Polygamy/Polyandry

SAMAS · Post by **SAMAS** » 2003-02-17 09:11pm

While cleaning out my room, I found an old issue of an independent newspaper about multiple-partner marriages. Then game the debates in the OSF board about Tenchi Muyo, and I was also playing Skies of Arcadia. It's finally gotten to the point where I have to ask around here:

Siimply put, do you think it's alright, or even possible, to marry more than one person?

Also, how many people do you think you could handle beeing married to?

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2003-02-17 09:12pm

it's possible. it's ok if everyone involved is fine.

I could not handle it.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-02-17 10:01pm

Posible in certain countries. Perhaps, depends on the culture. And no I could not handle it

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-02-17 10:23pm

Some cultures find it entirely wierd to have one mate. Me, I get attached to too many people so it's probably dangerous for me, I'd end up getting them all confused.

But I'm good with multipartner relationships. More the better, infact! Cant go wrong with 20 people wanting to routinely clusterfuck..

Post by **haas mark** » 2003-02-17 10:36pm

It's possible.

One.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-02-17 10:37pm

It is possible, but depends massively on cultural values and perceptions. Basically, unless you're born into such a society, it's unlikely to work well. The biggest problem is really just jealousy.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-02-17 10:44pm

Jealousy.. Thats why its best to get with someone whos just as slutty as you!

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-02-17 10:45pm

I don't think it's a good idea, and I would never do it. However, I have serious misgivings about forcing the societal notion of monogamy upon others with the threat of imprisonment.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-02-17 11:01pm

I could not do it. I do not think it can work in a North American or European environment. It requires a certain cultural mind set, and I think even in that case, the women get the short end of the stick.

Sokar · Post by **Sokar** » 2003-02-17 11:05pm

Its entirely possible for it to work , but in a culture like ours where possession and individualisim is a major facets of our shared cultural archetype it makes it very difficult. I also disagree with the criminalization of polygamy and polyandry. Many of these laws are left-overs from the era of Mormon persecution in North America and really have no place in modern society, although I'm sure the fundies would have a field day with any such move to strike thoes inane laws from the books.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-02-17 11:15pm

I think polygamy is always going to be one of those alternative lifestyles that it will always be safe to condemn. That said, the government doesn't need to be involved in this sort of thing.

Rubberanvil · Post by **Rubberanvil** » 2003-02-18 02:28am

Durran Korr wrote: That said, the government doesn't need to be involved in this sort of thing.

That never stop any Govt. before.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2003-02-18 12:33pm

SAMAS wrote:While cleaning out my room, I found an old issue of an independent newspaper about multiple-partner marriages. Then game the debates in the OSF board about Tenchi Muyo, and I was also playing Skies of Arcadia. It's finally gotten to the point where I have to ask around here:

Siimply put, do you think it's alright, or even possible, to marry more than one person?

Also, how many people do you think you could handle beeing married to?

This is illegal and can get you procescuted in many States, especially if you applied for multiple marriage liscenses (the only way for any marriage to be legal in most states).

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2003-02-18 03:01pm

In nearly all societies (including, to a lesser extent ours), women have a history of being treated as property, at least in that they are not considered to own their husband's property with him. This state of affairs is changing globally, but it has existed in many societies for a long time.
Women are expected to marry, as their only percieved role in many cultures is as a wife and mother. Men can generally remain single if they want. Again, to a lesser extent, we can observe remants of this idea in Western culture as well as elsewhere. I'm symplifying this situation immensely in this post, to amplify the differences between polygyny and monogamy and their effects on women

OK, having established that, Polygyny vs monogamy:
In polygynous cultures, wives are a valued commodity and a status symbol: something to be proud of. As such, many societies have the tradition of brideprice - the husband 'buys' his wife off her parents; daughters, therefore, can be a valuable asset, and are prized more than the younger sons (assuming patrilinear inheritance, where the first son is always wanted)

In [socially enforced] monogamous cultures, there is more pressure on the woman to find herself a husband, as an unmarried daughter is a shame and a burdern in a way unmarried sons are not. In these cultures, the dowry is common - parents pay their son in law to take their daughter away. Daughters, therefore are a sap on the welath of a family, and it is in these cultures where gender-biased nutrition and female infanticide are common.

Of course, the ideal would be to not treat women as property, but I'd rather be a valued piece of property than a burden.

Me, I could imagine being in a relationship with more than one person, if I loved and trusted them equally.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2003-02-18 05:09pm

I'm not sure if this applies to the original question, but my wife and I have had an open relationship for 10 years (legally married for only 6, though). Neither of us has actually taken advantage of that "open" status for about 5 years, mostly because we can't find people that interest us that we also consider emotionally stable enough to participate (i.e., my wife and I don't get jealous, but we don't trust the third party not to).

