"Why not polygamous marriage?"

[crimresearch]

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.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Marduk ..."well then, you missed the main point, that in the west poly groups are far more often female led, with multiple male partners"

Ziggurat: ..."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".
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That looks like a claim of a causal mechanism... If you can't describe what that is or how it works, then it is hard to follow your argument.

 

[The Greater Fool]

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.

First, I have no problem with legal prostitution everywhere. And yes, it would be OK for my daughter if she chose it, after all she is a Tech Recruiter now, so it's pretty much the same thing I'm for Legal Gambling, too. Semi Legal drugs, likewise. But, here in LV, 2 of 3 isn't that bad.

Second, as I said earlier, I don't believe Polygomy would be a common or frequent choice, therefore I don't believe there would be the shortage of women that you posit, therefore not more horny hords of young men with no outlet but trouble.

Third, perhaps more young men will stop denying their gayness and setttle down with a nice guy or three and llive happier lives.

Fourth, Maybe with no shot at your non-existant females, they will, in fact, calm down and focus on work and making money so they can attract a woman.

 

[Marduk]

Really? You need me to specify Pashtuns in Afghanistan,

Polygamy is practiced on a limited scale. A Pashtun takes a second wife only when the first one is issueless or differences between the husband and wife assume proportions beyond compromise.

http://pashtuncultureandhistory.blogspot.com/2010/08/pashtun-customs-regarding-birth.html

or the Oromo in Ethiopia?

Marital arrangements are governed under a customary law in Ethiopia called the Fetha Nagast. Polygamy is forbidden under civil law.

Not that these are the only examples, but if you just want some examples, I think they'll do fine.

These don't seem to be very good examples of the evils of polygamy societies do they, you said that these examples were evidence of crippled, dysfunctional societies and that was your main point. So apparently your main point is disfunctional and crippled isnt it

 

[Weird Science]

Some polygamy is about that.

No more than 95-99%, though. So nothing to worry about, I guess. That every polygamous society on earth treats women like dirt? Sheer coincidence, I'm sure.

By the way, a few years back, opponents of gay marriage pointed out it would lead to polygamy, and I distinctly recall pro-gay-marriage folks screaming at them that this will never happen, it is just a scare tactic to deny gays their rights, etc.

And now -- poof! -- suddenly the same folks who kept screaming those who said gay marriage will lead to polygamy are paranoid, are campaigning for the exact same thing, polygamy, those "paranoid" folks predicted they would.

Curious, isn't it?

Look, if I were cynical, I would say it's no skin off *my* nose. I'm a man, and an Israeli to boot, so if foolish American pseudo-feminists want to bury the work of 100 years of female liberation by re-establishing women's status as de facto property by supporting polygamy, hey, be my guest.

But the problem is, I DO care. I care enough about human rights to not want to see women, who are after all the majority of the human race, have their status reduced to that of property by idiots.

 

[The Greater Fool]

No more than 95-99%, though. So nothing to worry about, I guess. That every polygamous society on earth treats women like dirt? Sheer coincidence, I'm sure.

By the way, a few years back, opponents of gay marriage pointed out it would lead to polygamy, and I distinctly recall pro-gay-marriage folks screaming at them that this will never happen, it is just a scare tactic to deny gays their rights, etc.

And now -- poof! -- suddenly the same folks who kept screaming those who said gay marriage will lead to polygamy are paranoid, are campaigning for the exact same thing, polygamy, those "paranoid" folks predicted they would.

Curious, isn't it?

Look, if I were cynical, I would say it's no skin off *my* nose. I'm a man, and an Israeli to boot, so if foolish American pseudo-feminists want to bury the work of 100 years of female liberation by re-establishing women's status as de facto property by supporting polygamy, hey, be my guest.

But the problem is, I DO care. I care enough about human rights to not want to see women, who are after all the majority of the human race, have their status reduced to that of property by idiots.

Except that the Polygomy that I and other advocate or would accept is not just a man with many wives, or wife with many husbands, but any combination of adults, particularly with fair, balanced contracts that protect the rights, responsibilities, finances, and dissulution of the arrangement, so that nobody gets "used" in a way they are uncomfortable with.

No one is property.

 

[bookitty]

No more than 95-99%, though. So nothing to worry about, I guess. That every polygamous society on earth treats women like dirt? Sheer coincidence, I'm sure.

By the way, a few years back, opponents of gay marriage pointed out it would lead to polygamy, and I distinctly recall pro-gay-marriage folks screaming at them that this will never happen, it is just a scare tactic to deny gays their rights, etc.

And now -- poof! -- suddenly the same folks who kept screaming those who said gay marriage will lead to polygamy are paranoid, are campaigning for the exact same thing, polygamy, those "paranoid" folks predicted they would.

Curious, isn't it?

Look, if I were cynical, I would say it's no skin off *my* nose. I'm a man, and an Israeli to boot, so if foolish American pseudo-feminists want to bury the work of 100 years of female liberation by re-establishing women's status as de facto property by supporting polygamy, hey, be my guest.

But the problem is, I DO care. I care enough about human rights to not want to see women, who are after all the majority of the human race, have their status reduced to that of property by idiots.

I really do wish someone would explain how legalizing polygamy in a culture in which women have rights will automatically negate those rights. I just can't figure out the mechanism.

 

[Complexity]

I've always liked Heinlein's concept of a "line marriage" as presented in The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress.

