# Polygamy



## bugmenot (Jul 4, 2012)

Most people have more than one friend. Each friend is different and has different qualities you value. If one of your friends demanded that you devote yourself to them and reject all your other friends you would most likely refuse - the combined qualities of all your friends is worth more than the qualities of this one friend.

So why do people invest everything in one sexual partner by getting married? How can one person fulfill you in every possible way? Why put all your eggs in one basket?

The solution is simple: polygamy. Why have less when you can have more?


----------



## Caribbean Man (Jun 3, 2012)

bugmenot said:


> The solution is simple: polygamy.


Nope.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

Polygamy is not simple. And in societies where it is practiced the only men who are allowed to be polygamous are those who have the money for it.

If you like being responsible for several wives, then why don't you move to those countries.


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

I could only see one distinct advantage if I were to practice polygamy, and with credit largely due to the late, great comedian *Rodney Dangerfield*:

*"At my age, with two women in bed with me, whenever I fell asleep, they would have each other to talk to!"*


----------



## anonim (Apr 24, 2012)

i say yes but with a caveat; it depends on what you want from a relationship. If you're looking for a marriage but with extra people thrown in, it might not work out how you expect.

There are different benefits and disadvantages.



NextTimeAround said:


> Polygamy is not simple. And in societies where it is practiced the only men who are allowed to be polygamous are those who have the money for it.
> 
> If you like being responsible for several wives, then why don't you move to those countries.


or just have multiple ex wives with alimony.

srsly people should leave the country because you dont like what they wat?


----------



## sandc (Dec 15, 2011)

Sure add more marriage partners to the mix. Deal with the jealousy issues not only of the women being jealous of each other, (bad enough) but being jealous of each other's children.

Read Roughing It by Mark Twain some time. On his way west he stops and interviews Brigham Young. BY thought it very tedious having more than one wife. At least in his interview with Mark Twain.


----------



## Wiserforit (Dec 27, 2012)

Well Brigham overdid it just a tad. 27 wives. A reasonable person would stop at maybe ten or twelve.


----------



## sandc (Dec 15, 2011)

Undoubtedly so.


----------



## TCSRedhead (Oct 17, 2012)

It would not work for me but I don't have objections if it works for other consenting adults.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

bugmenot said:


> The solution is simple: polygamy. *Why have less when you can have more?*


Most people are too *JEALOUS* of a *Romantic attachment* (due to pair bonding hormones) ...craving the sole love , devotion & body of 1 special man or woman...... we are also too damn selfish to share...plus it would pi$$ us off... 

Me & mine has only been with each other...met him 31 yrs ago, he has never wanted another...and I love our Love story just the way it is.... "Polygamy" holds 0 allure for someone like myself. 

A die hard Romantic Mormon woman living in the 1840's had to of struggled with maddening jealousy at times over her husband....they say Brigham Young had 55 wives.


----------



## Theseus (Feb 22, 2013)

There's a problem with the short wording on this poll. What do you mean a "good idea"? A good idea for everyone, or a good idea to legalize it for some? There's a big difference.

Similarly, a poll about gay marriage being a "good idea".. I would tend to vote no, since I'm not interesting in being in a gay marriage. So it's certainly not a good idea for me. But that has nothing to do whether I think other people should be allowed to do it. 

During my various tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, I ran into quite a few polygamous families. Usually the wives lived in separate houses and they NEVER shared a bed with the husband and his other wives at the same time (takes a lot of the fun out of it!). They are also required by law to treat them all equally. In Afghanistan, there's an expression that goes something like, if you have to apples to bring home to your two wives, you can't just give an apple to each one, because one apple might be better than the other. You have to cut each of those apples in two, and give each wife one half from each, just in case!

Most people object because historically polygamy has generally been a failure, because it leads to a few weathy men taking many wives while other men are forced to be single, and that tends to cause unrest. HOWEVER, that doesn't matter now, because if you did it in a Western country today, both men and women would have equal opportunity to take multiple partners, so it would (theoretically) balance out the sex ratio in the long run. 

I say, let people do it if they want to if they are consenting adults.


