4 ms·
Polygamy encourages the objectification of women. Marriage ceases to be a union of equals in which there is a total self-giving of spouses to one another. While
by bobthechef 7y ago
Polygamy encourages the objectification of women. Marriage ceases to be a union of equals in which there is a total self-giving of spouses to one another. While we has become dull to and ignorant of an understanding of the essence and purpose of marriage (years before the last two decades, I might add), it is a union which is unitive and procreative in principle. The unitive and the procreative are not separable. The unitive is ordered toward the good of the family (and, of course, by extension society).
While monogamous marriages can be defective in practice, they are not so in principle. Polygamous marriages, on the other hand, impose these defects in principle.
There may be a similarity here with hookup culture, that is, a polygamous culture seems to likewise, though perhaps to a lesser degree, encourage men to view women as mere instruments of sexual gratification. Harvey Weinstein is in essence not some exception, but the poster child for our age.
Far from denigrating women as has been falsely claimed by some, the Christian (specifically Catholic) defense of insoluble, monogamous marriages was one of many ways in which woman was saved from the disordered predations common in human societies throughout history.
(P.S. A relatively recent philosophical tract worth reading is the late Karol Wojtyla's "Love and Responsibility".)
- cheez 7y agoThere are many women who would take the trade off of being loved by a man who loves multiple women over never being loved. The reverse is not so true though.
- dominotw 7y agoWould you be ok with form of polygamy where a woman has multiple husbands ?
- bobthechef 7y agoThat's polyandry, but terminology aside, the same problem vis-a-vis what I've written still exists. There may be sex-specific problems that result from polyandry vs. polygamy, but the same problems mentioned above remain.
- dominotw 7y ago> but the same problems mentioned above remain. Polyandry also objectifies women? how? > That's polyandry, polygamy is a superset of polyandry per dictionary. Your original comment was about polygamy.
- bobthechef 7y agoW.r.t. polyandry, yes, you're right. I was thinking polygyny. My mistake. In terms of polyandry, I meant the non-sex specific, general defects still hold. Certainly, polyandry specifically inflicts a defective relationship on the males, but given the asymmetrical responsibilities between the sexes, the result would likewise be detrimental to women. (Of course, where the latter point is concerned, it is the same with polygyny vis-a-vis men. It's not as if a man is honoring his nature by being a polygamist. It is to his detriment as well.)
- scarface74 7y agoFrom a moral standpoint no. I don’t think this would work out as well from an evolutionary standpoint, if you believe that men are driven to have as many children as possible, a woman can only have one man’s child at a time. A man can get multiple women pregnant.
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y agoYou understand neither morality nor evolution.
- scarface74 7y agoI’m not arguing morality I really don’t care what two or more consenting adults do. I think the most “moral” thing we can do as a society is to leave other people the hell alone to live their own life.
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y agoIn case you hadn't noticed: All you are making is assertions. Some of those assertions probably have a tradition behind them, but they aren't any more insightful than "people who choose nicknames beginning with 'b' are stupid in principle". We understand you believe that, but that doesn't make those assertions any more sensible.