If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Why is polygamy illegal?
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
It's only really in Western cultures that monogamy is considered immoral.
Even still, why is it that polygamy is unlawful? Why can't a man (or even a woman) possess more than one spouse?
Even still, why is it that polygamy is unlawful? Why can't a man (or even a woman) possess more than one spouse?
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Don't you mean, "It's only really in Western cultures that polygamy is concidered immoral"?
Biblical it is allowed. Hence why mormones don't forbid it. And practice this, despite of having governments trying to stop it.
Heard a story of why it is forbidden by law. Just that I can't remember it. Will get back to you if I find out.
Personally when I will eventually get married in around 50 years from now, maybe a bit more, then I wouldn't want to share my husband.
Why? Pure jealousy.
Don't think that a three-way marriage can work.
Though lawfully, I think that it's something o do with women in situations like these being opressed. Being used merely as objects by their husbands. Doing house-chores and taking turns of giving him pleasure.
As for polygamy, I think it's something to do with the division of property and income or something. And as most of America, Europe and other Christian countries are either Protestant, Catholic or Baptist, polygamy is forbidden by those churches.
Since when is monogamy concidered immoral, in the west?
Human will make whatever form of marriage is best suited to the situation work -- that's what marriage is for. The Mormons took on polygyny because many of their men died on the trek west, so allowing one man to have many wives was the logical thing to do. The institition of marriage is as adaptable as the humans that thought it up -- and they did that long before any church or state dared to try and codify it.
Why is monogamy considered the 'true' way in the West? Because it has worked for so long, and been customary for so long, that it has acquired sacred status. Fashions become customs become traditions become unbreakable moral codes.
If, in the future, some different system serves the purpose of marriage better, humans will adopt it: be it polygyny, polyandry, some form of plural or line marriage. The legality is irrelevant in the face of what works.
See the above. I can see your point, though.
Fact is, there are more women than men;
women fare better in a proper polygamous household;
mormons proved this years ago...there are fewer children per woman in a polygamous household than in a monagamous relationship!
Now, about polyandry...choise of Tibet, Nepal, and high places East!:D
You mean 'serial monogamy', surely? A la Liz Taylor: married 14 times.
Seriously? I was wondering if there were any real-world examples of polyandrous marriages...
Oh and Mormons did not logically arrive at polygamy because of the trek Westward, it was am original tenet of the religion from the time Joseph Smith first began proselytising. Not surprising given the fact that he was a reknown town drunkard and womaniser.
Actually during the trek Westward the Mormons split into two factions, those adhering to the original practice of polygamy and those who decided it was immoral. Those that ceased to practice it were the branch that finally settled in Salt Lake City and to compensate they began the more mystical practice of "celestial marriage" whereby (to this day) a man can have any number of symbolic marriages performed with any number of women (already married or not) in preparation for the afterlife when they believe he will then be joined with all his "celestial" wives.
Does anyone know, when monogamy became the norm, and polygame got "out-fashioned"? Under which circumstances?
Lawfully, there must be some attempt of a logical explenation. Or at least there should be.
I could be wrong and welcome any sociological evidence to the contrary, but it seems to me that polygamy arose out of collective society with the move from rural agrarian based culture to an urban environment where mass human interaction became a facet of daily life.
I'd be interested if anyone has links to any such analysis either way.
Apart from that we do have biblical accounts, which, while to many perhaps dubious, are at least recognised to date back to at least 2000 B.C. and which (apart from select exceptions) point to an already well established morality leaning more toward monomgamy rather than polygamy.
* Agree *
Many species of animals mate for life, is it so hard to believe that humanities natural instinct is to form a monogamous relationship within which to raise offspring? If not, why is it considered so immoral to cheat on long term spouces? Granted this could be due to western traditions but surely as jealousy seems to be such a fundamental part of the human personality its roots lay deeper than simply habbit?
Only if you use western culture as the only source...
Well, if we look at the whole of the animal kingdom, we see a great variety in mating practices -- and the mammals aren't far behind in their variety. Some species do mate for life, practising lifelong monogamy (I believe this is the case with some avians -- owls, IIRC). Others go for serial monogamy, choosing a single partner for each breeding season. Many of the larger mammals (the large cats, the great apes) have an 'alpha male' who has a polygynous 'marriage' to all the females in the group until he is overthrown. Dolphins, on the other hand, even have sex for fun.
My point, really, is that we have only the scantiest idea what human coupling customs were in our earliest days, and that the animal kingdom provides such a plethora of examples that we cannot make any decent inferences from there, either.
Yet the Arab Islamic world has urban centres, and polygamy is still in operation there...
And many more species of animal do not mate for life. Mama fish and papa fish produce their kiddies with barely a nodding acquaintance.
Indeed. But none of what you said in the snippet above is specific to monogamous marriage, or indeed to any kind of marriage. It is also considered 'immoral' to cheat on one of one's wives, or friends, or business partners, or national allies.
Apart from avians, one can also witness lifelong monogamy with whales and dolphins as additional examples.
As for what xertain Arab societies do, remember that polygamy is a facet of the religion not some inherent trait of the people themselves. And since Islam began around the 7th century it doesnt quite qualify as an indication of mankind's root sexual practices.
I know. I deliberately threw my net far and wide to illustrate the variety.
Well, if you want to argue it that way, the only way we can guess at mankind's earliest sexual and marital practices is to make guesses based on placements of skeletons in ancient graves, really, isn't it? Written records only go back so far... and I'm pretty sure many of the 'earliest' records would refer to 'wives' as much as 'wife.'
