Entertaining, ofttimes, impossible dreams, these dreams, are,
nevertheless, productive of a conservative and bourgeois ideology of a
life of leisure and non-productiveness.
It was the machine process in production that permitted the rise of a
parasitical, or leisure, class. As long as both men and women were
forced to produce things in order to live, an exploiting class, that
lives off the labor of others, was impossible. But as spinning, weaving,
canning, soap-making, butter, bread, candle, clothes-making and a
hundred other functions formerly performed by women in the home, were
absorbed into the factories, the young girls often followed the old task
into the new plant. This was also true of the boys on the farms, who
turned toward the cities and entered factories, where hogs were
slaughtered, farm machines manufactured, or where shoes were made.
But the farm youths expected to become permanent producers in the shops
and mills; they sought to become able to support a woman, and, perhaps,
children. The girls entering the factories, on the other hand, did so to
earn money to help pay their expenses at home until they married, or in
order to buy gay and expensive clothes, unconsciously, perhaps, for
advertising as well as decorative purposes.
THE EVOLUTION OF THE FAMILY
Undoubtedly the early savages drew together for self-protection against
their forest enemies. And out of this necessity grew the love of
society. Man became a gregarious animal.
Promiscuity in sexual intercourse among these herds was another factor
for holding the tribes, or groups together.
In his "Origin of the Family," Frederick Engels says:
"The development of the family is founded on the continual contraction
of the circle, originally comprising the whole tribe, within which
marital intercourse between both sexes was general. By the continual
exclusion, first of near, then of ever remoter relatives, including
finally even those who were simply related legally, all group marriage
becomes practically impossible. At last only one couple, temporarily and
loosely united, remains ... even from this we may infer how little the
sexual love of the individual in the modern sense of the word had to do
with the origin of monogamy."
Any casual student of sociology can prove that marriage and the family
have not always been what they are today. Lewis J. Morgan, in his
well-known work, "Ancient Society," says:
"When the fact is accepted
|