the past.. You can't say that this wouldn't work, just because GS, who lives in the modern world and earns his living on a computer, couldn't drag a 100kg animal for miles.. If he lived back in a time when this was even relevant, then he would not be the same GS...
absolutely, but then other needs change and evolve as well, don't you think? This is exactly why traditions spring up and rules are created, because peoples needs change as society restructures itself. therefore its neither good nor bad. If someone is talking about reverting to certain situations (due to judging as bad), raw and myself are pointing out that your opening the doors to having physical domination and other things come out of the woodwork, not to mention other implied bulldozing over other various progressive protections of rights of individuals of both sexes. People can deny this all they want, but its implicit in much of this stuff. It seems less hypocritical to me coming from someone like Mel Gibson or a similar person, yeah, I stand by that.
-
Personally, what is wild enough for me is Palawan. Beside the beach where fishing is easy, and you can pick up shellfish and sea urchins. And on land have a herd of goats and ducks. With coconut trees near the beach and fruit trees all around. Seems nice and comfy enough. Plant some vegetables and sweet potatoes for good measure.
Sounds like a survival retreat in case the current civilization goes crazy.
-
I am lost in these debates.
What's this about dragging a 100kg animal for miles?
No one would have to do that by themselves back in the days. They had brothers and relatives to help carry or butcher.
As far as polygamy vs monogamy. I do imagine that people had multiple sexual partners back in paleo days throughout an entire lifetime. But who knows how many and the social structer of that? No one.
Humans are not gorrillas, wolves, lions or baboons.
I wouldn't munch down some organs while everyone waits their turn, or have all the woman to myself if I was the dominant one in a tribe.
I would share organs, and I only need one woman. Their would be too much back stabbing in a tribe where dog eats dog is applied. I want everyone's trust in a tribe, whether I have 1 or 5 women. A stronge tribe is a tribe that cooperates.
In a tribe where everyone eats big game animals raw. Everyman man and person is needed to cooperate to hunt and watch young ones. Healthy people who cooperate = a peaceful group/tribe.
-
What a flood of posts during the night in Europe! Who's gonna read all that?
I wouldn't munch down some organs while everyone waits their turn, or have all the woman to myself if I was the dominant one in a tribe.
I would share organs, and I only need one woman. Their would be too much back stabbing in a tribe where dog eats dog is applied. I want everyone's trust in a tribe, whether I have 1 or 5 women. A stronge tribe is a tribe that cooperates.
In a tribe where everyone eats big game animals raw. Everyman man and person is needed to cooperate to hunt and watch young ones. Healthy people who cooperate = a peaceful group/tribe.
Absolutely. Elephants cooperate and help each other in a herd.
EDIT : The problem with you, KD, is that you write faster than normal people can read. I strongly suspect that you belong to the rare polykeyboarder type (found amongst very few homo sapiens and bonobos) and that you type not only with 10 fingers, but with 20 - hands and feet.
:o
-
What a flood of posts during the night in Europe! Who's gonna read all that?
People truly interested in the discussion at hand. I read it all. :)
-
I'm glad you do !
-
The dog eat dog part of sexuality and sperm wars is an ever present fact of human life.
Just watch The Maury Povich show.
There's your dog eat dog sperm wars exposed by DNA testing.
We are too far educated, knowing about paternity testing to go back in the wild.
We may be forced back in the wild by an earth tragedy, which will be a cannibal fest. Gross.
-
I had a look at the link you gave, GS. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_Wars
I read :
The book is controversial, both because of its explanations of homosexuality, rape, and prostitution, and because several of the hypotheses in the book are not supported by scientific research.
For instance, oral sex is explained as an opportunity for partners to judge each other's reproductive health, and for mates to detect recent infidelity (also proposed by Kohl & Francoeur, 1995 "The Scent of Eros").
That’s very weird and doesn’t fit with the fact that apes, some hunter-gatherers, Polynesians and Inuits (amongst others) don’t care about “infidelity”and even favor it. Note that it shouldn’t be called “infidelity”when it’s not done secretly from the usual partner, but with his/her total agreement or even presence.
