When there is resource inequality among men—the case in every human society—most women benefit from polygyny: women can share a wealthy man. Under monogamy, they are stuck with marrying a poorer man.

This is part of a story published in Psychology Today. The full story in here:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200706/ten-politically-incorrect-truths-about-human-nature

I'd like to hear the thoughts of others.


The history of western civilization aside, humans are naturally polygamous. Polyandry (a marriage of one woman to many men) is very rare, but polygyny (the marriage of one man to many women) is widely practiced in human societies, even though Judeo-Christian traditions hold that monogamy is the only natural form of marriage. We know that humans have been polygynous throughout most of history because men are taller than women.

Among primate and nonprimate species, the degree of polygyny highly correlates with the degree to which males of a species are larger than females. The more polygynous the species, the greater the size disparity between the sexes. Typically, human males are 10 percent taller and 20 percent heavier than females. This suggests that, throughout history, humans have been mildly polygynous.

Relative to monogamy, polygyny creates greater fitness variance (the distance between the "winners" and the "losers" in the reproductive game) among males than among females because it allows a few males to monopolize all the females in the group. The greater fitness variance among males creates greater pressure for men to compete with each other for mates. Only big and tall males can win mating opportunities. Among pair-bonding species like humans, in which males and females stay together to raise their children, females also prefer to mate with big and tall males because they can provide better physical protection against predators and other males.

In societies where rich men are much richer than poor men, women (and their children) are better off sharing the few wealthy men; one-half, one-quarter, or even one-tenth of a wealthy man is still better than an entire poor man. As George Bernard Shaw puts it, "The maternal instinct leads a woman to prefer a tenth share in a first-rate man to the exclusive possession of a third-rate one." Despite the fact that humans are naturally polygynous, most industrial societies are monogamous because men tend to be more or less equal in their resources compared with their ancestors in medieval times. (Inequality tends to increase as society advances in complexity from hunter-gatherer to advanced agrarian societies. Industrialization tends to decrease the level of inequality.)

What evidence would it take to convince you?

I don't agree.



This is saying that most women are all about money. Why would I want to marry someone who is rich and share him just to get a bit more money? I don't see how I'd benefit at all there.

good question,, perhaps a comparative study of the longevity of historically polygamous societies compared to historically monogamous ones,,,

One problem I see with polygamy ( besides the obvious ) ... if it was practiced everywhere, and it was very common.... I would think that we would eventually end up with a problem of inbreeding to at least a degree.
One husband with say... 5 wives can have MANY children.
So if most people in one country practiced this, my guess would be eventually there would have to be in-breeding going on.

I don't think it's saying women are all about money. If you look mainly at other poorer countries... it's more beneficial for many women to marry one rich man that can provide food, shelter, things like that, than to marry someone and they are both hungry and homeless.
Basically poor men get left out in the cold

I posted in another thread that genetic defects in the children of non related sexual partners is not any higher than those in children of incest (so long as the relation is no closer than first cousins. So as long as full blooded brothers and sisters didnt match up,,,

( I am opposed to the idea, Im just debunking the common myth people claim causes them to object to incest).

it works in Utah

I do however believe that if that's what someone really believes in, then that's what they should practice.
I don't understand why freedom of religion is a federally protected right except if you want to practice polygamy. Most of the people that practice polygamy do so for their religion.
As long it's not being forced on others, forcing young girls into marriage and such... if you want to be wife #12, go for it.
It's not something for me. I am ENTIRELY to greedy to share my husband with anyone else.