How is the Hutterite Community organizationaly structured?
84943
Nuclear family makes children, children raised for baptism/iniation into colony. Colony provides for individuals. Thats the short version. Anthropologically speaking this culture is VERY intense and has a lot of ideosyncracies. Read the following book: The Hutterites in North America.   by john hostetler and gertrude enders huntington.
657374
The children stay close to their mother; most of the childrearing is done by women. The Yanomami practiced polygyny (though many unions were monogamous). Polygynous families consisted of a large patrifocal family unit based on one man, and smaller matrifocal sub-families: each woman's family unit, composed of the woman and her children. Life within the village is centered more around the small, matrifocal family unit.
579799
Independent Order of Odd Fellows
1110648
This can be found at the USCCB website with all the explanations for the whens and the whys, but basically it follows this basic structure.\n\nA. The Introductory Rites\n\n   The Entrance\n   Greeting of the Altar and of the People Gathered Together\n   The Act of Penitence\n   The Kyrie Eleison\n   The Gloria\n   The Collect\n\n\nB. The Liturgy of the Word\n\n   Silence\n   The Biblical Readings\n   The Responsorial Psalm\n   The Homily\n   The Profession of Faith\n   The Prayer of the Faithful\n\n\nC. The Liturgy of the Eucharist\n\n   The Preparation of the Gifts\n   The Prayer over the Offerings\n   The Eucharistic Prayer\n   The Communion Rite\n   The Lord's Prayer\n   The Rite of Peace\n   The Fraction\n   Communion\n\nD. The Concluding Rites
1031695
The book concerns the structure of society.\n\nSee the Wikipedia article below.
918960
Anthropologists tend to classify different societies according to the degree to which different groups within a society have unequal access to advantages such as resources, prestige or power. (Useful definitions.) Virtually all societies have developed some degree of inequality among their people through the process of social stratification-the division of members of a society into strata (or levels) with unequal wealth, prestige or power. Differences lie in how societies treat the inequalities. Some may downplay them so they become transparent and insignificant (egalitarian societies) while others will accent inequalities (ranked and class-based societies). Three different types of societies can generally recognized: egalitarian societies, ranked societies and class-based societies.\n\nEgalitarian societal members tend to treat each other as equals. Wealth differences are few as is the amount of power available to any individual or group. The people possess norms that emphasize sharing and ideals of interpersonal equality. This is not to say that stratification is non-existent in these societies. In comparison with nonegalitarian societies, however, stratification is relatively insignificant. Even when someone like a bigman is present, prestige is important and linked to redistribution. However, the bigman gives more than he receives as his role as a redistributor is defined. If he hordes or possesses too much, he will lose the recognition as a bigman. In effect, he is a member of society as an equal who has a defined role that carries prestige but not wealth and recognition but not status. (See reading on egalitarian hierarchies.)\n\nIn ranked societies people are divided into hierarchically ordered groups that differ in terms of prestige, but not significantly in terms of access to resources or power. Within this context it is possible to identify persons we can label as chiefs whose inherited position and prestige is often linked to the redistribution of goods.\n\nIn class-based societies people are divided into hierarchically ordered groups that differ in terms of access not only to prestige, but also to resources and power. Western capitalist societies have distinct classes (e.g. upper class, middle class, poor), but mobility amongst the classes sometimes occurs through activities such as education, marriage or hard work. For similar reasons to those mentioned above, it is not appropriate to describe the Net as a class-based society.\n\nEconomics\nCultures can be characterized, in part, by the type of economic systems that they support. Three forms of economic exchange systems are typically recognized by anthropologists: reciprocity, redistribution and market exchange.\n\nReciprocity is the simplest form of economic exchange. It involves giving a product or service to another person in the expectation of receiving something of similar value in return. Reciprocal transactions are economic exchanges, but they are also personalized; they take place between people who have a bond, and they serve to strengthen these ties.\n\nIn a redistributive economy goods or labor are accumulated by a specific person, or at a particular place, and are subsequently redistributed back throughout the society. Such economies are found in all societies, to some extent, but they are "an important mechanism only in societies that have political hierarchies-that is, chiefs and other specialized officials and agencies" (Ember and Ember, 1990, p. 129).\n\nMarket exchange economies are associated with capitalist societies. In such economies producers send or take their goods to a marketplace where they are bid for by purchasers. The main feature of market exchanges is that goods and services are bought and sold at money prices determined by the impersonal forces of supply and demand.\n\nThere is one aspect of human economic systems that we should recognize. There are societies where it is more important to give everything away rather than a
279854
:}\nNew social structures created by\nThe single parent family\nReduced  faith based communities\nremoval of prayer from schools\nless stay at home moms
1041325
I enjoy reading information about secret societies.  If you want to learn more about another interesting group read about the Bilderberg group.\nAs far as my opinion for this society, I believe that they exist.  This country was formed by a group of men, most belonging to a secret society-free masons.  Seems like it is tradition maybe even American culture.
