Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: JRochelle
Well if polygamy were ever legal in this country, polygyny would be too.

Polyandry (what you meant) is a woman with more than one husband, polygyny is a man with more than one wife.

Polyandry has virtually no historical precedent because the strongest man in such a relationship will simply kill his rivals and take the woman for himself - it's a biological reality in mammalian species. Men don't share. ;)

Polygyny was historically common because wars killed off a disproportionate number of young men. For a young woman facing economic hardship, being one of several wives to a wealthy and powerful man was not a bad deal.

Polyamory is in fact perfectly legal (see: Hefner, Hugh) - it's just that government-defined marriage and its attendant benefits can only legally be conferred on one other person at a time. And polyamory is widely practiced informally - there are plenty of women out there who would rather have 33% of Brad Pitt than 100% of Morty the Accountant. I don't think polygamy will be legalized any time soon, however, because it messes up government projections for things like Social Security in a way that gay marriage doesn't.

183 posted on 04/06/2006 7:13:53 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("When the government is invasive, the people are wanting." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies ]


To: Mr. Jeeves
Only stupid women share.

I'd rather have 100% of Morty than 50% of Brad Pitt.

I'm sure you would rather have 33% of Pamela Anderson than 100% of Helen Thomas.
It amazes me that so many of the participants in these posts seem to have no problem with polygamy but find polyandry objectionable.
184 posted on 04/06/2006 7:27:31 AM PDT by JRochelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson