Your views on polygamy

reply to post by Romantic_Rebel

I looked at your linked list of reasons why polygamy is a Good Thing. I'm afraid I didn't make it past the first, because it was so completely off the mark.

From your source: Polygamy instigates social stability. After the Crusades many men had died and women were often left alone without any support and without means of survival. Men took it upon themselves to marry numerous women to rebuild communities and reduce poverty. While the context has changed dramatically over the last five hundred years, the Middle East is still rife with internal conflict and there are comparatively far too many women for the society to support without the practice of polygamy helping them gain financial support for their children and for their education.

This is, I'm afraid, complete nonsense. Polygamy does not 'instigate' social stability; it undermines it.

Wherever polygamy is permitted by law and social sanction, it will occur. It is natural for men to want as many sexual partners as possible. The problem is that not every man can have more than one partner. Since the human sex ratio is pretty much 1:1, a man who takes two women to wife must leave another man womanless. A man who acquires a large number of wives or concubines deprives several other men of women to light their lives, warm their homes and bear their children.

Women, as every young lad finds out to his chagrin, are expensive creatures. They are also disproportionately attracted to men of wealth and status. Thus in polygamous societies, a small number of rich, powerful (and, usually, older) men will acquire and maintain luxurious harems, while a very large number of poor, disempowered (and, usually, younger) men will be deprived of feminine comfort almost entirely.

Do you think this is a prescription for social stability? On the contrary, it is a prescription for disaster--for revolt and revolution. Polygamy has done the Muslim world no favours: a major factor in its notorious social instability is almost certainly the anger and frustration of so many poor, womanless young men. The problem is compounded because in these societies adult men tend to outnumber adult women; this is due to relatively higher infant and child mortality rates among females, the result of the generally inferior position of women in Muslim societies, as well as--nowadays--to selective abortion of female fetuses.

The statement that in Middle Eastern societies 'there are comparatively far too many women for the society to support without the practice of polygamy' is utterly, ludicrously wrong. Take a look at this map.

Besides, Muslim societies were polygamous long before the Crusades--all the way back to Mohammed, in fact.

Polygamous societies are, for the reasons outlined above, inherently unequal and fissiparous. Polygamy doesn't promote social stability--it promotes inequity, genetic dominance by the elite and violent social upheaval. These are good enough reasons to be opposed to it, as I do.

Edit to add: I see Byrd has already made the above point. Serve me right for posting without reading through the whole thread. Still, her post seems to have been water off ducks' backs, so I'll let mine stand in the hope that repetition promotes consideration. You free lovers really need to be thinking beyond your own personal fantasies and imagined satisfactions before you make up your minds that polygamy is a good idea. Take a look at the societies that practise it--doesn't that tell you something?

[edit on 6/9/10 by Astyanax]

Originally posted by Jovi1
reply to post by Annee

 

No would argue that love is just more than sex, but there is no way you can properly love more than one person in a committed sexual relationship equally. This is the problem with the idea of group marriage altogether.

Maybe you can't.

From this woman's point of view. From many things I've experienced in life. From being a single mother. From knowing single mothers who have been abandoned by their spouse and father of their children.

I think there is a better way then monogamy.

Originally posted by Astyanax

This is, I'm afraid, complete nonsense. Polygamy does not 'instigate' social stability; it undermines it.

Where in the modern world where women have Equal Rights do you have data of the results of Polygamy on society?

So far as I know - there isn't any.

Originally posted by Annee
Where in the modern world where women have Equal Rights do you have data of the results of Polygamy on society?

I don't see where equal rights for women comes into my argument, which concerned the impact of large numbers of frustrated, womanless young men in society.

Data on sex ratios and the relatively high mortality of female infants and children in the Middle East is commonly available. Try the UNICEF web site.

As for the impact of polygamy on society, you're right that there isn't much data. I imagine such a comparative study would be very difficult to do because of all the other factors that would have to be corrected for. Still, a clear pattern exists.

Here's another map that makes that pattern evident. Countries where polygamy is legal or generally accepted are marked in blue. Countries where it's illegal are marked in red or yellow. Take a look and see for yourself where greater social stability lies--with the reds and yellows, or with the blues.

