"Why not polygamous marriage?"

[TellyKNeasuss]

A, B and C are married. C wants to divorce A, but not B. How is that going to work?

The cost to society is in legal complexities which would need to be unraveled, and in paying all the lawyers to do so.

That's just the start of the legal quandaries. If one spouse wants to bring another person into the family, can they do it unilaterally. If not, would it require all current spouses to agree? Or just a majority? Similarly, if a majority of the other spouses want to divorce one of the family members, is that member out of the family? Or only if all the other spouses want the divorce?

For myself, I see no benefits to polygamy that would compensate for having to accompany multiple wives on shopping trips.

 

[Marduk]

But I think that's precisely because polygamy isn't legally sanctioned. If that were to change, I don't think that would remain the case.

again, human nature, if the law changed, the way people run their lives wouldn't on the whole be any different, you can't force a poly relationship to work like some people try to force monogamous ones, theres always an extra partners opinion and support, so those men you suspect will steal all the women would be the most arrogant, I can tell you something about women here, they do find arrogance attractive in men, but only if its in very small quantities and backed up by charisma and loving support, all the poly marriages you are envisioning would fail before they got started, just imagine for a moment that you're in a relationship where it's impossible to force your will on your partner, and where your actions are being judged by two women first hand. The cons generally outweigh the pros if your relationship isn't solid, the stress isn't doubled, its tripled

 

[Ziggurat]

I guess I don't see the issue.

Then forget about your son. What do you think large numbers of young men who can't get women are going to do? Because I can tell you the two-word answer: cause trouble.

 

[Ziggurat]

again, human nature, if the law changed, the way people run their lives wouldn't on the whole be any different

Sure it would be. Not because human nature would change, but because incentives would change. The entire point of having laws is that they DO change behavior. If they didn't, we wouldn't bother with them.

 

[The Greater Fool]

That's just the start of the legal quandaries. If one spouse wants to bring another person into the family, can they do it unilaterally.

If their current contract(s) give them the right to act unilaterally, yes. If not, no.

If not, would it require all current spouses to agree?

If the current contract(s) requires total agreement, yes.

Or just a majority?

If the current contract(s) require a simple majority, yes.

Similarly, if a majority of the other spouses want to divorce one of the family members, is that member out of the family? Or only if all the other spouses want the divorce?

I would say that would be like now. Only one member of a marriage need want it dissolved to get it dissolved. Polygomous marriages would just need to deal directly with rights, responsibities, and finances of dissolution up front.

For myself, I see no benefits to polygamy that would compensate for having to accompany multiple wives on shopping trips.

My contract currently says I don't have to go with my wife on shopping trips. If their are multiples, they can go together, and I could stay home and sleep.

 

[Marduk]

For myself, I see no benefits to polygamy that would compensate for having to accompany multiple wives on shopping trips.

aye, thats the problem, I solved it though and I think my solution is brilliant, when the girls want a shopping trip, they do it together. I have since discovered that male company on such trips was always considered completely unnecessary anyway.
what, you think she wants you there tutting, sighing and thinking her ass used to be smaller whenever she tries anything on
really ?

Sure it would be. Not because human nature would change, but because incentives would change. The entire point of having laws is that they DO change behavior. If they didn't, we wouldn't bother with them.

you seem blissfully unaware of the realities of female attraction

What do you think large numbers of young men who can't get women are going to do? .

live with their mothers like they do now, obviously

 

[The Greater Fool]

Then forget about your son. What do you think large numbers of young men who can't get women are going to do? Because I can tell you the two-word answer: cause trouble.

OK, that doesn't necessarily follow, at least here in Las Vegas. He can rent a wife for a short time as often as he can afford.

 

[Ziggurat]

I'm not seeing the connection.

How is female led polyamory affected by laws against polygamy?

