Talk:Oneida stirpiculture

Oneida stirpiculture is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles

Discrimination

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

[Untitled][edit]

The oneida community talk page has a question about bias, and I'm raising the same question here. Personally I am wondering why the current article *doesn't* at least offer a *view* of Noyes as a "sex-crazed manipulator" (not my term) ... this article and the community article are parroting Oneida's printed goals at face value, as if they were in fact achieved, without any alternate point of view of the disparity between human nature and the ideal. The statutory rape charge mentioned in the main article is the only indicator that this cult may have been an excuse for older men to get with 14 year old girls as "wives", like the small, private communities still existing in the USA. (One was infamously "raided" years ago and the minors put in protective custody - and returned to their families when no allegations would stick, lol.) I'm guessing that more than one of the many sources for the community article offers criticism - why is none of it included here? Ukrpickaxe (talk) 03:14, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Reading the article led me to open the talk page; wondering if there is a discussion about the bias. 91.54.185.51 (talk) 22:58, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From what I could tell from my reading about the Oneida Community, older partners were often paired with young partners. For young men, this was for the older women to train them in sexual continence, which was the practice of refraining from ejaculating.

It does seem to me that the initial impetus was for Noyes to have more than one sexual partner, & that he developed a philosophy around it. I think that the practice did not meet up to the philosophy.

It was not just the older men getting younger women. In fact, aside from Noyes, it seems that there were a number of women who had power in the community & who dictated who could match up with whom. Part of the idea was that a more spiritual partner could elevate a less spiritual partner.

But the most powerful person in the community was Noyes himself, & the women did not have control over him.

All this is my opinion based on what I have read, so right now it counts a original research. There is a lot of research material available, even if the descendant of the disbanded community members did choose to destroy a number of community records. Peaceray (talk) 00:02, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'Stirpiculture' is an independent term from Oneida[edit]

These two terms are not interrelated; Oneida the name that stemmed from the native group "Ganneious/Ganneous/Gannejout(s)"; the Mississaugas. ElizaultyShaelicGorangMaqCat (talk) 19:30, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]