The impact of polygamy on individuals, especially women, has been well studied. Here are a few abstracts. Take a look at the results summaries and decide whether polygamy is good for women and young people--or not.

Mental Health Aspects of Arab-Israeli Adolescents From Polygamous Versus Monogamous Families

Learning Achievement, Social Adjustment, and Family Conflict Among Bedouin-Arab Children From Polygamous and Monogamous Families

A Comparison of Family Functioning, Life and Marital Satisfaction, and Mental Health of Women in Polygamous and Monogamous Marriages

Mental Health Aspects of Turkish Women from Polygamous Versus Monogamous Families

Sexual behaviour of adolescents in Nigeria: cross sectional survey of secondary school students

Polygamy and Its Impact on the Mental and Emotional Health of Children

[edit on 6/9/10 by Astyanax]

reply to post by Astyanax


I'm discussing Polygamy being made legal for the average everyday person in America. Let me know when you're gonna discuss Polygamy in America.

What data do you have on Polygamy in America - - that is not a religious group?

reply to post by Astyanax


"Women, as every young lad finds out to his chagrin, are expensive creatures. They are also disproportionately attracted to men of wealth and status. Thus in polygamous societies, a small number of rich, powerful (and, usually, older) men will acquire and maintain luxurious harems, while a very large number of poor, disempowered (and, usually, younger) men will be deprived of feminine comfort almost entirely."

If this is true then the difference between western society and those who practice polygamy, is not that great, in western they being females attracted to wealth and status men, will go for such regardless of its called polygamy or something else, then naturally the less fortunate males will slip through the cracks of such society. So it exists either way in both societies only is not so obvious in our western society, compared to some muslim ones were its code and law.


"This is, I'm afraid, complete nonsense. Polygamy does not 'instigate' social stability; it undermines it."

So then polygamy would not undermine social stability, but displace it to a more concentrated degree. In western male to female coupling it's displaced as in more spread out over larger populations so it gives the appearance of equal ratios of male to female coupling, And in muslim polygamy societys it would not undermine the ratios of male to female coupling, but concentrate it...it would be more visible. So basically it comes down to what works best for survival for females, that is the road taken, so then in western society we have cracks that reduces the visibility of the less prosperous males to dissapear, and the females to move on to more prosperous males. And polygamy society like those muslim ones its more concentrated, therefore more visible. So basically in western you have a 2 year marriages, and rinse and reapeat, thill stable/favorable circumstances follow. And muslim ones you have longer more stable ones, as they can afford it, but more confining due to stricter code and law. But either way females are drawn to the more prosperous therefore more favorable males....So in the end both societys are just taking different roads to the same end. In the end it depends on which society is more prosperous, that society will atract the most females. It seems the op could be right polygamy could be the wave of the future, because you can change societys but you can't change the nature of what we males or females are, after all were the favorable conditions are, the females will follow. Intresting I wonder were this thing will go in 50 to a couple of hundred years, it could be normal.

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
reply to post by Astyanax

 

"Women, as every young lad finds out to his chagrin, are expensive creatures. They are also disproportionately attracted to men of wealth and status. Thus in polygamous societies, a small number of rich, powerful (and, usually, older) men will acquire and maintain luxurious harems, while a very large number of poor, disempowered (and, usually, younger) men will be deprived of feminine comfort almost entirely."

Whatever - - money never interested me. Independence did and someone I could have a conversation with did.

I have 2 daughters. Neither were attracted to money.

I really get tired of this stereotype crap.

What consenting adults do in their spare time is nobody's business but their own, I have no problem with it.

I personally can't imagine more than one spouse (gawd even one is too many for me lol) nagging on me but hey, that's just me lol.

Good luck with your decision.

reply to post by Annee


Was not talking to you but Astyanax wanted his viewpoint on something. But since you responded.


"Whatever - - money never interested me. Independence did and someone I could have a conversation with did."

You can't have independence without money in this money based society, so your search for independence and conversation was achieved by way of what?

"I have 2 daughters. Neither were attracted to money."

umm ok and bees are not attracted to flowers, but you will always find them were plants and flowers are. But you said "were" does that mean they "are" now.................Just messing with you, I get what you ment to say.