Also :
However, this literal sperm warfare has not been observed in subsequent experiments, and is considered discredited.[5][6][7]
Overall, the author of this book stick to conventional thinking since he doesn’t know (like most people and researchers) that physical love has another essential function than reproduction. It’s absolutely logical that it must have one. With a correct raw paleo nutrition, sexual drives are normalized. I’ve experienced it ever since the first days and most others I know and talked with also have. Consequently all the ambient salad about sexuality has been based on abnormal human behaviour due to perturbations caused by incorrect nutrition and it must be completely reconsidered from scratch.This work was done by GCB and is exposed in a new book, translated in English and downloadable here. (https://sites.google.com/site/metapsychanalyse/home/qu-est-ce-que-la-metapsychanalyse/metapsychanalyse-et-justice/metapsychoanalysis-and-justice/BeyondtheOedipusComplex.doc?attredirects=0&d=1)
Yes, I didn’t find myself what I exposed in previous posts. Perhaps it is wrong, but at least it fits with everything we know, whit every observed fact and even with everything that happened in my live and around me.
-
Thanks for the book.
Much appreciated!
-
EDIT : The problem with you, KD, is that you write faster than normal people can read. I strongly suspect that you belong to the rare polykeyboarder type (found amongst very few homo sapiens and bonobos) and that you type not only with 10 fingers, but with 20 - hands and feet.
:o
thanks
Sully: just for the record, that began with me but a quick back-read would show that was not my point at all. I was trying to keep the subject on topic by saying what a person today would have to deal with - making all this other stuff total superfluous as they probably couldn't even support a single other person in todays wild if they couldn't take care of themselves. Likely they would have to have a mate that was independent and capable of tasks and roles possibly even traditional peoples did not but wasn't likewise thinking entirely opportunistically to move on to something else. Even if in that past there might have been various divisions of labor to a certain degree, but all the males (and likely the females) would have to have more than basic levels of fitness and strength. In fact its been presented here by TD that paleo women were stronger then some contemporary strength trainers. If people can't carry a 50 lb box of crap up a 5th floor walk-up without panting, odds are they couldn't maintain a wife in a truly dog eat dog world of equals without lock-and-key type distribution of resources and social hierarchies. This is why I said its easy-peasy behind the keyboard theorizing. Its one thing to have extreme opinions, but you have to follow through with the actual results and ramifications of what one says don't you think? It certainly bothers me that people can just glaze over all the points others bring up and spew the same bullshit over and over.
I certainly concede that what Ingunna presents is possible but there essentially is not enough evidence for it and plenty of evidence to the contrary. People act like we are completely enslaved by societal conventions far too often on forums like this, the fact is some people have all the options in the world for -if not officially by law- poly type relationships to their hearts content, and still choose monogamy. I suspect heavily that the same individuals sucked dry of all modern toxins and programming would not necessarily act differently. Despite how some animals act in nature, monogamy (at least serially) is quite present so it can't be an 'invention' of cooked foods. Only as I tried to point out, the very mechanisms that create wealth and removal from the circumstances of the wild, seem to create spiraling systems that then in themselves are not always fair, but that doesn't mean there is no instinct to be with a single person.
as for SW, I'm glad someone else pointed out how basically its just someones crack-pot ideas that have nothing to do with actual information researched on primitive or modern cultures not to mention does not technically promote polymory specifically or cite homosexuality as a invention of modern toxins or any other nonsense in which its been referenced on this site.
I don't believe we have much of anything in common with bonobos, and do see most 'great apes' as a degeneration of human form (which is inherently complex) rather than a model of simplicity, so perhaps that does have something to do with it. :)
-
I didn't suggest that palaeo women were more powerful than modern male strength-trainers.
As for bonobos, I recall reading somewhere that bonobos are further away from us, evolutionarily-speaking than standard chimpanzees. It is difficult, though, to call humans monogamous as paternity fraud, for example, appears to be much larger than one thinks, according to some studies.
-
I feel pretty confident with my recollection that you posted an article commenting on the size of women's arms and strength in comparison to a modern person, can't find it however.
either way, other than the chance that I remembered falsely, you are skipping over the bulk here, not to mention your other posts do mention the superiority of fitness amongst average people in the paleolithic to even modern advanced athletes, which is basically all that matters per my point.