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

If it works for someone else, so be it. That is not ok for me, nor for my husband. Plain and simple: I don't share my husband with other women, period. And he doesn't share me with other men. Our vows said "forsaking all others"... so no, polygamy is not ok for us. 

Now, think of this... whether married or not, there is always jealousy regading the wives/mistresses and each of their children. I see no way for that to change, even if allowed more spouses. I see it being worse if expected to be under the same roof, actually.


----------



## tacoma (May 1, 2011)

Maricha75 said:


> Now, think of this... whether married or not, there is always jealousy regading the wives/mistresses and each of their children. I see no way for that to change, even if allowed more spouses. I see it being worse if expected to be under the same roof, actually.


Damn, the trouble I've had with a common blended family is childs play when you consider the madness polygamy could create.

it would take some very unique people to pull it off happily.


----------



## Cosmos (May 4, 2012)

We don't usually have sexual relationships with our 'friends,' nor develop strong romantic attachments to them...


----------



## Leasel (Mar 30, 2013)

I couldn't care less what other people choose to do, but polygamy would never work for me. I wouldn't be able to stand having to share my husband's attention with other women constantly like that.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

Theseus said:


> Most people object because historically polygamy has generally been a failure, because it leads to a few weathy men taking many wives while other men are forced to be single, and that tends to cause unrest. HOWEVER, that doesn't matter now, because if you did it in a Western country today, both men and women would have equal opportunity to take multiple partners, so it would (theoretically) balance out the sex ratio in the long run.
> 
> I say, let people do it if they want to if they are consenting adults.


It is done in a Western country. We have polygamists in Arizona, Utah, Kansas, and parts of Texas. It's also done in Canada. Look up Bountiful.

Yes, it's illegal, but it's done. And it is a disaster for the young girls who are taught that they should be married to some old geezer who leads the community and be his 15th wife. It's a disaster for the girls who have kids with these men and then are ripped away from those kids so they can be sent to be married to another man and become his 6th wife. It's a disaster for the girls who are bred into this and have no education or money or any real contact with the outside world. 

It's a disaster because those multiple wives are competing for a sliver of attention and resources for themselves and their children and have no way of providing for themselves.

And it's a disaster for the boys who are sent away because there are too many of them and not enough girls to be multiple wives for a few men.

Polygamy tends to lead to abuse of women of all ages, and young men.


----------



## Theseus (Feb 22, 2013)

norajane said:


> It is done in a Western country. We have polygamists in Arizona, Utah, Kansas, and parts of Texas. It's also done in Canada. Look up Bountiful.
> 
> Yes, it's illegal, but it's done.


You are confusing the issue a bit. That's not illegal, because technically they aren't marrying these other wives. There's no bigamy involved. Legally, the polygamists you are referring to usually marry one woman, and technically the others are just living with them. They call them "wives" but they are not wives under the law. They don't have a marriage license.

What I was talking about here is polygamy legally recognized by the government, which doesn't happen (yet) in the United States, Canada, or any Western country that I am aware of.

BTW, I am still stumped at how gay marriage can be legal, but not polygamous marriage (which has much more history behind it), but that's another issue entirely.




> And it is a disaster for the young girls who are taught that they should be married to some old geezer who leads the community and be his 15th wife.


Agreed. But note that I said they should be allowed to do it "*if they are consenting adults".* Big difference. That's not the case with a lot of these polygamous cults in the United States, so I don't support polygamy under their model.


----------



## Ostera (Nov 1, 2012)

The topic of Polygamy here is the classic ideal that 'men' have multiple 'wives'. 

I bet most men wouldn't want to be in a relationship where there was 1 wife and several 'husbands' that share her.

Men don't like to share, women that do this are not capable of getting out from under it because they are indoctrinated into these ideals and don't have the economic ability to escape it.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

Polygyny = one man, two or more legal wives
Polyandry = one woman, two or more legal husbands
Monogamy = one legal husband, one legal wife

Pretty much the entire world was polygynous, with the notable exception of the Greeks, although some claims are made otherwise. Even Greek monogamy was strictly a legal monogamy for paternity, etc. Greek men had sexual access to numerous women within the household, so it was legal monogamy with sexual freedom for the male only. The Spartan women appear to have been free to copulate outside the marriage, so with Spartan's it was a two way street for extra-marital sex within a legally monogamous relationship. 