"I really get tired of this stereotype crap."

It's not a stereotype, it's a function of a society almost all life off, and depend on, but you being female cant see this very clearly, for to do that you would have to question your whole nature, but how about if I say it like this "women aren't against us, they just are for themselves" do the echoes of the past reverberate, there just echoes, you should know the past is not real...... Anyways I like you, but your weird like all females, so im guessing your actually a female, and not some dude named bob in a basement somewere. After all who but a female would argue such weird points.

[edit on 7-9-2010 by galadofwarthethird]

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
The difference between western society and those who practice polygamy is not that great, in western they being females attracted to wealth and status men, will go for such regardless of its called polygamy or something else, then naturally the less fortunate males will slip through the cracks of such society.

You're right, this happens.

So it exists either way in both societies only is not so obvious in our western society, compared to some muslim ones were its code and law.

Right again. And because it is not so obvious, young, unattached men in modern (I won't say western) societies have hope, as well as access to short-term relationships with temporarily unattached or promiscuous women, something much more difficult to achieve in parts of the world where polygamy is practised. All this helps ease the social tension generated by all that bottled-up testosterone.

So basically it comes down to what works best for survival for females...

I'm afraid not. It comes down to what works best for societies, and for the individuals that comprise them regardless of sex.

I wonder were this thing will go in 50 to a couple of hundred years, it could be normal.

Polygamy was far more widespread in the past than it is now. Most cultural factors I can think of point towards a decline, not an increase.

*

Originally posted by Annee
Let me know when you're gonna discuss Polygamy in America. What data do you have on Polygamy in America--that is not a religious group?

Obviously there is no data for polygamy in America apart from that concerning Mormons. Polygamy is prohibited in the United States not merely by legislative but by Constitutional decree.

The OP did not limit the discussion to any one country. I am not American and I despise your geographical chauvinism.

I have 2 daughters. Neither were attracted to money. I really get tired of this stereotype crap.

Unfortunately, observation and statistics bear out the 'stereotype crap'. Your own family may go against the trend, and you are welcome to feel good about that, but extrapolating from a sample of two to the general population is meaningless.

It is perfectly clear that you have lost the argument, whether you admit it or not, so feel free to ignore my reality check return to your wistful little discussion about how much you'd enjoy polygamy, if only it were allowed.

i am a polygamist - i have two wives (K and H), we have been happily married for 12 years to each other. Here is how we do it...
...Be in love, romantic love and in love with the world and life in general.
...K and H are also married to each other, it can't be 1 person with two, it has to be (in our case) three people together equally.
...Finacially it works better as three people contributing equals more, yet the "third" person doesn't cost much more than just a couple.
...Be in love
...Treat it as a marriage, with vows, promises, honesty and integrity
...See life as fun and be in love
...Share ideas and thoughts
...As with any marriage, compromise and live up to it
...Do things as a unit, not as individuals (this goes for couples too), otherwise stay single, marriage is about unity
...Be in love
...think about the others over yourself (also for couples), you are there for the other(s) and the other(s) are there for you - equally
...Be a nice person

Comments from others made to the three of us - women are generally more accepting and curious (some even asked if it could be four). Men generally ask about sex (yet i doubt they would ask a hetero couple about their sex life - it's very rude). The comment i've heard most from men is something like, "I can barely have one wife, I don't know how you handle two"... The Comment most heard from women is something like, "It would be nice to have a wife"...
Some folks interpret plural marriage as a "swinger" thing, it's not

Usually, after knowing the three of us for a short time folks understand that we are a plural marriage and very similar to a regular couple marriage, and understand we are, "us three".

A friend once said he could count his real friends on one hand, and counted us three as one finger. Another friend told us that in our case the plural of spouse was spice

reply to post by trika3000


Thank you for FINALLY - - - presenting a Modern Plural marriage. (I prefer the term Plural - - because Polygamy has a negative history).

Many have trouble getting past Old Concepts and seeing new concepts - - such as a Modern Shared Marriage.

