3 ms·

So you really believe that physical coercion to marry high-status males is caused by (i.e., is an "outcome" of) the practice of polygamy? Forced polygyny does

So you really believe that physical coercion to marry high-status males is caused by (i.e., is an "outcome" of) the practice of polygamy? Forced polygyny does not just happen, someone has to have the power to force it. That someone exactly he who benefits from the practice: high-status men – by definition, the patriarchy. Is being physically coerced to marry someone worse than being economically incentivized to? Of course, I'm not arguing that. Is being formally ostracized for refusing to marry someone of high status worse than being informally ostracized for refusing to marry someone of low status? Yes, but by degrees. Yes, you can replace formal ostracism with informal ostracism by normalizing monogamy, but it's still going to happen so long as a patriarchal power imbalance remains in place. (Doubt that informal ostracism happens? Women who choose not to marry have historically been excluded from mainstream society in western society. Hence the trope of the isolated spinster/widow, and the prevalence of prostitution as a means of earning for women who choose to stay single.)

Nursie 9y ago
>> So you really believe that physical coercion to marry high-status males is caused by (i.e., is an "outcome" of) the practice of polygamy? No, I believe that when we look at historical or contemporary examples of societies or sub-cultures in which polygamy is practised, we tend to see forced marriages. I'm not saying either is the cause of the other, but that they are associated, and I agree very much that they both take place in highly patriarchal societies. I'm also not sure why you keep talking about status and what your issue is with people choosing monogamy. You don't have to if you don't want to, and it's no longer the case that a woman can't support herself adequately.
- colanderman 9y ago
  > I agree very much that they both take place in highly patriarchal societies. Then why are we arguing? > what your issue is with people choosing monogamy I have no such issue? You are putting words in my mouth. Perhaps this is why we are arguing. All I take issue with is the GP's assertion that polygamy is the cause of the "lost boys" problem. I claim it's not, patriarchy promulgated by high-status males is. Remove polygamy and all you've done is democratize power among males, without addressing the problem of patriarchy. Remove patriarchy and polygamy is no longer problematic. > it's no longer the case that a woman can't support herself adequately. Western society has made strides in that direction, yes. And beside the decrease in social ostracism of single females, it is argued that the rise of feminism has driven the rise in consensual polyamory [1], supporting my above point. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyamory#Philosophical_aspects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyamory#Philosophical_aspect...
  - Nursie 9y ago
    >> Then why are we arguing? I'm not really sure. >> All I take issue with is the GP's assertion that polygamy is the cause of the "lost boys" problem. I claim it's not, patriarchy promulgated by high-status males is. I'd say it's an intermediate cause, or even an immediate cause and the patriarchy is at the root of it in all examples that we have to look at. If, somehow, consensual polygyny became the norm then we could end up with some of the same societal problems re: pools of unmarried/unattached men. >> Remove patriarchy and polygamy is no longer problematic. Well sure, no longer problematic in as much as no longer forcing people to marry others, but it may still cause societal problems. I'm not advocating it be outlawed for those reasons, FYI, just looking at possibilities. I do think it's fairly unlikely that widespread polygamy would happen outside of the patriarchal constraints, and certainly I'm not sure I know of any examples of polygamous societies having existed without such. Polyamory is a different beast entirely of course.

Nursie 9y ago

>> So you really believe that physical coercion to marry high-status males is caused by (i.e., is an "outcome" of) the practice of polygamy? No, I believe that when we look at historical or contemporary examples of societies or sub-cultures in which polygamy is practised, we tend to see forced marriages. I'm not saying either is the cause of the other, but that they are associated, and I agree very much that they both take place in highly patriarchal societies. I'm also not sure why you keep talking about status and what your issue is with people choosing monogamy. You don't have to if you don't want to, and it's no longer the case that a woman can't support herself adequately.

colanderman 9y ago
> I agree very much that they both take place in highly patriarchal societies. Then why are we arguing? > what your issue is with people choosing monogamy I have no such issue? You are putting words in my mouth. Perhaps this is why we are arguing. All I take issue with is the GP's assertion that polygamy is the cause of the "lost boys" problem. I claim it's not, patriarchy promulgated by high-status males is. Remove polygamy and all you've done is democratize power among males, without addressing the problem of patriarchy. Remove patriarchy and polygamy is no longer problematic. > it's no longer the case that a woman can't support herself adequately. Western society has made strides in that direction, yes. And beside the decrease in social ostracism of single females, it is argued that the rise of feminism has driven the rise in consensual polyamory [1], supporting my above point. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyamory#Philosophical_aspects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyamory#Philosophical_aspect...
- Nursie 9y ago
  >> Then why are we arguing? I'm not really sure. >> All I take issue with is the GP's assertion that polygamy is the cause of the "lost boys" problem. I claim it's not, patriarchy promulgated by high-status males is. I'd say it's an intermediate cause, or even an immediate cause and the patriarchy is at the root of it in all examples that we have to look at. If, somehow, consensual polygyny became the norm then we could end up with some of the same societal problems re: pools of unmarried/unattached men. >> Remove patriarchy and polygamy is no longer problematic. Well sure, no longer problematic in as much as no longer forcing people to marry others, but it may still cause societal problems. I'm not advocating it be outlawed for those reasons, FYI, just looking at possibilities. I do think it's fairly unlikely that widespread polygamy would happen outside of the patriarchal constraints, and certainly I'm not sure I know of any examples of polygamous societies having existed without such. Polyamory is a different beast entirely of course.