Anonymous #4 57w

It’s when 1 man has multiple wives

-1

Anonymous #5 57w

I have women in my family who are happily married in polygamous marriages. Where’s your evidence that it doesn’t work? Does free for all dating work? What’s the alternative solutions to the epidemics we are facing?

-3

Anonymous OP 57w

U do the research. Why r u expecting the woman to do the work for u and hand it to u on a silver platter.? Ohhh I know why….

6

Anonymous #2 57w

Tell me what research should I do? What work am I expecting women to do? Can you enlighten me please

0

Anonymous OP 57w

1. Women are much more emotion driven than men; I can promise you there is guaranteed jealousy within those groups. Every poly relationship i’ve witnessed has always been a disaster, the worst ones involving attempted murder. Just look up any article online about how most of them end up. Free for all dating never works because, again, jealousy. It causes too much tension. Alternative solutions is both men and women moving towards dating culture again instead of a one night stand type of deal

1

Anonymous #5 57w

Yes these are poorly structured polygamous relationships, the same as the poorly structured mono marriages that end in disaster and death. I’m suggesting a structured one with strict rules. Dating culture is favoured to what we have today in terms of the problems we’ve discussed but it’s not a solution to the problems we have as a result of free for all dating. Jealousy is a healthy emotion that can be managed in a healthy structured polygamous relationship

-1

Anonymous #8 57w

You’re right mr spell check, I’m glad you’re here to make sure I get my point across properly. Thank you for your support. Regardless of the misuse of the word, I’ve made my points clearly in the replies

-5

Anonymous #6 57w

Yes I used the wrong word. Thank you

-1

Anonymous #7 57w

I am Muslim but I haven’t made any argument from a Muslim perspective

1

Anonymous #9 57w

How can we resolve the issue then? How can we make people care? I’m saying allow the men to have multiple wives so they can take on the single mothers as wives, giving them safety, financial security and strong male role models for the their children. This fixes the single mother’s epidemic. If someone doesn’t want to live like this there’s no issue, I haven’t said every woman must accept her husband to have other wives

-3

Anonymous OP 57w

Financial security?? bro, two working parents have a hard enough time providing for a family as it is. And if a single mother wants a husband - she can still marry a single guy?? Again, we’re not short on guys that want to be fathers

6

Anonymous OP 57w

I get wanting to reform our system of marriage so that different relationship structures work, but saying “polygamy is objectively good for kids” is a big stretch at best.

11

Anonymous OP 57w

Monogamy is not the reason for any of these issues; it is also not unique to western societies lol. What you tend to find as you look deeper into the nature of fatherless households is that these are predominantly lower income households, for whom opportunities for economic advancement and financial security are pretty limited. I’d sooner focus on that than trying to make society embrace polyamory on a major scale

6

Anonymous OP 57w

Yeah if this was the norm and expected of me, I would never want to get married and I think manyy women would agree. I could not handle a husband so much as flirting with another woman. Nope.

3

Anonymous #11 57w

And if you’re a man and wouldn’t want your wife marrying and having sex with a lot of other men constantly then you especially have no right to force this narrative

2

Anonymous #9 57w

If the husband is not financially capable of taking care of the wives then he is not fulfilling his duties as a husband. Yes single mothers can marry single guys buts it’s rare of a single guy to be interested in a single mother, and she also has to trust this new guy in the modern dating world that he won’t do the same thing the last one did. Whereas if she is looking specifically for a man who is financially secure enough to support his current wife and have a second one this solves that prob

-2

Anonymous #9 57w

You haven’t shown that it’s bad for kids, I’ve explained why I think it’s good for them and I haven’t seen a counter argument that proves otherwise

-3

Anonymous OP 57w

I’m not saying it’s objectively bad. Im saying that it’s not fixing anything whatsoever. Also you can’t just hand wave the cost of supporting a family with “it’s his duty as a husband”, that doesn’t get people paid lmao. if we can just assume that relationships work out perfectly and everyone is capable of “fulfilling their duties”, that already solves everything without adding more wives to the average family.

3

Anonymous #11 57w

That’s your personal preference and that’s perfectly fine. I’m not saying all women should be okay with it and it should be expected of everyone

1

Anonymous #11 57w

I will never have any right to force any narrative I completely agree with you. Regardless what you’re saying doesn’t address the topic of conversation and doesn’t take away from the benefits of men having multiple wives does for society

1

Anonymous #9 57w

I’m not saying every man will now be forced to earn because they will have to fulfil their duties. I’ve said the men who are not capable of financially supporting this structured set up shouldn’t be involved in it

1

Anonymous OP 57w

It just seems to me like this plan/idea only even kinda works for people who are already well off, and with a guarantee of family stability. Any family who fits that criteria isn’t struggling with what you’re trying to solve. It’s parents without stable incomes that are currently struggling to raise their kids. Do you not see how telling them “just marry someone who can support you!” is not going to be well received? Even without them becoming a second wife/husband.

