WI: A sexually promiscuous judaism

Inspired by this
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=348023

I understand most of the Middle East was rather sexually liberated during the Bronze Age: Fertility goddess/festivals which included orgies and the like, but I'm by no means an expert.
Now, WI if there is no "do not desire the neighbor's wife" in this ATL nine commandments, and even if the religion doesn't encourage cheating or orgies (like - I think - their neighbors) it clearly states there is no sin in cheating or sex outside marriage (if marriage does exist in this scenario).

How do you think this changes things later on?

juanml82 said:

Inspired by this
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=348023

I understand most of the Middle East was rather sexually liberated during the Bronze Age: Fertility goddess/festivals which included orgies and the like, but I'm by no means an expert.
Now, WI if there is no "do not desire the neighbor's wife" in this ATL nine commandments, and even if the religion doesn't encourage cheating or orgies (like - I think - their neighbors) it clearly states there is no sin in cheating or sex outside marriage (if marriage does exist in this scenario).

How do you think this changes things later on?

Click to expand...

Judaism probably never gets going as anything but a fringe cult. Ritual orgies are one thing (although I suspect that their frequency tends to get overestimated, in the same way that most lurid sex-related things do), but there's no way you'll convince the majority of people that cheating on your marriage is a good thing. Not only is it going against what most people naturally feel, it's also extremely unwise in an ancient society. If you're a woman and you get pregnant, you want someone to help raise and look after the child, because good luck doing the sort of backbreaking agricultural labour which most people were involved in while you're nine months pregnant. If you're a man, you want to be sure that "your" children are actually yours, and that you're not being tricked into raising another man's offspring. Marriage is an obvious way of dealing with this, so what incentive would the ancient Jews have with doing away with it? And what arrangement would be better?

Oh, and I'd be careful with the phrase "sexually liberated". Where societies placed less emphasis on life-long monogamy, that tended to be less because they were free-love hippy communes than because they saw women as more-or-less interchangeable breeding objects with no purpose other than creating more (male) babies. Also, given that human populations naturally tend to be around 50/50 male/female, non-monogamous societies don't normally have enough women for everybody to get married; and in such situations, of course, it's the already-powerless who tend to lose out. Basically, a "sexually liberated" tenth-century BC Jewish society would be great for rich and powerful men, and significantly worse than OTL for everybody else.

it would be very uncomfortable ESPECIALLY BEFORE INVENTION OF RELIABLE BIRTH CONTROL.

Let's say that Jewish culture and the other Semitics paid important mention on having clear ancestry and thus... PATERNITY.

While you could squeeze some Temple harlots as holy prostitutes in Judaism, I doubt women in general will have an unchecked sexual mores. The reverse will happen as OTL Islam does, Covering their women from head to toe because they are deemed as Private Property, this origins in pre Islamic Arabian mores where men could fuk all they want but forbidden to violate the other's properties. And yes, Semitic Holy Prostitutes are very common in pre Islamic Arabian society.

Fabius Maximus said:

If you're a man, you want to be sure that "your" children are actually yours, and that you're not being tricked into raising another man's offspring. Marriage is an obvious way of dealing with this, so what incentive would the ancient Jews have with doing away with it? And what arrangement would be better?

Click to expand...

That about sums it up right there. Many cultures preferred patrilineal ancestry. Obviously there's some exceptions, but as the Roman saying goes, the mother is always certain. It just makes sense to have the father committed and working towards the survival of the family, it's pretty much what built civilization.

M. Adolphe Thiers said:

(snip) Obviously there's some exceptions, but as the Roman saying goes, the mother is always certain.

Click to expand...

Have you seen the Maury Povich show?

I agree that religious orgies were probably less common than some historians imagine - and interestingly the more sexually repressed the times are that the historians are brought up in, the more promiscuous they imagine the past is. The Victorians, as a parallel example, thought that the Vomitorium was a place degenerate pagan Romans went to throw up when they'd eaten their full so they could feast again. In fact it was simply part of a theatre that the audience "vomited forth" into from the seated areas when the play was over, what we call the lobby.

M. Adolphe Thiers said:

Many cultures preferred patrilineal ancestry.

Click to expand...

Although Jewishness, interesting enough, is passed down through the mother. Maybe because that's the only way you can be certain that a child actually is Jewish.

Fabius Maximus said:

Although Jewishness, interesting enough, is passed down through the mother. Maybe because that's the only way you can be certain that a child actually is Jewish.

Click to expand...

A later invention though. Note Joseph's wife, Judah's daughter-in-law, Moses' wife, Ruth, possibly David's mother, Solomon's mother, Solomon's wife, etc etc...all foreigners.

"I like your History of the World, Mr. Spacebat, but I think it would sell better if you sexy it up a bit."

Do you mean multiple wives, concubines, or something else when you mean "sexually promiscuous"? None of these are going to make Judaism a particularly progressive religion, if that's what you're after.

Well, basically, sort of "cheated on your wife/husband? oh, well... shrugs" "Oh, that woman is a prostitute?... shrugs" "Orgy festival in Lebanon? Get your tickets!"

