Organic, I get what you're saying but as far as what is and what has been to date, your viewpoint simply contradicts the bulk of humanity's known experiences, including those of premodern and indigenous cultures whose cultural and spiritual treasure troves are vast. As in fact, we've already gathered loads of 17th through 21st century evidence on loads of cultures that predate the written word
, which includes the recent modern era.
Variation exists, that is true, but none of it overturns the fact that beyond the extended family (usually 25-30), competition has always existed between men for material goods and/or territory and/or brides (or, women of childbearing age). Saying that it isn't so doesn't make it so, particularly when you have no majority support for this perspective globally.
Now, I also get that you are consciously looking to reinterpret our history to something that it majority never was, to what never existed in the main for the bulk of human culture and society. I get that you think this would also serve as a blueprint for future, and that this is your purpose for trying to locate it in the past somewhere, and in some group.
IMO I don't see it's honest or true to deny the vast bulk of what is and what has been. It's dishonest and it denies the reality of what is and what has brought us here to this point. It denies the reality of who we are up to this point. We need to begin to make conscious choices, I agree, but it's more about accepting the reality of what is and deciding where we can and should and need to or desire to change.
So here's where the real discussion begins. Not in rewriting the past to something it never was en masse, in order to justify doing whatever it is you want to do now...but rather accepting the past as it is, and consciously taking different choices. In discussions of where we go from here, much of what you say is ideal about this semi-isolated primitive society wouldn't resonate with many others. I'm not saying a more collaborative approach amongst men wouldn't generally be positive in many areas of life where material goods or territory are involved.
However, that collaboration does not and can never extend to treating other human beings as collective goods, because that is slavery at its core, no matter your stated "rights", and we have rejected that concept. No one person or group has the right to treat another person or group as a collective good like money or food, however, so this collaborative approach cannot be applied to the objectification of people as goods or sexual goods. In those primitive societies where women have been accultured to multiple partners, it is nearly always so that the men will accept all the children out of possible paternity, rather than cast them out and favour others. It is for sheer survival, at the core. This is typically a mark of intensified male competition for sexual goods or power via blood hiearchies and numbers, and it generally indicates a lower level of power and status amongst women.
In my view and in the view of the majority here on earth, that situation is to be avoided at all costs. It is a violation of our human rights and we might as well be sex slaves or property. Women treating men in this same way would always be equally objectionable, and deeply so.
It's a matter of spiritual maturity and equanimity and loving others equally to the self (seeking the highest good of others equally to oneself). Ultimately, it's in no one's highest good to be intimately touched without the full and complete immersion and engagement of the heart and soul, and of the spirit as well as the body. It's in no one's highest good to be used or exploited, ever, even if "mutually agreed".
We are each responsible for our intent, thought, word, and deed toward others, regardless if others mutually agreed to use and exploit one another. As we walk our paths, we all come to deeper realisations and deeper levels of self-awareness. Women generally don't desire sex for its own sake...it is a channel for emotional and spiritual intimacy which is only right when we are loved authentically and within a context of meaningful commitment. This is broadly universal, just as is men's primal fear of cuckolding and betrayal/drive to control women. Certain aspects of the culture you mention, as portrayed, simply will not fly in a more spiritually and ethically advanced society. Where women do not have to fear for their lives or the lives of their children, and pimp themselves out to pacify men or gain protection.
This ideal society many of us seek does not yet exist -- either anywhere in our prehistory NOR in our recorded past, NOR in our present day. Oppression, exploitation, and even slavery (and sex slavery) have not yet been eradicated anywhere, but it's still the goal. Once aware, you can never go back home again. No matter how it's packaged or what it's purposed to be. Better to see it just as it was and as it currently is, and to know it as it is as deeply and as penetratingly as possible.
The fact is, both the past that truly was and the past you may have wished us to have are both deeply objectionable for many of us. As is the present, all round the globe. We can all see a lot of misalignment, prejudice, and exploitation built into our history and continuing to our present day. For many of us, both our past and our present are deeply misaligned with the truths of who we are at core. It's time to look to the future with open eyes but whilst keeping BOTH the good and the true (which is both good and bad) which we have learnt about ourselves to date...in order to better inform us going forward.
Peace & blessings,
7L