1

Anonymous OP 57w

Why do you think this would better encourage parenting than anything else? How is “marry more people, in order to support them” a better idea than “help out those less fortunate and create supportive communities”, for example? Just because it takes a village to raise a kid doesn’t mean everyone involved has to be married. I don’t see how more spouses is helpful for kids in any way in the majority of situations.

1

Anonymous #9 57w

I didn’t claim it would better encourage parenting than anything else. I haven’t denied helping people is a good thing, so therefore I’ve never claimed anyone who helps a fatherless child must be married. What I said is that this would help solve the wide spread problems we currently have in the west. Can you tell me why what I’m suggesting is a bad thing rather than a good thing? What’s your alternative solution to address these problems?

0

Anonymous #9 57w

Yes 100% it only works if the husband who is marrying multiple wives is capable of looking after them financially, emotionally and physically. What do you mean any family that fits the criteria doesn’t exist, your criteria is for the men and they do exist? Why wouldn’t a single mother marrying a capable man for support be well received?

-2

Anonymous OP 57w

This just sounds like weird traditionalism then, if you only care about the men. “The best, most successful men should get more wives”. Is that what you’re saying? This is circular reasoning, you’re just saying “well yeah it works, if it fits the criteria for it working”

5

Anonymous OP 57w

I think you misinterpreted what I meant. Any family that already currently has financial and familial stability, doesn’t benefit from what you’re proposing. This would only be a benefit in the particular case of single mothers marrying into a well off family, which as I explained, seems like an objectifying and condescending solution whether it involves polygamy or not.

3

Anonymous #9 57w

You can word it that way, I don’t have a problem with that. I would say it’s less that the more successful men should have more wives, it’s that the successful men should have the option. What’s the circular reasoning? I’ve these are the issues and I think this would solve these issues, which isn’t circular

1

Anonymous #9 57w

I’ve specifically said that society would benefit as a whole because the issues I’ve mentioned would be addressed? Are you saying they wouldn’t be? I’m not sure what’s objectifying or condescending about it, we can talk more about it if you explain it further

1

Anonymous OP 57w

I’m calling the initial conditions you’re using circular reasoning, not your overall idea. Yes, polygamy would be financially viable in cases where the father can support the whole family, that’s just.. how that works, it’s not an argument. It doesn’t mean it’s financially viable the majority of the time. I also am a bit unsure on your criteria for fixing societal issues, It’s hard to offer better solutions if I don’t know what your specific goals are besides lowering single parenthood.

1

Anonymous OP 57w

I’m saying that it’s condescending and objectifying because the point of marriage is loving commitment, not just financial support and a father for your kid. It’s one thing to say poly marriage should be legal, it’s another to say that single mothers should marry into families just for their kids to have a dad of some sort. In the cases where this makes sense from a personal relationship standpoint and not purely a financial one… it already happens. Just without a fancy document.

1

Anonymous OP 57w

Most of the issues I would associate with single parenthood revolve around lack of ability to put time towards parenting, since the parent needs to work. So polygamy only creates a benefit under extreme wealth disparity, where splitting one high paycheck across a 5 parent family is more viable than one average paycheck across 2 parents, for example. Without that wealth disparity, this would just mean marriage in general is good for parenting time.

1

Anonymous #9 57w

You’re saying the reasoning is circular because I’m saying it’s only viable for financially capable men? I haven’t said it’s financially viable majority of the time. To clarify the reasons it’s better for society- it allows single mothers a more stable way of living, it provides strong father figures for children living in single mother households, it reduces the burden on the economy because the government would not be required to support the single mother because the husband is now supporting

0

Anonymous #9 57w

The point of marriage is not loving commitment. It’s a structured way of reaching emotional, social and practical goals. Human beings use each other and there’s nothing wrong with that. In this case the woman would seek husband who can support her and her child and who is capable of taking on that role, and the man would be allowed to have a second wife which is a privilege for him

-1

Anonymous #9 57w

Yes I agree with you, it only works if the man is financially capable

-1

Anonymous OP 57w

You need a lot more than finances…

3

Anonymous #2 57w

A lot more than what? If you’re not financially capable of supporting a family then you shouldn’t try to support one

0

Anonymous OP 57w

I feel like you’re purposely misunderstanding everybody’s points to try and make yourself feel better about your own argument

5

Anonymous #2 57w

What have I misunderstood?

-1

Anonymous OP 57w

well, then we’ve reached the point where our argument breaks down. I believe a marriage should mean more to both parties than an exchange of financial security for the “privilege” of adding a wife to the collection. If you don’t, that’s fine, but that’s one of the primary places you’ll lose people in this train of thought.

5

Anonymous #9 57w

I haven’t said it’s nothing but an exchange. I said this is the primary reason you seek it out, even in successful monogamous relationship you see the same thing. You admire good things about this person and you see they will benefit you so you focus on building a relationship with them. Of course when building the relationship other things come like love and trust and all the rest. I believe the same thing as you so there is no breakdown

0

Anonymous #10 57w

I haven’t said monogamy is the reason for the issues, nor have I said it’s unique to western society. I’m not against improving financial security of all people. You haven’t addressed any of the points I’ve made

1