In defence of Polygamy

93 posts / 0 new
Last post
kc1253's picture
Generally, polygamy is one

Generally, polygamy is one MAN with multiple wives. Rarely the other way around. It's generally practiced in societies that are very misogynist. It is also generally a part of strong class separation, where those with money and power have multiple wives. So, while I see nothing inherently wrong with polygamy, it's practice is usually tainted and indicative of some form of social injustice.

Algebe's picture
Polygamy is by definition one

Polygamy is by definition one husband with multiple wives. The reverse situation is polyandry.

I don't think I could handle either situation myself, but I have no objection in principle, provided that only consenting adults are involved. No crime is involved unless one person tries to register multiple legal marriages at the same time. However, there would be no legal protection for the property rights of the individuals concerned in the event of a breakup

Randomhero1982's picture
From an atheist position? I

From an atheist position? I don't see how this relates... has sod all to do with atheism.

But from a personal stand point? I couldn't care, provided all parties are consenting I don't see a problem.

From a moral point of view I would say I don't like the sound of it, it's not something I would engage in and if I had a daughter who was being lured into that kind of relationship, strong words would be had with the gentleman in question..... with a sledgehammer. :)

Flamenca's picture
Polygamy and polyamorous play

Polygamy and polyamory play in different leagues. Before you jump into conclussions for egalitarian reasons (I used to think the same way), I urged you to read or listen to Andrea M. Emmett, a psychologist/journalist who spent several years in Uttah studying bible-based polygamy and she wrote an awarded book with interviews of women ex-members, called "God's brothel".

She concluded that in fact polygamy is a cover for pedophilia, rape, incest, orgies, sexual slavery and violence.

C. M. Allen's picture
"She concluded that in fact

"She concluded that in fact polygamy is a cover for pedophilia, rape, incest, orgies, sexual slavery and violence."

I think I will agree with that conclusion, but mostly when it is institutional and when one gender or individual is dominant.

C. M. Allen's picture
Hahaha...

Hahaha...

I remember this thread from more than two years ago. I go away for awhile and when I come back, BANG! here it is again.

I wonder why that is?

Flamenca's picture
Hi, CM Allen. There were 4

Hi, CM Allen. There were four 2017 posts before mine. I felt like writting about it, since no-one had added a reliable source to prove the dark side of this...

Sorry if this has upset you.

I think I will agree with that conclusion, but mostly when it is institutional and when one gender or individual is dominant.

Yes, I was just talking about biblical-based poligamy.

(edited 'cause of grammar mistakes)

C. M. Allen's picture
Oh no, it doesn't upset me.

Oh no, it doesn't upset me. In fact I find it quite amusing that a thread about polygamy would reappear after 2 years like that. And I am glad you posted that source, it offers a sobering perspective.

Flamenca's picture
Ah, okok. You're welcome!

Ah, okok. You're welcome!

Darkfallenangel's picture
I've been involved in

I've been involved in polyamery for a number of years. It's no one else's business but mine, my partner and my boyfriend. It's not advertised to anyone. I've not brought it into my family life in any way. I'm not harming anyone. I don't see the problem. I know many that are polyamerous.

Emma's picture
I believe in people being

I believe in people being free to do as they please so I don't think the government or anyone should interfere with polygamous relationships or anything.
But at the same time polygamy is considered to destabilise societies and is linked to war, terrorism and is condemned by the UN human rights committee as it is linked to human rights violations. So I think a society holding polygamy a little bit taboo and the state not recognising polygamy by legalising marriage is probably best.

Dr Professor's picture
I'm an atheist and I am 100%

I'm an atheist and I am 100% against polygamy nor do I believe the nonsense written in the original post.

"Atheists who hold strong perspectives against polygamy are like the atheists who argue in favor of there being a spirit or free-will behind every person, they are atheists who, whilst not believing in god or religion, still cling to a religiously motivated morality."

This is ridiculous. I have no religious beliefs. I was born atheist and have remained so for my entire life, currently 37 years old. I am against polygamy for reasons based on biology, society, history and reason.