The Romans adopted Greek monogamy, with a twist or two, as they did with everything Greek. From there we have the Roman Church promoting legal monogamy, joined later by the Protestants, around the world. This has evolved from legal monogamy to an expectation of actual sexual monogamy over the last 400 years.

The advantages to legal monogamy are that more men are able to have wives than would be possible otherwise, since women rate about 2/3 of males as substandard. The disadvantages are that more unworthy males, males who would otherwise have been non-selected, are able to reproduce. Another is that women who settle, tend to get the 7 year itch leaving a wake of heartbreak and familial destruction.

The advantages to legal polygyny are that weak males tend to be selected out of the gene pool and more women are able to mate with the Alphas and Sigmas of their dreams and produce stronger and legitimate heirs. Also, the women are less likely to become bored as they vie for primacy with their husband. The disadvantages of polygyny are that many lower SMV men are not able to mate and can only resort to prostitution for sexual outlet and they tend to become violent and resentful. 

So both systems have their pros and cons.


----------



## gbrad (Jul 20, 2010)

One wife is hard enough to deal with, why add more stress...


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

gbrad said:


> One wife is hard enough to deal with, why add more stress...


Polygynous men have a higher testosterone level than monogamous men.


----------



## Coffee Amore (Dec 15, 2011)

If I loved my husband a lot less sure I'd consider it, but I love him and I won't share. Being exclusively his and he being mine makes me very happy.


----------



## tacoma (May 1, 2011)

Machiavelli said:


> Polygynous men have a higher testosterone level than monogamous men.


Where'd you get that?

I have no trouble believing it, it makes perfect sense.

I'd like to read whatever survey or study that came from.


----------



## gbrad (Jul 20, 2010)

Machiavelli said:


> Polygynous men have a higher testosterone level than monogamous men.


Why would that matter?


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

tacoma said:


> Where'd you get that?
> 
> I have no trouble believing it, it makes perfect sense.
> 
> I'd like to read whatever survey or study that came from.


Polygamy and Testosterone


----------



## anonim (Apr 24, 2012)

Machiavelli said:


> Polygyny = one man, two or more legal wives
> Polyandry = one woman, two or more legal husbands
> Monogamy = one legal husband, one legal wife


what about where men can have multiple wives AND women multiple husbands? Why be stuck on it being one way or the other, why not both?



norajane said:


> It is done in a Western country. We have polygamists in Arizona, Utah, Kansas, and parts of Texas. It's also done in Canada. Look up Bountiful.
> 
> Yes, it's illegal, but it's done. And it is a disaster for the young girls who are taught that they should be married to some old geezer who leads the community and be his 15th wife. *Its just as much a disaster as Learning love and romance from disney movies in monogamous societies. That is a different issue.* It's a disaster for the girls who have kids with these men and then are ripped away from those kids so they can be sent to be married to another man and become his 6th wife. *This is more if a cultural issue than a relationship form (read poly) issue. It is possible to have societies that are polywhatever that do not do this.* It's a disaster for the girls who are bred into this and have no education or money or any real contact with the outside world. *You mean like single parents for example?*
> 
> ...


----------



## Marianita (Feb 24, 2013)

We are not animals to be polygamy. We are humans and we choose someone to be with till the end. This is our nature


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

I read the Good Earth by Pearl Buck.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

Machiavelli said:


> Polygyny = one man, two or more legal wives
> Polyandry = one woman, two or more legal husbands
> Monogamy = one legal husband, one legal wife
> 
> ...


Shows that polygamy is good for society as a whole but not necessarily for the individual woman or man of modest means.


----------



## anchorwatch (Mar 5, 2012)

I believe that most people hope for and actively seek out someone to partner with, in intimacy, for life. It's as simple as that.