504983
less organized than eukarotes
566555
Please check:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_organization
140734
Small groups (aka 200 pers. max i guess) in which you know everyone including the leaders and where everyone help the community because they know it. [excuse the bad english :-)]
56245
Wow - there are tens of thousands. Nobody could ever hope to get them all into one posting, it would take days to write.\n\nThe basic breakdown:\n\nANCIENT ECCLESIA:\n\n- Eastern Orthodox\n- Coptic Church\n- Catholic Church\n- Armenian Church\n\nVIA MEDIA:\n- Anglican/Episcopal Church\n\nPROTESTANT:\n- Lutheran\n- Methodist\n- Prebyterian\n- Quaker\n\nEVANGELICAL:\n- Baptist\n- Free churches\n\nCHARISMATIC:\n- Pentecostal\n\nOTHER:\n- Universalist unitarians\n- Mormons (LDS)\n- Jehovah's witnesses\n- Unitarian Universalists\n- Oneness Pentecostal\n- Seventh Day Adventists
911468
Patriarchal- Male (father) is head of household/ village/ tribe.\n\nMatriarchal- Female (mother) is head.\n\nEqalitarian- Leadership is divided equally between genders. I think this is actually "egalitarian."
324797
Copied from the Wiki:\n\nStructure/agency theory is a now recognised as a branch of social theory that reconciles the debate between whether social structure or social agency should be given theoretical primacy - by refusing to grant theoretical primacy to either. Structure/agency theorists suggest that social agents are inherently socialised and that the actions of agents are informed by and shaped by social structure such as norms and institutions prevalent in the society they are socialised into. On the other hand, the actions of actors may, individually or collectively, alter and shape social structure such as norms and institutions.
792384
The structure is how the database will be organised and the content is the actual data.
538282
almost all of them? and i dont think people that organize those things go on yahoo answers.\n\nThe ones that i know for a fact...all of europe, all of north and south america, australia...
255425
Here is some of the charts of it when doing a paper on them...\n\nCharacteristics Associated with Cultic Groups - Revised\nJanja Lalich, Ph.D. & Michael D. Langone, Ph.D.\n \nConcerted efforts at influence and control lie at the core of cultic groups, programs, and relationships. Many members, former members, and supporters of cults are not fully aware of the extent to which members may have been manipulated, exploited, even abused. The following list of social-structural, social-psychological, and interpersonal behavioral patterns commonly found in cultic environments may be helpful in assessing a particular group or relationship.\nCompare these patterns to the situation you were in (or in which you, a family member, or friend is currently involved). This list may help you determine if there is cause for concern. Bear in mind that this list is not meant to be a “cult scale” or a definitive checklist to determine if a specific group is a cult. This is not so much a diagnostic instrument as it is an analytical tool.\n‪  The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law. \n‪  Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.\n‪  Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).\n‪  The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry—or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth). \n‪  The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity). \n‪  The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.\n‪  The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).\n‪  The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).\n‪  The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.\n‪  Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.\n‪  The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members. \n‪  The group is preoccupied with making money. \n‪  Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.\n‪  Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.\n‪  The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.\n\n\n\nCharacteristics of a Destructive Cult:\n1. Authoritarian pyramid structure with authority at the top \n2. Charismatic or messianic leader(s) (Messianic meaning they either say they are God OR that they alone can interpret the scriptures the way God intended.....the leaders are self-appointed.) \n3. Deception in rec