I am against polygamy because it is bad for society and leads to violence, suffering, death, rape and possibly war. As human beings we have a natural drive to procreate and have offspring just all life forms. Take a look at countries where males are preferred to females and female babies are killed or aborted before they are born because they are not male. Say India. There are places in India where there are 40 males to 1 female ratios. These are also places where you find lots of rape, gang rapes, etc.

Many of these men have no possibly way to ever pass on their genes / procreate or even just have sex. Their drive to do so does not go away, it's there constantly nagging at them in their subconscious. For many of these guys the only way they will ever be able to have sex is if they rape someone or kill the partner of that female to increase that males chances of hooking up.
In places like China you have prostitutes shipped in and major human trafficking problems, again, because of the male to female ratio being so off balance.

To the other questions asked, no , I am not against gay marriage or anything else. There is no reason to be. There is great reason to be against polygamy though and it has nothing to do whatsoever with any worthless religion or fairy tale characters from their ignorant "holy" books.

Cognostic's picture
What mature consenting adults

What mature consenting adults do regarding their sexual functioning or preference is no one else's business.

Terminal Dogma's picture
Imo the best model of

Imo the best model of civilization involves a monogamous hetero couple where the male goes out to earn an income and the mother nurtures and raises the children.

Generic leftists typically disagree because muh gender and identity politics.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Terminal Dogma - Imo the best

Terminal Dogma - Imo the best model of civilization involves a monogamous hetero couple where the male goes out to earn an income and the mother nurtures and raises the children.

Sounds like Unilineal evolution.

Sushisnake 's picture
And here's it's bastard child

"Sounds like Unilineal evolution."

And here's its bastard child:

https://www.nature.com/scitable/forums/genetics-generation/america-s-hid...

Terminal Dogma's picture
How does your mind make the

How does your mind make the jump from mum dad & kids of average middle class nuclear family to eugenics.

Leftists are just overflowing mindless meme cliché generators that can't actually compose a rational thought of your own.

These days it's become impossible to tell the difference between an actual living breathing leftists and a leftist spam bot.

Another post and you would have got to the gassing of Jews somehow ...that already. happened in the Polish March thread lmao.

Sushisnake 's picture
@TermDog

@TermDog

Re: "How does your mind make the jump from mum dad & kids of average middle class nuclear family to eugenics."

Exactly the same way Nyar made the jump from belief in the mummy the homemaker/daddy the breadwinner thing to unilineal evolution. Didn't you read the link he gave you? Eugenics grew out of unilineal evolution, which itself grew out of a misunderstanding of what Darwin meant by survival of the fittest. FFS, mate! It's simple history- not a leftist plot!

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.cs.m...

https://www.coursehero.com/file/p3s77s5/Eugenics-and-unilinear-evolution...

https://www.cs.mcgill.ca/~rwest/wikispeedia/wpcd/wp/s/Sociocultural_evol...

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=ya81B-EsLxgC&pg=PA172&lpg=PA172&dq=...

Re: "Another post and you would have got to the gassing of Jews somehow ...that already. happened in the Polish March thread lmao."

Are you denying the rise of the far right in Poland? Again, it's simple fact- not a leftist plot. I gave you lots of evidence.

Re: "Leftists are just overflowing mindless meme cliché generators that can't actually compose a rational thought of your own.

These days it's become impossible to tell the difference between an actual living breathing leftists and a leftist spam."

I'm getting a little tired of the endless ad homs, mate. I wouldn't mind if you actually engaged with my arguments and the data I present, but noooo! You're patently incapable of it. The bulk of your posts are " The left bad this!." and "The left bad that!" with nothing to evidence your shit or even signify you have a fucking clue what the left even is. What's the matter, lad? Did a little leftist girl knock you back?

Sheldon's picture
"Generic leftists"

"Generic leftists"

I thought we discussed your use of sweeping generalisation as rhetoric to create negative stereotypes?

Do you have any evidence that the left is any less diverse than the right in politics? How would you feel if someone described right wingers as avericious fascists?

Terminal Dogma's picture
"@sheldon How would you feel

"@sheldon How would you feel if someone described right wingers as avericious fascists?"

Already happened on this board multiple times, how do I feel about, bored like I'm talking to a leftist spam bot.