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/infonews-items/more-evidence-that-palaeo-tribespeople-were-strongerfitter-than-us/
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/off-topic/modern-men-are-wimps!/
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/exercisebodybuilding/how-big/
of course we all know that all people do not have success with monogamy or its necessarily a default and everything else is deranged. The point is monogamy is not purely a construct of civilization covering up our innate desires and that love goes beyond biological functioning and often behaves dysfunctionally. Even if it was a construct, we don't necessarily live under conditions where people can be responsible enough to welcome all our innate desires. I won't slander anyone by bringing up examples of those again, but picking and choosing elements [edit - amongst the paleolithic or traditional] to ones convenience is not appropriate like it can be with diet preference - which has no victim of other people.
-
Any Neanderthal woman could have beaten former bodybuilder and current California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in an arm wrestle.
http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/2009/10/14/2009-10-14_modern_man_a_wimp_says_anthropologist_peter_mcallister_in_manthropology_.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/14/modern-man-is-a-wimp-acco_n_321117.html
ok it was the modern men are wimps thing.
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/off-topic/modern-men-are-wimps!/
-
As I recall, I simply stated that Cro-Magnon humans were as good as or better than modern Olympic athletes. At the time, I naturally was comparing palaeo men to modern men and palaeo women to modern women. The exception re Neanderthal women was based on a scientific study and obviously Neanderthals were far stronger than Homo Sapiens(Cro-Magnon) given past data re bones, being different species albeit able to interbreed etc.
-
on a biological level, of course the advantage of having variety of mates is obvious to just about anyone (that is male!), but I can say for certain that as someone fully capable of attracting a variety of females in a modern or probably traditional setting - not to mention per topic a larger probability of survival, I would trade constant shuffling between partners for a true committed love. This is the love that makes us human and not an amoeba. Just about the majority of all humans believe this way, which is why despite the obvious problems, all the otherwise deemed 'alphas' seem to be drawn into at least a series of monogamous relationships, even when they have all the looks and resources to have basically whatever they please in our modern world 24/7.
Let's get married, Knievel. Are you free this Thursday? Wait, not this Thursday, but next Thursday - a week from this Thursday.
We could have bridal registries at Slankers, Northstar Bison, and WF. Daniel Vitalis and Mark Sisson could do the catering... We could have one conventional wedding cake and another hardcore RPD wedding cake (idk, does a pemmican layer cake with marrow/suet/pet food "fondant" sound good? maybe some organ "ganache" in the center?). [If you prefer not to get "married," at least consider having the ceremony/reception - we won't really sign the marriage contract. We'll just have the "party" (reception) for the sake/show of having a party and to get all the wedding gifts (we'll split these). Shhhh... it will be our secret! ;) ] Lmk.
-
Let's get married
where is my necklace made out of crustaceans? Where is my blow to the head with a blunt object? This is soooo non rpd. Where is my courtship? I need to be wooed. I want to swoon in anticipation. ah well.
yes of course!
I think making the cake would e the best part, we could do it together. I guarantee if its a triple layer it will make the 6 o'clock news. Have you seen the Meatza on Dirty Carnivore site?... yuck. Ours will be artistry-come-delicious. Some kind of structure made out of pemmican and suet topped with blood and strawberry sauce. It might even food combine ok. It would be good because and vegans would say what would a RAF wedding cake look like, made all out of meat? and we'd just say yes. Strawberry or vanilla? We'd have to invite all the major prominent figures of the forums and blogosphere and they'd all argue about which diet is best and then pretend to hope the bouquet does not land on them next. I promises for one day I won't chase off any potheads, all are welcome and we'll have an almond flour cake for the less adventurous. It just won't have any little people on it.
-
where is my necklace made out of crustaceans?
I got some claws from the cooked crab brohem!
-
where is my necklace made out of crustaceans? Where is my blow to the head with a blunt object? This is soooo non rpd. Where is my courtship? I need to be wooed. I want to swoon in anticipation. ah well.
Wait, where is MY necklace? Oh, the blow to your head with a blunt object - that's coming later... And our entire marriage will be a courtship, so don't worry about that.
yes of course!
Excellent! (I hope you cried... b/c if you didn't cry, people might not believe that you really want to go through with this.)
I think making the cake would e the best part, we could do it together. I guarantee if its a triple layer it will make the 6 o'clock news. Have you seen the Meatza on Dirty Carnivore site?... yuck. Ours will be artistry-come-delicious. Some kind of structure made out of pemmican and suet topped with blood and strawberry sauce. It might even food combine ok. It would be good because and vegans would say what would a RAF wedding cake look like, made all out of meat? and we'd just say yes. Strawberry or vanilla? We'd have to invite all the major prominent figures of the forums and blogosphere and they'd all argue about which diet is best and then pretend to hope the bouquet does not land on them next. I promises for one day I won't chase off any potheads, all are welcome and we'll have an almond flour cake for the less adventurous. It just won't have any little people on it.