----------



## BrockLanders (Jul 23, 2012)

Could you imagine having multiple wives whose cycles had all aligned? You'd have to be crazy to sign up for that.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Lyris (Mar 29, 2012)

I suspect you mean polyamory, which is not gender specific.

I'm not interested in sharing my husband, or having sexual/romantic relationships with anyone other than him.

I think it can work fine for other people, and I have no issue with it.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

gbrad said:


> Why would that matter?


Larger muscles, more territorial, sharper thinking, greater sexual attraction and drive; all the better to defend his harem from interlopers.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

norajane said:


> It is done in a Western country. We have polygamists in Arizona, Utah, Kansas, and parts of Texas. It's also done in Canada. Look up Bountiful.


This LDS version, where boys are driven off to the greater, monogamous world while a small group of older men hoard all the sweet young things is highly twisted and artificial. Not to mention incredibly selfish. Without the greater surrounding society for the young men to migrate to, the old men would be dead in five minutes.


----------



## anchorwatch (Mar 5, 2012)

Machiavelli said:


> Larger muscles, more territorial, sharper thinking, greater sexual attraction and drive; all the better to defend his harem from interlopers.


Mac, you kill me sometimes. I love it!!!


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

anonim said:


> what about where men can have multiple wives AND women multiple husbands? Why be stuck on it being one way or the other, why not both?


So far as I know, while there is at least one society of where one woman serves as legal wife for two or more brothers, it's the only one. And while Sparta had legal monogamy, either party, not just the male, *seems* to have been able to have outside sex partners. IIRC, Xenophon, an exile to Sparta, wrote about that. There have been no societies with legal polyamory, nor is it likely, since the AMOG will eventually end up with all the women.


----------



## Thundarr (Jul 4, 2012)

bugmenot said:


> Most people have more than one friend. Each friend is different and has different qualities you value. If one of your friends demanded that you devote yourself to them and reject all your other friends you would most likely refuse - the combined qualities of all your friends is worth more than the qualities of this one friend.
> 
> So why do people invest everything in one sexual partner by getting married? How can one person fulfill you in every possible way? Why put all your eggs in one basket?
> 
> The solution is simple: polygamy. Why have less when you can have more?


Bug, it sounds like if you find a partner who thinks like you then you should try it and see how it works. Of course you greatly reduce the pool of partners.

For me on the other hand, monogomy is the only option. She is mine and I am hers because that's what makes it feel as special as I think it's supposed to be.


----------



## Lyris (Mar 29, 2012)

Hi Thundarr!

Machiavelli, polyamory is legal in every society that sex outside marriage is legal.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

Lyris said:


> Hi Thundarr!
> 
> Machiavelli, polyamory is legal in every society that sex outside marriage is legal.


On a day to day basis, maybe so as the cheating spouse has to divide he/her time with one partner or the other.

but a legal marriage has implicit benefits. My mother was telling me that a friend of hers who had to deal with a long time mistress and finally separated from her husband..... well he died before they were divorced and she got all the goodies.... and the mistress got nothing........ this is why I would never assume that a marriage license is "just a piece of paper."

and this is why will not commit long term without getting married.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

Lyris said:


> Hi Thundarr!
> 
> Machiavelli, polyamory is legal in every society that sex outside marriage is legal.


There are no legally required responsibilities, benefits or privileges to such a relationship, so it doesn't qualify as legal.


----------



## anonim (Apr 24, 2012)

Machiavelli said:


> There have been no societies with legal polyamory, nor is it likely, since the AMOG will eventually end up with all the women.


I think its more to do with other cultures wiping out cultures with differing social structures.


----------



## Lyris (Mar 29, 2012)

It is legal, ie, within the bounds of the law, to have multiple romantic and sexual partners. 

Nothing to do with marriage legalities, you didn't say polygamy, you said polyamory.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Would be fun I guess, though might be too troublesome considering one woman may be trouble enough!

Servant: "Which of your wives should I bring?"
Attila: "All of them, only way to avoid a fight!"

From the movie "Attila the Hun" hehe
Talk about alpha male really!


----------