That doesn't mean it would become "progressive" (whatever that means in the bronze age), but I wonder what kind of butterflies it creates.

As for paternity, didn't Roman gladiators doubled as sex workers for rich women?

juanml82 said:

Well, basically, sort of "cheated on your wife/husband? oh, well... shrugs" "Oh, that woman is a prostitute?... shrugs" "Orgy festival in Lebanon? Get your tickets!"

That doesn't mean it would become "progressive" (whatever that means in the bronze age), but I wonder what kind of butterflies it creates.

As for paternity, didn't Roman gladiators doubled as sex workers for rich women?

Click to expand...

Rich, OLD, women that past childbearing ages so it was unlikely they will sire a children...

basically well muscled, young gigolos for rich old grannies, that's it (I doubt the Gladiators do that thing... voluntarily, of course there's exceptions but still)

juanml82 said:

As for paternity, didn't Roman gladiators doubled as sex workers for rich women?

Click to expand...

Yuelang said:

Rich, OLD, women that past childbearing ages so it was unlikely they will sire a children...

basically well muscled, young gigolos for rich old grannies, that's it (I doubt the Gladiators do that thing... voluntarily, of course there's exceptions but still)

Click to expand...

Being muscled and young?
You do not have to be a gladiator to possess these qualities.
If we are speaking of the sex-symbol of Rome it is a highly successful gladiator who killed A LOT of people on arena. Actually he may not be too young and attractive. But violence, death and blood were the sexiest things for the Roman women.

You won't make a guy who is famous like a rock-star and met a death on arena so many times to have sex with some granny...

Yuelang said:

it would be very uncomfortable ESPECIALLY BEFORE INVENTION OF RELIABLE BIRTH CONTROL.

Let's say that Jewish culture and the other Semitics paid important mention on having clear ancestry and thus... PATERNITY.

While you could squeeze some Temple harlots as holy prostitutes in Judaism, I doubt women in general will have an unchecked sexual mores. The reverse will happen as OTL Islam does, Covering their women from head to toe because they are deemed as Private Property, this origins in pre Islamic Arabian mores where men could fuk all they want but forbidden to violate the other's properties. And yes, Semitic Holy Prostitutes are very common in pre Islamic Arabian society.

Click to expand...

No, that's really not the reason for the Hijab...

Addressing the main question, I think there tends to be a reason why cults that tend to be extremely sex positive tend to be on the fringes of societies. The vast majority of societies in the world both have marriage and view marriage as exclusive to an extent, at least for the woman. I think that this might actually be due to a mixture of cultural reasons as well as elements of human nature. So any Judaism that encourages orgies would be pushed to the margins of society.

I could see two possibilities:

a) "Thou shalt not commit adultery ..." in the 'big 10' -- that is, don't specifically makes its prohibition on that level. It might still be forbidden in other writings/teachings, but this would make it less central to Judaism and the Christianity based thereon.

b) For periods of time Jewish leaders (Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, etc) had multiple wives and concubines. If that was the prevailing guidance at the time of the 10 commandments, perhaps that could have been somehow folded into the 10 commandments. So, it might read as "Thou shalt no commit adultery, sharing thy marital bed only with those to whom you are wedded in the eyes of God." If it, then, remained OK to have multiple wives and concubines (but all were more or less considered 'wives') that would change some dynamics.

jahenders said:

I could see two possibilities:

a) "Thou shalt not commit adultery ..." in the 'big 10' -- that is, don't specifically makes its prohibition on that level. It might still be forbidden in other writings/teachings, but this would make it less central to Judaism and the Christianity based thereon.

b) For periods of time Jewish leaders (Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, etc) had multiple wives and concubines. If that was the prevailing guidance at the time of the 10 commandments, perhaps that could have been somehow folded into the 10 commandments. So, it might read as "Thou shalt no commit adultery, sharing thy marital bed only with those to whom you are wedded in the eyes of God." If it, then, remained OK to have multiple wives and concubines (but all were more or less considered 'wives') that would change some dynamics.

Click to expand...

It would change dynamics but only so far as allowing men to have multiple partners but only letting women have sex with their single husband. Most societies have had that at one point or another. That doesn't get Judaism closer to the "free love" society that I think the OP was going for.

juanml82 said:

Well, basically, sort of "cheated on your wife/husband? oh, well... shrugs" "Oh, that woman is a prostitute?... shrugs" "Orgy festival in Lebanon? Get your tickets!"

That doesn't mean it would become "progressive" (whatever that means in the bronze age), but I wonder what kind of butterflies it creates.

As for paternity, didn't Roman gladiators doubled as sex workers for rich women?

Click to expand...

Actually I think there are some African or Polynesian tribes that encourage other men to have sex with one's wife after she gets pregnant because of the belief that one must "water" the seed inside one's wife regularly- other guys have sex with the wife to give the husband a break from this arduous task. I think that's the closest you'll get to officially sanctioned promiscuity. Perhaps having a strong clan structure might eliminate some of the need to ensure paternity, with everyone in the clan considering each other relatives, as well.

Although Jewishness, interesting enough, is passed down through the mother

Click to expand...

.

This is a rule that seems most consistently adopted by groups that have been conquered politically and militarily.