Matrilinearity

There are crimes which are caused by sheer jealousy. One of these is the case where a man kills his wife, and or his children, because the relationship has broken down and, as he sees it, the wife and children are no longer "HIS". He can't stand the idea that they might become the PROPERTY of some other man.

In UK society, which is the one I know best, and in many classes, there are single women bringing up their children because the man has left, or been made to leave. This is in itself almost a matrilineal society. The children may or may not have the name of their father, depending on whether the couple married or not; but marriage is becoming increasingly rare as it is commercialised to the point of idiocy and people are drawn to expect their parents to spend many thousands of pounds on what should be a simple public ceremony.
(I've met far too many women who longed to marry their sometimes decades-long partner, but simply couldn't afford the wedding.)

In a matrilineal society, the mother, left with the children, would receive some kind of support from her "line" - her mother, her relatives; a sister or aunt. She might move back to her mother's house.
Many of the single mothers I have known have been forced by circumstances, usually money or loneliness, to take a new partner very soon after their breakup.
(The fact that women's work is STILL far lower-paid than that of men may have something to do with this... also state benefits that are completely impossible to live on.)
This can lead to all kinds of further problems, where the new partner, a little like a lion, may resent the children of his predecessor. The children too, of course, may well resent the man they see as their father's replacement. Tensions follow, and the second relationship all too often breaks up.

My thought, I suppose, is that a matrilineal style of living might be a better one for many women, and for their children, and also that it is very difficult, in a culture that is overwhelmingly patriarchal, to achieve that goal. But that it might well be a direction we need to move in, if our culture is to survive at all.

(In case you were wondering, I am very happily married in RL and have been for 36 years. Marriage DOES work for some of us, and matrilinearity would not invalidate marriage for those who want or need a long-term partnership.)

Avertible Catastrophe - More on the Oil Disaster

Could something really have been done? A fascinating bit of news has surfaced. avertible catastophe

It seems that help, GOOD help, help probably the most experienced marine engineers and researchers in the world, was offered. And refused.

WHY? Was it because of that precious thing, valued ONLY by those in control of our nations, called SOVEREIGNTY? That thing that has caused more wars than ANY other concept ever?

Wikipedia says "Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory. It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which no purely legal explanation can be provided. ... The current notion of state sovereignty was laid down in the Treaty of Westphalia (1648), which, in relation to states, codified the basic principles of territorial integrity, border inviolability, and supremacy of the state (rather than the Church). A sovereign is a supreme lawmaking authority." The whole article is well worth a read.

but the most important part, for me, is its statement of Hobbes' theory
"Hobbes deduced from the definition of sovereignty that it must be:

* Absolute: because conditions could only be imposed on a sovereign if there were some outside arbitrator to determine when he had violated them, in which case the sovereign would not be the final authority.

* Indivisible: The sovereign is the only final authority in his territory; he does not share final authority with any other entity."

Which implies, in this situation, "If the President of the US, who is the SOVEREIGN RULER, shares authority in the sense of accepting ANY help from the Dutch, or any other nation, he is diminishing his own power. No matter what help is NEEDED, unless he is the Commander in Chief of the forces, he would be put under obligation to the other nation, he (and his nation) would be diminished.

Is sovereignty more important than cleaning up the mess? It would seem that for some, it is.