I shall now await the string of comments on our strangeness...

SAMAS · Post by **SAMAS** » 2003-02-18 05:15pm

Ted C wrote:I'm not sure if this applies to the original question, but my wife and I have had an open relationship for 10 years (legally married for only 6, though). Neither of us has actually taken advantage of that "open" status for about 5 years, mostly because we can't find people that interest us that we also consider emotionally stable enough to participate (i.e., my wife and I don't get jealous, but we don't trust the third party not to).

I shall now await the string of comments on our strangeness...

You sound like some of the triads, as it were, in the article. Legally, the man was only married to one of the women involved, but after that, they were all one big, happy family, complete with children.

I can't really call you wierd. If(when) you find that Third, I'll say good for you. Personally, I don't know if I could handle two partners, and I dunno about being a second partner, either(Remember, Polyandry is 2+ husbands), but if someone else can make it work, they should go for it.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-02-18 06:33pm

Ted, you cute and bi? >D

SAMAS · Post by **SAMAS** » 2003-02-18 06:46pm

kojikun wrote:Ted, you cute and bi? >D

*whap*

Don't you remember English class? You should never end a sentence with a proposition!

Shaka[Zulu] · Post by **Shaka[Zulu]** » 2003-02-18 07:08pm

interesting little topic here... perhaps it could benefit somewhat from the insertion of some evolutionary biology.

first, let us establish certain facts regarding the vast majority of mammalian species:

1) males are typically outnumbered by females, due to various factors including but not limited to differing birth ratios (iirc from bio, 3 fems *should* be born for each male in the case of humans), susceptibility to death in adolescence from illness or injury, increased mortality due to the propensity for males to get involved in conflict etc.

2) a single male can service the reproductive needs of an effectively unlimited number of females, barring interference from other males or, in the case of humans, cultural taboos.

3) males can successfully sire offspring throughout their entire adult life, barring illness or injury

4) females are the principal (possibly the sole) determinant of rate of reproduction (increase in population) of a species, as they can only safely bear a certain maximum number of offspring at a time, and pregnancy takes them out of the great game for extended periods.

5) females can only bear offspring for a limited time during adulthood. for humans, this typically ranges from the ages of 13 thru 35, with outer limits of 7 years and 45 years in certain extreme examples.

Ill post my thoughts on the ramifications this has on the polygamy/polyandry thing later... for now, if anybody has anything to add to the above, feel free.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2003-02-18 10:10pm

If everyone in the relationship is open and gets along well, I say go for it.

I probably won't be able to handle more than one partner.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-02-18 10:12pm

So long as it's allowed equally then i see no reason to bar it.

Shaka[Zulu] · Post by **Shaka[Zulu]** » 2003-02-18 10:33pm

Stormbringer wrote:So long as it's allowed equally then i see no reason to bar it.

unfortunately I dont think it can really work in a truly equal fashion. You see, in the great game that is the battle of the sexes, women hold the ultimate trump card -- for every reproductive strategy males might utilize to ensure that their sperm is THE sperm that gets to the egg, it can all be rendered moot by the fact that human females can effectively select whose sperm gets there simply by the timing of the big 'O'. Marriage & other taboos where women are treated as property were for a very long time the premiere means of ensuring that the guy who was supposed to be the daddy was in fact the daddy (and it didnt work all that well), thus putting men on a semi-equal level of control vs the 'fairer' gender. Only recently (in the last 50 years), with the advent of DNA screening, can any man be certain of the lineage of his offspring.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2003-02-18 10:55pm

SAMAS wrote: You sound like some of the triads, as it were, in the article. Legally, the man was only married to one of the women involved, but after that, they were all one big, happy family, complete with children.

What my wife and I practiced was only remotely related to polygamy. We never intended to have lasting relationships with anyone but each other, and we made that clear to our other partners.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2003-02-18 10:57pm

kojikun wrote:Ted, you cute and bi? >D

My wife keeps telling me I'm cute, but I am quite straight (not that men haven't tried).

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2003-02-19 04:49am

Shaka[Zulu] wrote:interesting little topic here... perhaps it could benefit somewhat from the insertion of some evolutionary biology.

--snip--

Ill post my thoughts on the ramifications this has on the polygamy/polyandry thing later... for now, if anybody has anything to add to the above, feel free.

All fine, but you forgot the issue of childcare - humans have extended childhoods and unusually dependant neonates, so biparental care is needed (parallels with birds of prey)
Sorry, in a hurry, so I'll leave it there.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Polygamy/Polyandry

Polygamy/Polyandry

Re: Polygamy/Polyandry