Questions about Polygamy/Polygyny/Polyandry:

By well-wisher

Sun, 25 Jan 2015
  • 6392 reads
7 comments
 

Questions about Polygamy/Polygyny/Polyandry: 1) If a parent can divide up their love between several children, even between their birth children and adopted children and if a person can divide up their love between several friends; why is it impossible for a person in a polygamous relationship to divide up their love between several partners? Is marital love the only kind of love that can’t be divided? 2) A person may have children from two different marriages where they have divorced and remarried and yet love the children from both marriages, their spouses children and their ex-spouses children, equally so why could they not, in a polygamous relationship love all their children equally? 3) If all the spouses within a polygamous marriage were working and earning money; were independently wealthy, would inheritance be a problem as it is a problem in old patriarchal societies where only husbands work and earn money? 4) Furthermore wouldn’t a polygamous marriage in which all the spouses were independently wealthy be a good financial and material support network for all the children of the marriage, if all of the children inherited the collective money earned by all of the spouses. 5) And wouldn’t such a ‘Modern’ polygamous marriage, with working wives as well as husbands, provide a good support network for children where one of the parents dies. Note: Please bear in mind that I am not arguing that Polygamy SHOULD be the NORM but merely questioning whether, if INDEPENDENTLY WEALTHY CONSENTING ADULT individuals were to choose it , it could be a harmless or even positive thing.

Certificate PG
Other
Other Stuff
Miscellaneous

Comments

Submitted by Philip Sidney on

I suppose it does work in some societies for some of the participants.

Submitted by Canonette on

If you're in the UK, then polygamy (bigamy) is illegal, but in some countries it is considered normal.  Love and marriage are subject to cultural differences.  For example, I'm going through a phase of being interested in the Mongols - Gengis Khan chose his wife when he was nine and married her when he was sixteen.  It was politically expedient for him to marry a girl from that particular tribe, although it wasn't the match his father had wanted.  She was his favourite wife and his only Empress, although he had other wives of lower rank too.  I say this, because it shows the purpose of marriage in many cultures historically was to do with forging bonds between families, the production of heirs, wealth, status, etc.  From a female point of view, her survival would ultimately depend on marrying well.

I could just as well refer to a Jane Austen novel, because seemingly very little had changed by then.

We're still living with the influence of Victorian notions of love and marriage and within that legal framework, but things are changing.  Why not polygamy - as long as everyone concerned is happy with it?  The case you put for it sounds quite practical, but I suspect it wouldn't work quite so well in real life.

I see love as a separate discussion to marriage.

 

 

Submitted by Canonette on

I've been mulling this over some more and don't think polygamy will catch on in this country until there's some sort of tipping point where muslims out number non-muslims.  

Although I can't find anything in the Bible forbidding polygamy, the 'sacrament' of marriage is still important to many and they see it as a timeless tradition, not realising that its current form is a few centuries old.

You could say that we have lost the financial imperative for marriage - women can be self-supporting.  However, I think there's a deep-rooted biological drive to make a good marriage that's difficult to override, even if your survival no longer depends on it.  I see it with my own eyes on a daily basis, as I live in an affluent commuter town where women enjoy the fruits of their husbands' labour.

This is also why I think polygamy won't catch on - exclusivity is a safer bet.

I think that it isn't a coincidence that the rise of the idea of marrying for love has coincided with the rise of the novel, which still influences how we see love and romance. You can marry for love now that marriage isn't a financial imperative and for that reason also I do not think that polygamy will become popular.  If you love someone, you are unlikely to want to share them.

 

Submitted by well-wisher on

But, Canonette; exclusivity is a problem with parental love aswell. When a new baby is born or a parent adopts a new child this may cause the jealousy of their other children and the parents have to explain to those other children, "Mummy and Daddy don't love you any less". The human heart is capable of loving more than one person simultaneously and equally if they are a child or a friend and I think it is only an assumption that we have that a person is incapable of loving more than one  (romantic/marital) partner simultaneously. If I see scientific evidence to prove otherwise I will change my opinion.

Also, based upon what I know of Polygamy in the past and present (for example in native Kenyan society), all of the problems that existed/exist with Polygamy stemmed from gender inequality but whether a polygamous relationship in which all the partners are economically independent and equal would work or not has not been tested.

To me, Polygamy is a thing like Homosexuality used to be; something illegal inspite of the fact that it is between consenting adults and there is no scientific proof that it is harmful to any who freely engage in it and just as homosexuality became legal, I think Polygamy will aswell.

Furthermore, does saying that monogamy has problems; that it doesn't work for everyone and that marriages often end in divorce make monogamy a bad thing? No, because there are plenty of examples of happy monogamous relationships. So too there may be examples of happy polygamous relationships. I don't think there is one perfect form of relationship that works for everyone and just as some people prefer "living together" to getting married; some people may prefer, if they had the option, polygamy to monogamy.

Oh look, a link. I wonder where it leads.(link is external)

JoHn

Submitted by Canonette on

Monogamy goes against our genetic programming.  So, as I was saying - the idea of romantic love has been constructed for us, it's not necessary in line with our biology.  If our function is to pass on our DNA, then promiscuity is more natural.

Not that I'm saying polygamy is preferable.

You're right - propaganda is so powerful a tool that people can be persuaded of anything.  Marriage as we know it, will soon be a thing of the past.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/women-who-stray/201202/why-men-gave...(link is external)

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/sep/03/anthonybrowne.theobserver(link is external)

 

Submitted by well-wisher on

If you look at the history of anti-polygamy it seems to start in Rome and spread with the spread of Christianity mixed with Greco-Roman values; it's legal throughout the world before then and only became illegal in India, China, some other Asian African and Middle Eastern countries in the 20th Century and in many countries its still legal so I'm very doubtful about the article from Psychology Today (in your link)entitled "Why did men give up Polygamy?" because the truth is, they didn't give up polygamy in most parts of the world until very recently and European Pagans only gave up polygamy because they were being ruled by the Romans (and even in medieval Europe Polygamy was still being practiced illegally).

My only thought regarding your article about female promiscuity is that it may be true that women are as promiscuous as men but it is also certainly true that it has been much easier for men to be promiscuous than women although with the availibility of the contraceptive pill and the morning after pill perhaps that has changed.

 

Oh look, a link. I wonder where it leads.(link is external)

JoHn

Submitted by Canonette on

They're not MY articles! I just posted them as I thought you might glean some information from them.  The "Why did men give up polygamy?" article didn't ring true for me, either.  And the one about promiscuous women compared humans and guppies, which always seems erroneous to me.

Thank you for your interesting insights, JoHn.  I wouldn't welcome a return to polygamy myself, but it's a fascinating topic.