Sheldon's picture
Yet you continue to use such

Yet you continue to use such disingenuous and generic pejoratives yourself, as if such rhetoric is compelling?

If someone uses unsound argument or reasoning it can be frustrating, but the answer is to challenge it with sound arguments and reasoning, not match their dishonest rhetoric post for post. Or even worse adopt the practise in every discussion.

Sushisnake 's picture
@Sheldon

@Sheldon

Re: "Generic leftists"

You must have missed the "mindless meme cliché generators that can't actually compose a rational thought of your own. These days it's become impossible to tell the difference between an actual living breathing leftists and a leftist spam." ad hom directed at me, Sheldon. I don't think the lad's "generic" is quite as "generic" as he claims. I think it's quite specific and I think it's called trolling:

In Internet slang, a troll (/troʊl, trɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,[3] often for the troll's amusement.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

Sheldon's picture
Let's face if we're talking

Let's face if we're talking about polygamy then we're talking about Mormons. Polygamy has caused widespread sexual abuse of minors in the Mormon religion.

I recommend you read Under the Banner of Heaven: A Story of violent Faith. Polygamy as practised in Mormonism is far from consenting adults.

Terminal Dogma's picture
Some post mentioned polygamy

Some post mentioned polygamy mostly means males with multiple wives, paraphrasing.

That's a reflection of female inherent nature where women are willing to share the "fittest" male type deal, no different to chimps really.

Sheldon's picture
Could you link the research

Could you link the research evidencing that claim about women? Only I'm dubious, as it just sounds like something misogynistic men make up to justify their chauvinism. Nothing about polygamy in Mormonism involves the "fittest" males being shared. Most of the evidence suggests it involves deeply pernicious behaviours like paedophilia and incest, and a complete dehumanising of women and girls who treated as little more than chattel as fat balding middle aged men use them with no regard for their well being.

Again read Under The Banner of Heaven: A Story of Violent Faith by Jon Krakauer for a real insight into the horror of modern day polygamy, and the lives of young girls and women it ruins.

Terminal Dogma's picture
Which claim specifically, and

Which claim specifically, and please also explain why said claim sounds misogynistic and chauvinistic.

Can't respond unless I know what you are talking about specifically.

Sheldon's picture
You only made one claim in

You only made one claim in the post I responded to?

"female inherent nature where women are willing to share the "fittest" male "

"explain why said claim sounds misogynistic and chauvinistic."

That's self evident. It's misogynistic to claim that women are any more ok sharing a man, than multiple men might be sharing a single woman. Again read the book, do some research, polygamy is a filthy dehumanising practise that ruins the lives of women and girls. It's the very definition of inequality before you even start to examine the vile pernicious behaviours that it engenders in societies that victimise women and girls with polygamy.

Terminal Dogma's picture
Fact is less men have

Fact is less men have children than women but more men have more children than women.

That means most of us come from fewer fathers than mothers, I'm sure you can do the math.

Polyandry is common across species including bees. Domestic animals and farm animals are more advanced then humans in that so few males are responsible for most of the babies it leads to disastrous genetic bottle necks. I have worked a bit in animal production.

Not sure how you get misogyny out of all that but hey, that's leftist thinking...everything is a male plot.

You can find your own citations if you are genuinely interested.

Sheldon's picture
Misogyny involves choice the

Misogyny involves choice the other species you mention are not exercising choice, this the flaw in your reasoning. It has nothing to do with "leftist" it's about being a decent human being who empathises with others and cares about their well being.

"You can find your own citations if you are genuinely interested."

So you have no evidence to support your claim that most women are happy to share men, I can't say I'm surprised.

I notice you are not going to address the harm polygamy does, but read the book or at least do some research as it is a deeply pernicious practice. I don't give a fuck what bees get up to, but I do care when men use women as property, and coerce or even force underage girls into marriage.

Terminal Dogma's picture
Polygamy applies to legal

Polygamy is only meaningful in a legal context I am talking about polyandry which is our basic biology regardless of your moral judgments. Laws come and go, biology sticks. I am highly dubious of your claim it has much to do with misogyny...it's is/was necessity, evolution or both.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.