The other option, of course, is to look at our closest relatives in the animal kingdom. As I indicated, there is variation even there, and the great ape species are prone to alpha-male polygamy, harems and all.
As a minor point, I take slight issue with your implication that religion is not somehow an inherent trait of people. Surely it is an attribute, like hair colour, physical constitution, diet &c.?
Spirituality is, but not necessarily religion.
Can you provide an example of a culture that did not have religion as an integral part of it? Religion, not organized religion.
reposted so you can try again...
As for written records, well if you are not aware, we have written records from developed cultures that pre-date the rise of Arab culture by at least 2 millenia and perhaps more
What evidence we have of early cultures (worldwide) indicates polygamy was common across a number of cultures, far more common than monogamy.
Not sociology. The bulk of the evidence is historic or anthropologic, plus some linguistic evidence. Read Guns, Germs and Steel for an understanding of how linguistics is used to establish historic information.
As for polygamy:
Asia:
Tai Kadai people openly practiced polygamy extensively until very recently (and still practice it extensively, just not as openly).
Austroasiatic people practiced polygamy until the widespread introduction of Christianity. Communism put the final nail in the coffin on open practice (although it is still practiced, again not openly).
Miao-Yao still practice polygamy.
Many austronesian peoples practiced polygamy until the introduction of missionaries. Verbal histories are strong in this part of the world and very clear.
Africa:
What limited evidence we have indicates that Pygmies practiced polygamy until their disappearance.
Africa's "Whites" (the Arabic peoples..includes Israelis, Morroccans, etc.) practiced and practice polygamy for thousands of years.
Africa's "Blacks" are very varied in their particular cultures and it is extremely difficult to get any data on their existence from more than a few hundred years ago.
The Khoisan are also difficult to get any data on their existence from more than a few hundred years ago.
Madagascar's austronesian population practiced polygamy when discovered.
America:
At least some native American tribes and civilizations practiced polygamy. A very common form of polygamy seems to be for a man to marry his brother's wife (regardless of if he already had a wife) if his brother was killed.
Europe:
Only in Europe does monogamy seem to be more common than polygamy, and the data is inconclusive given that the Catholic Church has a history of modifying and destroying evidence which contradicts that which they want believed.
I must point out one of the requirements for this is that the husband MUST treat the wives equally (which can be very hard). The actual % of Muslims having more than 1 wife is tiny.
Polygamy condemns Islam only if it condemns Christianity. (It is Christian culture, not the Christian religion, which has prohibited polygamy. In the Bible Paul has recommended monogamy for bishops and Jesus has spoken of the sanctity of the union but no Bible verse prohibits the practice.)
Why Marriage to More Than One Woman is Permitted in Islam
Islam is the last and final word of God, ending the series of His messages to mankind. It therefore came with a general law suitable for all times and places, and for the whole of humanity. It did not legislate for the city dweller only, while neglecting the nomad, nor for the cold regions while ignoring the hot ones, nor for one particular period of time, forgetting later times and the generations to come.
Islam recognizes the needs and interests of all people, of individuals as well as groups. And among human beings one finds that individual who has a strong desire for children but whose wife is barren, chronically ill, or has some other problem. Would it not be more considerate on her part and better for him the marry a second wife who can bear him children, while retaining the first wife with all her rights guaranteed?
Then there may also be the case of a man whose desire for sex is strong, while his wife has little desire for it, or who is chronically ill, has long menstrual periods, or the like, while her husband is unable to restrain his sexual urge. Should it not be permitted to him to marry a second wife instead of his hunting around for girlfriends?
There are also times when women outnumber men, as for example after wars which often decimate the ranks of men. In such a situation it is in the interests of the society and of women themselves that they become co-wives to a man instead of spending their entire lives without marriage, deprived of the peace, affection, and protection of marital life and the joy of motherhood for which they naturally yearn with all their hearts.
Only three possible alternatives exist for such surplus women who are not married as first wives:
-to pass their whole lives in bitter deprivation;
-to become sex objects and playthings for lecherous men; or
-to become co-wives to men who are able to support more than one wife and who will treat them kindly.
Unquestionably, the last alternative is the correct solution, a healing remedy for this problem, and that is the judgement of Islam: "And Who is better than God in judgement, for a people who have certain faith?" (Qur'an 5:53)
For this is the Islamic "polygamy" which people in the West consider so abhorrent and to which they react with such hostility, while their own men are free to have any number of girlfriends, without restriction and without any legal or moral accountability, either in respect to the woman or to the children she may bear as a result of this irreligious and immoral plurality of extra-marital relationships. Let the two alternatives plurality of wives or plurality of illicit affairs be compared, and let people ask themselves which is the proper course of action, and which of the two groups is correctly guided.
and what about if the husband is the one firing blanks??? Would it be ok for the wife to go out and get herself another husband?
Okay, Harlequin, a quick dictionary lesson for you. (Courtesy of www.dictionary.com)
So, for one thing, your initial criticism was wrong. Polygamy does not imply that "there would not be enough women to go round" as it admits both polygyny and polyandry. Secondly, you seem to assume that every man should have a wife -- why? Would you be willing to admit polygamous marriages in which the numbers of co-wives and co-husbands were equal? What about same-sex marriages (or marriages in which the numbers of co-wives and co-husbands were unequal)?