Is Polygamy bad for Society


MarginOfError
 Share

Recommended Posts

short answer- depends how it is practiced.

Good answer.

I'd also like to comment on

Children, too, appear to suffer in polygamous cultures. Henrich examines a study comparing 19th-century Mormon households, 45 of them headed by wealthy men, generally with multiple wives, and 45 headed by poorer men, generally with one wife each. What’s surprising is that the children of the poorer men actually fared better, proving more likely to survive to age 15

I think one thing that most modern people don't consider is that the more wealthy households were capable of buying medicine for their children when they were sick. This means medicines like calomel (mercury), and laudanum (opium), and many other drugs that were considered everyday medicines, but would never pass for everyday medicine today. And medicines that certainly cut short a number of lives across America in the 19th century, could it be that the parents' ability to buy the medicine did more harm than good?

The article also doesn't state where the study took place, as in rural or city. Is it a combination? Those living in the city would be exposed to more epidemics (like cholera), while those in the country would be less exposed. Pampered children of the wealthy wouldn't necessarily need to work, they could relax; while their counterparts worked behind a plow and huffed and puffed and kept their lungs clearer. Yeah there are exceptions to every rule, but there's so much that we're not being told in the article that would help us to determine whether or not it's good or bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help but notice that all the problems related to polygamy are also directly related to the 'natural man.'

That is going to be a chronic issue

Which could very well explain why it only gets commanded to be done under very special circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My great-grandfather (my name sake) was a reluctant polygamist. According to his personal journal the vast majority of polygamists in the church were perverting polygamy and marriage. He predicted (prophesied) that the church would come under condemnation for the perversions and indiscretions.

It seems to me that we are left with very few examples, even in scripture, where polygamy did not at some point add fuel to marriage and family problems that resulted in various levels of pride, jealousies, separations and abuses – and not just within individual families but in time with entire societies and nations.

However, we should also keep in mind that as with any journey of significant distance that any deviation, however slight, will have disastrous consequences. In fact, to me, it appears that very slight deviations are the most dangerous - because we can make excuses for it much easier and for much longer – being absolutely convinced that we have not errored.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help but notice that all the problems related to polygamy are also directly related to the 'natural man.'

That is going to be a chronic issue

Which could very well explain why it only gets commanded to be done under very special circumstances.

This is also one (among several) reasons that I am skeptical when people claim that polygamy will have to be restored again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for fun.... gonna rewrite a few of the quotes about the societal dangers. Not so much to show that I agree or disagree with the premise in relation to polygamy but it really was just the first thing that came to my mind as I was reading it. lol

“Monogamous marriage reduces crime,” Henrich and colleagues write, pulling together studies showing that polygynous societies create large numbers of unmarried men, whose presence is correlated with increased rates of rape, theft, murder, and substance abuse. According to Henrich, the problem with unmarried men appears to come primarily from their lack of investment in family life and in children. Young men without futures tend to engage in riskier behaviors because they have less to lose.

Marriage reduces crime. In a society of divorce it creates large numbers of unmarried men, whose presence is correlated with increased crime. The problem with unmarried men appears to come primarily from their lack of investment in the family life and in children. Young men without futures tend to engage in riskier behaviors because they have less to lose.

polygynous households foster jealousy and conflict among co-wives. Ethnographic surveys of 69 polygamous cultures “reveals no case where co-wife relations could be described as harmonious,” Henrich writes

Divorced households foster jealousy and conflict among ex-wives and step children.... reveals no case where ex-wife relations could be described as harmonious.

Some scholars suspect that polygyny may discourage paternal investment. Men with lots of children and wives are spread too thin, and to make things worse, they’re compiling resources to attract their next wives instead of using it on their existing families.

Some suspect that divorce may discourage paternal investment. Men with lots of children and ex-wives are spread too thin, and to make things worse, they're compiling resources to pay for their past wives (or look for the next wife) instead of using it on their existing families.

Polygamy may actually exacerbate inequities in wealth and gender that hurt societies, even if the institution itself appears neutral. Crime and chaos are threatening.

Divorce may actually exacerbate inequities in wealth and gender and hurt societies, even if the institution itself appears neutral. Crime and chaos are threatening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way Society is right now, yes, I would say poligamy is bad for it. Not saying it always was or is bad, just saying right now, I think it causes issues.

Women and men have it so ingrained in their minds that one man and one woman is the only way. Fairy tails, and general society point to the thought that there is a soul mate, only one soul mate out there for each person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite frankly the only difference i see between mono and poly marriages athat i really see is one provides a larger social environment which means there are going to be more social issues and more opportunnity for abuse.