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by trika3000

 

Thank you for FINALLY - - - presenting a Modern Plural marriage. (I prefer the term Plural - - because Polygamy has a negative history).

Many have trouble getting past Old Concepts and seeing new concepts - - such as a Modern Shared Marriage.

I like that. People online call it plural marriage.
Second line

Originally posted by Astyanax

Unfortunately, observation and statistics bear out the 'stereotype crap'. Your own family may go against the trend, and you are welcome to feel good about that, but extrapolating from a sample of two to the general population is meaningless.

It is perfectly clear that you have lost the argument, whether you admit it or not, so feel free to ignore my reality check return to your wistful little discussion about how much you'd enjoy polygamy, if only it were allowed.

I grew up in Los Angeles just outside of Hollywood. I do not know - nor have I ever known one single woman who went after a man for his money.

My daughter works in the business. She has friends that work in the business. Neither her nor any of her friends has any interest in hooking up with a guy for his money.

They're not going to turn a guy away because he has money - - but they are not with him because of it.

They are all independent - - hard working - - and not interested in having a man take care of them. (unless of course they start a family - which isn't related to money)

Are there women who go after men with money. Sure. Just like women went to college to find an educated man.

As any woman knows (or should know) being with a High Profile man - - - will be the hardest money you ever earn. The women I know - aren't willing to give up themselves.

You can pull any statistic you want out of your butt - - - my experiences are "live in person" - - - over 60+ years of real life experience.

OH! Could it be "man in question" is attracted to Bimbos?

I think your statistics are more related to man thinking with his "little head".











[edit on 7-9-2010 by Annee]

reply to post by Astyanax



"I'm afraid not. It comes down to what works best for societies, and for the individuals that comprise them regardless of sex."

Ya but regardless of sex things are by the process of time and social structures, developed by its individual make up... it's many ones, and all societies are but reflection's of that which make's it seem as it is its groups and like minded individuals. So one group or gender goes in one way intertwined in the whole by oneanother. So ultimately ya females will do what is best for them, and males wil do alike, for there intrests...... and the end process of such acumalated wants and needs... are called societies. So its not regardless of sex or gender it's regarding your sex and gender. Unless you all wish to go genderless, if such is the case then its regardless of sex.


"Polygamy was far more widespread in the past than it is now. Most cultural factors I can think of point towards a decline, not an increase."

Really might want to recheck that, for most that I see point in a slight favor towards Polygamy or anything other but this that does not work. At the end it goes towards what works better, or what just plain works. So yes it will spread because it's spreading.

Yes - plural marriage is the best way to descibe it... K, H, and myself are very happily married.
Our main thing is, we like one anothers company. Also, we find our personal interests, that we have individually, interesting.
We also share common values, and morals...
And we really have a lot of fun together...
We laugh an awful lot (Mainly 'cause K is so frickin' funny) and we don't take ourselves too seriously (unless the need arises)...

As in any relationship - mature communication is key...

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by trika3000

 

Thank you for FINALLY - - - presenting a Modern Plural marriage. (I prefer the term Plural - - because Polygamy has a negative history).

Many have trouble getting past Old Concepts and seeing new concepts - - such as a Modern Shared Marriage.

I like that. People online call it plural marriage.

Second line

Plural marriage can be any combination of consenting adults.

Its just a broader term.

Breathe - breathe - Geeze!

reply to post by Astyanax


you see this is the norm listen to there answers, especially the annee person....she actually believes what she says....water always runs downhill, and for lots this 2 pair system is just not ment to be, and never will be. After all women are not attracted to men with money or power, but you will always find them around in places were power and money are....Anyways this thing will eventually be over, there is no point to dragging it on. Eventualy there will come a time to end it. So thill then round and round we go.

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
After all women are not attracted to men with money or power, but you will always find them around in places were power and money are....

Lets carefully choose our words - shall we.

I NEVER said women were not attracted to men with money.

I DID say - - the women I know are Not Willing to Give Up Themselves for money.

Marrying a man for his money - - - means basically that he is buying you. It means he Owns you and has expectations of his purchase. If this is what you want - - Go For It!

Can I just have multiple "ladies of interest" why we gotta ruin it by getting married?

Thawts?