In most societies, marital intercourse accounts for most of the sexual activity of adults. Even so, extramarital coitus is very common and even institutionalized and sanctioned under certain conditions and regulations. Although wives everywhere are more restricted than husbands are, it is estimated that from two-fifths to three fifths of non-literate societies permit some kind of extramarital coitus for wives (Gebhar). Variables include the double standard the knowledge and/or permission of the spouse, the choice of partner, the occasion and place where intercourse may occur, and the risks and penalties involved. Often, as Gebhard noted, the concern is less with the act itself than with its social implications, such as degradation of the spouse, implications of pregnancy, and effects on kinship ties and loyalty.
A typical example of the way adultery viewed and managed is described in Davenport’s account of the East Bay people. Before marriage, control of the right of sexual access to a young woman belongs to her father. When the bride price is paid to him at her marriage the controlling right passes to her husband and any kin who contributed to the bride price. Adultery, then, with a married woman is an offense against the husband and the other contributors. Although a wife has some of the same rights in her husband, she, as a woman, has no recourse to law. Therefore, any offense by her, as the accused or the accuser, immediately affects those close male kin who are her legal representatives. If the offense goes into litigation, it affects the men of several families and may become very complex, as all the offended ones must finally be compensated in money. Although most of the concern seems to be for the violation of the rights of the men with an investment in the woman, the moral culpability rests more heavily on the man in the adulterous relationship. In this society, in which women are trained to serve and to be obedient to the men with legitimate authority over them, it is expected that they are unable to refuse the request of a male for sexual services, especially if he offers presents. . Another widespread pattern includes the expectation that husbands will stray, but wives will be faithful. In Tepoztlan sexual promiscuity is for males only, and married men are expected to prove their masculinity by having affairs, usually with widows, unmarried women, or prostitutes. Husbands are anxious about their wives’ fidelity in the early months of marriage and feel most secure when they are pregnant or caring for an infant (Lewis).
In horticultural societies there is often an option according to which adults can have sex with someone other than a spouse (Friedl). Even so, adultery is thought to be risky for both partners and may be punishable by penalties or divorce. Men have firmer entitlements to their wives’ sexual services than do wives to their husbands’. An adulterous man may be required to pay a penalty to the husband of his lover or to her father if she is unmarried. A wife, however, cannot usually extract a penalty from the woman with whom her husband is involved.
Finally, Schneider described an institutionalized form of adultery among the Turu of Tanzania. The lover relationship, called mbuya, is compared to romantic love in the West, with the same components of courtship, mooning, and jealous, possessive behavior. Love songs are composed and gifts exchanged. The furtiveness of the relationship adds to its delights, so that its clandestine nature may be preserved even when the affair is well known to everyone and tacitly approved by the husband. A husband may forbid such a relationship but may have difficulty doing so, since others will not cooperate with him. His wife may point out to him that he, himself, has a<— mistress, юг she may go to her father and request an annulment of her marriage on the grounds that her husband is treating her shabbily.
*94/187/5*
0 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.
You must be logged in to post a comment.