That's a great idea - to make the cake together. That would make it more meaningful. I had seen the meatza on Dirty Carnivore! (Lol, at least it inspired me to get creative topping ground meat. I LOVE pizza. I'm going to try pineapple, pepperoni, and mozzarella on raw ground beef soon.) Sweet - I'm glad we're on the same page regarding "artistry-come-delicious." The blood and strawberry sauce made my mouth water. (There's a sentence I never thought I would write.) I love almond cake too! If we invite major prominent figures, it's gonna be a circus. :( I know you are fond of squabbling, but I don't know if that would be auspicious on our wedding day.
I would also like to be registered at Amazon.com, Apple, iTunes, Agent Provocateur, and Sur La Table (I can get us some Lodge cast iron and the expensive enameled cast iron, Le Creuset, for cooked paleo jags). Btw, I've always loved the combination of hot pink and black... but I'm really open/flexible to your ideas of wedding colors (or themes, et al.), as well. I'm not a control freak... Oh, I also want a cover band that plays hits from the 70s, 80s and beyond (Top 40 dance especially). I'm not sure what I want to wear - I keep going back and forth between a 70s disco gown, cave couture a la Raquel Welch in One Million Years B.C. or Linda Harrison in Planet of the Apes, or a $10,000 gown a la "Say Yes to the Dress"... What do you want to wear? You can help me decide by telling me what you want to wear (if anything). I'm going to ask Ioanna to be a bridesmaid. :)
I don't mean to take this thread further off topic, so anymore planning ideas, I'll do in your journal.
-
Any one who would like to form a survival group in the four corners should let me know... (I live on Arizona)
After winter I should be ready to take off a week or two and see how things go
-
I'm interested. Where are you going?
-
I'm interested. Where are you going?
I'm not really sure yet, I was thinking Kaibab but Az kind of sucks when it comes to pirates("public" officials). I would like to avoid legalese as much as possible. I would rather travel to a place that has an overpopulation of game, since I have no plan on applying for a license or tag.
I have only started contemplating...Where might you suggest?
-
Looks like this summer I won't be completely living in the wild but pretty much.
My friends staying at a farm in Quebec in a VERY beautiful place...surrounded by wild....I am going to try and spend at least two months there but I want three months maybe....
The farm is small and has chickens (which are just running around in the yard outside eating plants and bugs) and grows herbs, veggies and some fruit. But its in the beautiful sand dunes area, behind it is a huge sand dune "cliff" you can slide down right to the salty water beach full of mussels.
There are many fresh water lakes where theres plenty of things to fish.
Killing rabbits there is allowed without a hunters license.
So my diet there will be mostly fresh caught fish, seafood, herbs and seasonal veggies, with maybe rabbit or fresh goat or beef if I decide to buy something from the neighboring farms. Oh, and the rocks and cliffs along the beach naturally gather delicious sea salt I can enjoy with my fish and veggies.
Swimming, exploring, fishing, eating the freshest food, probably helping with stuff on the farm (I'll have to or I am an asshole lol)...its going to be a nice summer... something to look forward to! And its CHEAP to do!
-
Yuli is very fortunate. I have been looking for an apprenticeship or job on a four legged animal farm or maybe beekeeper for the past month. Still no luck although there are many more places for me to bug. Everyone wants farm experience, which I understand, but four years of herding children does not seem to interest them. Moving into the woods starts to look better and better -\ LOL
-
Sometimes if you spend summer camping close to some local-yocals and befriend them you will find opportunities. It all depends on the people I guess. Go to stay at some nice wild area but where there is a little town nearby, you'll find something eventually.
-
I have been looking for an apprenticeship or job on a four legged animal farm or maybe beekeeper for the past month. Still no luck although there are many more places for me to bug. Everyone wants farm experience, which I understand, but four years of herding children does not seem to interest them. Moving into the woods starts to look better and better -\ LOL
try WWOOFing. it's really easy to get in touch with farmers who need help. i've done it a few times now and it's been great. planning on doing it many more times (probably with sully)
-
try WWOOFing. it's really easy to get in touch with farmers who need help. i've done it a few times now and it's been great. planning on doing it many more times (probably with sully)
Where gonna get all the grass fed lamb we want!