Maybe it wouldn't, but that would actually make my case stronger, not weaker. What I said was that under legalized polygamy, single male/multiple female relationships would outnumber single female/multiple male relationships (I've been using "polygamy" to indicate both). The number of the latter might not change at all, but the number of the former will increase and surpass the latter, creating an imbalance. And it's the imbalance which is the problem.

 

[Marduk]

Maybe it wouldn't, but that would actually make my case stronger, not weaker. What I said was that under legalized polygamy, single male/multiple female relationships would outnumber single female/multiple male relationships (I've been using "polygamy" to indicate both). The number of the latter might not change at all, but the number of the former will increase and surpass the latter, creating an imbalance. And it's the imbalance which is the problem.

so where are the figures youre using to back this up ?
did you know that there are already more men per ratio on earth than women and yet look, society still works

 

[Ziggurat]

you seem blissfully unaware of the realities of female attraction

You keep making statements like this which, as far as I can tell, have no bearing outside of your own immediate circle. What you describe doesn't match most of the world at large. Taken at your word, there shouldn't even be any oppression of women, but there clearly is.

 

[Ziggurat]

so where are the figures youre using to back this up ?

What happens in actual polygamous societies. They're always dominated by single male/multiple female relationships, not the other way around or even balanced. That's not a coincidence.

 

[Marduk]

You keep making statements like this which, as far as I can tell, have no bearing outside of your own immediate circle. What you describe doesn't match most of the world at large. Taken at your word, there shouldn't even be any oppression of women, but there clearly is.

again, we're not talking about opression of women, thats present in any form of marriage
heres the relevant question
why are you opposed to certain demographics of society having the same rights as others ?

 

[Marduk]

What happens in actual polygamous societies. They're always dominated by single male/multiple female relationships, not the other way around or even balanced. That's not a coincidence.

name me some polygamous societies in the modern world please, I'm missing your examples

 

[Ziggurat]

OK, that doesn't necessarily follow, at least here in Las Vegas. He can rent a wife for a short time as often as he can afford.

Prostitution isn't legal in Vegas. And if you're hoping that an illegal activity is going to operate as a safety valve for society's ills, well, that's just asking for an organized crime problem the likes of which we haven't seen since prohibition.

 

[Ziggurat]

name me some polygamous societies in the modern world please, I'm missing your examples

The middle east. Parts of Africa. They're part of the modern world, even if they're dysfunctional and underdeveloped. But that's rather my whole point: polygamy is only surviving in crippled, dysfunctional societies. You may think that's a coincidence, but I do not.

 

[Lamuella]

I have no problem with polygamous marriage, so long as each person's duties and obligations to each other person are well defined.

 

[The Greater Fool]

Prostitution isn't legal in Vegas. And if you're hoping that an illegal activity is going to operate as a safety valve for society's ills, well, that's just asking for an organized crime problem the likes of which we haven't seen since prohibition.

OK, I didn't spell it out... he'd have to drive a 1/2 hour to one of the several legal brothels. Sorry, I thought the 1/2 hour drive was obvious.

 

[Marduk]

The middle east. Parts of Africa. They're part of the modern world, even if they're dysfunctional and underdeveloped. But that's rather my whole point: polygamy is only surviving in crippled, dysfunctional societies. You may think that's a coincidence, but I do not.

they are not polygamous societies
try again
I asked you to name them, not give a general location of where you think they might be

 

[Ziggurat]

they are not polygamous societies
try again
I asked you to name them, not give a general location of where you think they might be

Really? You need me to specify Pashtuns in Afghanistan, or the Oromo in Ethiopia? Not that these are the only examples, but if you just want some examples, I think they'll do fine.

 

[Ziggurat]

OK, I didn't spell it out... he'd have to drive a 1/2 hour to one of the several legal brothels. Sorry, I thought the 1/2 hour drive was obvious.

So to mitigate the problems of polygamy... you think we can just legalize prostitution all over the country. Maybe in little islands, but at least have them all over the place.

I somehow don't think that solution is actually going to work here.