 

[Marduk]

But the problem is, I DO care. I care enough about human rights to not want to see women, who are after all the majority of the human race, have their status reduced to that of property by idiots.

polyamory is typified by male Dominance when the people concerned are under 30, when theyre over 30 they are more likely female led. So your point is moot, you are apparently opposed to female empowerment, don't you want to be part of a Dominant womans stable ?

 

[Marduk]

I really do wish someone would explain how legalizing polygamy in a culture in which women have rights will automatically negate those rights. I just can't figure out the mechanism.

I'm wondering if theres a correlation with strong patriarchal or religious influence on the people espousing those views, Weird Science is an Isaraeli, nuff said there, whats Ziggurats excuse

 

[crimresearch]

No more than 95-99%, though. So nothing to worry about, I guess. That every polygamous society on earth treats women like dirt? Sheer coincidence, I'm sure.... <snip>

You could have simply said 'No, I don't have anything that isn't based on fallacies', instead of recycling.

 

[bookitty]

I'm wondering if theres a correlation with strong patriarchal or religious influence on the people espousing those views, Weird Science is an Isaraeli, nuff said there, whats Ziggurats excuse

A common failing universal to humans. When presented with a new social or unusual social idea, they immediately apply it to their own situation and then extrapolate to the rest of the world. So "I would have 20 hot wives!" turns into "OMG! no moar womenz!"

 

[Marduk]

A common failing universal to humans. When presented with a new social or unusual social idea, they immediately apply it to their own situation and then extrapolate to the rest of the world. So "I would have 20 hot wives!" turns into "OMG! no moar womenz!"

Thats quite tragic really, not only are they reducing their own chances of happiness, theyre intent on buggering it up for the rest of us

oh well, I concede, I will just have to come to terms with the fact that as a 42 year old man in a relationship with a 38 year old Domme and a 25 year old (blonde attractive with a pert bottom) submissive I'm probably trying too hard not to get involved in a gay marriage or causing a "crippled, dysfunctional society" by marrying the women I love

their loss, I'll have to make it up to them in chocolate

 

[Ziggurat]

These don't seem to be very good examples of the evils of polygamy societies do they, you said that these examples were evidence of crippled, dysfunctional societies and that was your main point. So apparently your main point is disfunctional and crippled isnt it

I don't know what your point is about the Pashtun, but in regards to Ethiopia, the official law hasn't actually stopped the practice of polygamy. And that's fairly common in societies with weak states: local culture trumps official legal standards.

 

[Ziggurat]

That looks like a claim of a causal mechanism...

Yes, a mechanism for the increase in polygyny. You claimed polyandry wouldn't be affected, and I'm saying that doesn't matter to my argument.

 

[crimresearch]

polyamory is typified by male Dominance when the people concerned are under 30, when theyre over 30 they are more likely female led. So your point is moot, you are apparently opposed to female empowerment, don't you want to be part of a Dominant womans stable ?

Shouldn't he start out with some nice Old Guard training first? ;-}

 

[Weird Science]

Except that the Polygomy that I and other advocate or would accept is not just a man with many wives, or wife with many husbands, but any combination of adults, particularly with fair, balanced contracts that protect the rights, responsibilities, finances, and dissulution of the arrangement,

You're talking about fantasy and I'm talking about reality. You're talking about some fantastic idea of what you imagine polygamy should be, I about what polygamy actually always is.

Polygamy is a tool of male domination, a way for older, powerful men to enhance their status by owning women (or do you really think the tribe's chief honestly falls madly in love with his 23rd wife before he decides to marry her?). This is what it is today wherever it is practiced, this is what it was in the past whenever it was practiced.

The laws would be fair? That's nice. Well, the laws about ownership of sports cars are fair, too: it is just as legal for one sports car to be shared fairly and equally by several rich old men as it is for one old man to own many sport cars. But for some curious reason the ownership relation always goes in one direction, doesn't it?

 

[Ziggurat]

A common failing universal to humans. When presented with a new social or unusual social idea, they immediately apply it to their own situation and then extrapolate to the rest of the world. So "I would have 20 hot wives!" turns into "OMG! no moar womenz!"

You have it exactly backwards. I'm looking at the rest of the world first, and seeing how this idea seems to actually work in practice since it's not actually new. And the answer I arrive at is "badly".

 

[Marduk]

I don't know what your point is about the Pashtun, but in regards to Ethiopia, the official law hasn't actually stopped the practice of polygamy. And that's fairly common in societies with weak states: local culture trumps official legal standards.

my point is that I asked you to name a polygamous society, instead I got your geographic bigotry and examples that don't support your claim. IMO you have totally failed to prove any of your points, I'm listening, but I'm not seeing the truth of anything you've said in this thread at all.
you seem unprepared and ignorant of most of the points made in this discussion by people who know better.


Marriages have problems, the most common is physical or emotional abuse, thats going to be the same wether the marriage is gay, monogamous or polyamourous, if you can't see that the only thing your "ban polygamous marriages" approach is doing is depriving a certain section of society from their right to marry when they have already proved themselves to be more socially orientated than the rest of it. You are therefore wether you think it or not opposed to equal rights for everyone.

are you married ?

 

[JJM 777]

the official law hasn't actually stopped the practice of polygamy. And that's fairly common in societies with weak states

... such as Utah

 

[bookitty]

You have it exactly backwards. I'm looking at the rest of the world first, and seeing how this idea seems to actually work in practice since it's not actually new. And the answer I arrive at is "badly".

whoa <----Keeanu Reeves voice. Deja vu

I really do wish someone would explain how legalizing polygamy in a culture in which women have rights will automatically negate those rights. I just can't figure out the mechanism.