Edit: And perhaps some wild turkeys.
I mean sheep. Or is it lamb yon?
-
ha, i believe they're one in the same. lamb is just young sheep i think. but beef too! and of course we're gonna forage for grubs and stuff
-
ha, i believe they're one in the same. lamb is just young sheep i think. but beef too! and of course we're gonna forage for grubs and stuff
Yeah, lamb is young sheep, I was wondering if they slaughter most of them a year or under. Which would make it lamb.
It's going to be great.
-
Sometimes if you spend summer camping close to some local-yocals and befriend them you will find opportunities.
I wonder If they will mind, finding me camping on their lawn one summer morning(manifest destiny).... LOL I guess i should just find out
try WWOOFing. it's really easy to get in touch with farmers who need help. i've done it a few times now and it's been great. planning on doing it many more times (probably with sully)
Excellent... thanks for sharing!
-
I have been planning on leaving into the wilderness for several years now and I'm finally ready…Careful practice and planning has made it possible..Going to British Columbia, Canada..well its 100 miles east of Juneau Alaska just north of telegraph creek, a small town…the Taku river…its a salt water river that comes in off the ocean. just north of there is a fresh water river called Teslin river…it is between there where we plan on going. I did weather geographics on that area and it has the warmest summers in Canada as well as not so bad winters…hasnt gone below -7 in 30 years…average temp there is around 2-38 degrees in winter non factoring the wind chill and 55-70 in summer..trust me Id like to live in a warm climate but unfortunately you need ice and freezing temps to preserve food, hides, water, etc. Shelter with inside heating as well as stocked food and warm clothing will get us through winters no problem. There is also hot springs up there which i was able to get a satellite location on 2 right near where we plan on going…The spot is perfect 40-50 miles from 2 diff towns as well as less than 100 miles from the ocean and Juneau Alaska..salt water is needed for salt as well as a great food source so its a great location. We plan on leaving March 1st 2011…the plan is to meet in Seattle, Washington on March 1st. I spent 2 years in the army and several years studying herbalisms, medicines, curing hides and lots of other survival tactics. We are gonna pan for gold, hunt, etc. Ive been planning this for years just couldnt do it alone and Ive finally found some people to go. So its time to go…So far i have 3 other serious people 3 guys 1 girl total so far and 3 others interested for a total of 6 or 7…If your interested in going with us please email me at sydan66@gmail.com and i will email you where and what time we all will be meeting.Leaving March 1st 2011 Hope to talk to you soon.
Thanks,
Dan
-
...3 guys 1 girl....
Uh oh...
-
no cup?
-
I have been planning on leaving into the wilderness for several years now and I'm finally ready…Careful practice and planning has made it possible..Going to British Columbia, Canada..well its 100 miles east of Juneau Alaska just north of telegraph creek, a small town…the Taku river…its a salt water river that comes in off the ocean. just north of there is a fresh water river called Teslin river…it is between there where we plan on going. I did weather geographics on that area and it has the warmest summers in Canada as well as not so bad winters…hasnt gone below -7 in 30 years…average temp there is around 2-38 degrees in winter non factoring the wind chill and 55-70 in summer..trust me Id like to live in a warm climate but unfortunately you need ice and freezing temps to preserve food, hides, water, etc. Shelter with inside heating as well as stocked food and warm clothing will get us through winters no problem. There is also hot springs up there which i was able to get a satellite location on 2 right near where we plan on going…The spot is perfect 40-50 miles from 2 diff towns as well as less than 100 miles from the ocean and Juneau Alaska..salt water is needed for salt as well as a great food source so its a great location.
Thanks,
Dan
Cool! Sounds wonderful! But I'm fixing up my place to start a small farm and expecting some friends from this forum. With a small child, it's not easy to face adventure. Wishing you the best.
-
no cup?
HAHAHA!!!... got some shit on your mind miles?
-
But I'm fixing up my place to start a small farm and expecting some friends from this forum.
Wonderful 8)
-
This dude is spamming this message all over the net?
-
I wouldn't call that raw vegan retreat place "the wild."
-
Hey I'm moving on Thursday up North in the UK to practise some teamwork and wildy-living skills with a group for a few weeks and then I'm going off to mainland Europe to live in the woods so I'll hardly be on after Thursday and then I won't be on at all after that, for a while at least.
Maybe I'll get on here after a while and report some of my experiences. Who knows maybe someone will want to join my group.
-
...
Are there forest patrols?
When we chatted last you spoke of Apache national park, I looked into it and they threaten imprisonment for hunting without their permission. They call it "game thief" or "poaching". You should be aware if there are similar groups where you are going.
Not to deter you, just don't want you to end up eating prison food.
-
You all should watch Out of the Wild: Venuzela on Discovery Channel, Discovery on Demand or discovery's website: http://dsc.discovery.com/tv/out-of-the-wild/out-of-the-wild.html
Basically a bunch of civilized, US, neolithic peeps (average US people) choose to live in the wild for a few weeks in Venuzela a very untoched and large foresty place in America.
They go from their SAD to foraging and hunter gathering with little help, and basically eat a semi-raw cooked meat raw paleo diet. They ate insects, wild animals, fish, etc fruits, plants, whatever they could find.
It's still airing.
There's hope and they build things like tools, rafts, etc besides all the tools they have. They basically took a survival class with Venuzela's native Pemon Native Americans.
There's still hope that we can re-wild as they we're born into society and became hunter gatherers. Watch it.
Anyone know any good wild places in NYC (and no not central park, too many pesticides and people)
-
Has anyone read this book, Rewild or Die (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/13979723/urban-scouts-book-tour)?
-
I have. I found it mildly entertaining and insightful, albeit childishly written. If you feel drawn to the anarcho-primitivist worldview advocated by folks like John Zerzan, Derrick Jensen and Daniel Quinn, you might find it amusing.
Urban Scout (the author) has his own website (http://www.urbanscout.org) and his own message board (http://www.rewild.info). He also contributes to Derrick Jensen's forum (find it through http://www.derrickjensen.org). I know at least a couple other folks who regularly contribute here are members of Derrick's forum.
-
How much would it cost to live in a cabin/etc in the woods, or to build your own in the woods? There's this guy living in the wild paleo in the woods: http://goingferal.wordpress.com/ He truly gave me hope again and inspired me. Something I always wanted to do.
-
Courtesy of Jessica....
http://zerocurrency.blogspot.com/
-
Hey I'm moving on Thursday up North in the UK to practise some teamwork and wildy-living skills with a group for a few weeks and then I'm going off to mainland Europe to live in the woods so I'll hardly be on after Thursday and then I won't be on at all after that, for a while at least.
Maybe I'll get on here after a while and report some of my experiences. Who knows maybe someone will want to join my group.
How was it?
-
http://worldobserveronline.com/2013/10/04/man-lives-without-money/ (http://worldobserveronline.com/2013/10/04/man-lives-without-money/)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2138738/Daniel-Suelo-voluntarily-lives-NO-money-decade-slept-cave-years.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2138738/Daniel-Suelo-voluntarily-lives-NO-money-decade-slept-cave-years.html)
-
That's an idea....
It might be a cool. We have a few 20 something year old guys, my self included who really want to go out into the wild and live off the land for a while.
I was thinking canada or alaska at summer or perhaps try to join an indigenous tribe somewhere, africa, australia.. Although that might prove difficult
So far I'm thinking Sully, me, Miles, Hannibal, YonYonson or something who are all similar age and find this interesting.
I know for a fact that me, Sully and I think Hannibal are in pretty great shape, so hunting is definitely possible.
I'm also studying filmmaking, so I could document the process and make a documentary. Could be fun.
I'm serious guys, You'd have SOMETHING if you did film it, well, it would have to be a good production, but then it could be a pilot to show for a more professional shoot.... You guys should do it. Have you seen into the wild? and then there's that brit that jumps out of planes and does BBC show depicting just what you're talking about, surviving in the wild. but a group of you could have more emotional or humanistic appeal. think about it, before someone else does it.
-
I have. I found it mildly entertaining and insightful, albeit childishly written. If you feel drawn to the anarcho-primitivist worldview advocated by folks like John Zerzan, Derrick Jensen and Daniel Quinn, you might find it amusing.
Daniel Quinn has never advocated any sort of black and white, either-or worldview like anarcho-primitivism in anything I've read by him. He has repeatedly stressed that the problem of civilization is its inhabitants living only one way rather than the wrong way and encourages a breaking up of that monoculture.