If these things are looked at as negatives then we can continue down that line and say that mono marriage is also negative and that optimally people shouldn't get married or stay together for extended periods.

Right now with how marriage is in the US i don't think polygamy would provide any solution or reversal to divorce rates or co-habiting rate increases. And i think people on the whole are hardpressed enough to have the discipline to keep a single marriage without breaking it in any manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This raises a question, just out of curiosity- what would this study think if we had a matriarchal society and went the opposite direction by practicing polyandry (one woman with multiple husbands)?

Since the major complaints seem to be that unmarried men cause more societal problems by falling into crime, if all the men were married off and we instead had many unmarried women, would that solve the problems?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite frankly the only difference i see between mono and poly marriages athat i really see is one provides a larger social environment which means there are going to be more social issues and more opportunnity for abuse.

If these things are looked at as negatives then we can continue down that line and say that mono marriage is also negative and that optimally people shouldn't get married or stay together for extended periods.

Right now with how marriage is in the US i don't think polygamy would provide any solution or reversal to divorce rates or co-habiting rate increases. And i think people on the whole are hardpressed enough to have the discipline to keep a single marriage without breaking it in any manner.

I can easily argue that mono marriage - as a minimum is necessary for the preservation of human society - I know of no historical examples otherwise - not a single one. I believe thee are many historical examples of successful mono marriage spanning several successful generations in several societies. As to polygamy - can you provide even a single example that has successfully endured even 3 or 4 generations?

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This raises a question, just out of curiosity- what would this study think if we had a matriarchal society and went the opposite direction by practicing polyandry (one woman with multiple husbands)?

Since the major complaints seem to be that unmarried men cause more societal problems by falling into crime, if all the men were married off and we instead had many unmarried women, would that solve the problems?

Interesting thought, however it would be difficult since women bare children. One father can get several women pregnant, but the other way seems impractical. The wife is pregnant for 9 months, and cannot bare children any faster than one man and one woman relationship can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MOE, very interesting article.

And, as one would expect, polygynous households foster jealousy and conflict among co-wives. Ethnographic surveys of 69 polygamous cultures “reveals no case where co-wife relations could be described as harmonious,” Henrich writes, with what must be a good dose of understatement.

NatGeo had a segment on polygamy practiced somewhere in Africa (unfortunately I don't recall the area) and it highlighted this very issue. A group of polygamist women were interviewed and every one of them agreed that there was little harmony amongst co-wives. This disharmony included jealousy, being inferior to wives higher up on the totem pole, etc. Of course, the women who felt their arrangement not too painful, were the first and second wives out of five or six wives.. They expressed how having more co-wives was beneficial to them because it removed their responsibilities of chores and labour, which got delegated to the newer and younger wives. In the program, it followed one particular young woman who was the newest wife to a man that already had five wives. This woman was about seven or eight months pregnant, and was working her butt off labouring, while the first couple wives relaxed in the shade making stew..

Men with lots of children and wives are spread too thin, and to make things worse, they’re compiling resources to attract their next wives instead of using it on their existing families.

I won't judge how other people choose to live their lives but you can't possibly do any good if you're reserving and compiling all your resources (financial, emotional, physical) for courting your next potential wife, meanwhile, neglecting the needs of your current spouse and family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It'll be interesting to see if this marriage can endure the test of time. Will this turn into a bigamy or will they divorce? Seattle Woman 'Marries' Building - Indiana News Story - WRTV Indianapolis

How beautiful! Oh, the glories of human sexuality! Shame on all those Neanderthals who would deprive this woman of her perfectly legitimate marriage to the edifice of her dreams!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once the building is torn down I would assume it's declared dead and she is free to move on from the "marriage"..... or maybe she can collect life insurance upon it's death.... or they can bill her for the "burial" costs and she can foot the demolition bill.

oh so complicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I read the question I thought of the temple ordinances.

We do not simply let anyone into the temple to take out their endowments. We know that the Lord takes these covenants very seriously and those who later break them suffer very serious consequences. God will not be mocked.

The same could be said of Polygamy. It would not do to endorse that anyone who wanted to practice this principal should. We know that the Lord took such covenants very seriously and those who later abused such relationships would suffer very serious consequences. God will not be mocked.

Being a divine principal, when commanded by the Lord, if done right and not abused, then polygamy is good, acceptable and approved by the Lord.

Being a divine ordinance, when given permission by a Stake President, if done for the right reasons, in the right spirit and then kept and not broken, then the temple ordinances and covenants are good, acceptable and approved by the Lord.

Personally though? I'm glad that the Lord is no longer asking righteous priesthood holders to live this principal. Very glad.

That being said, does anyone else have the feeling or impression that there will be more women who ultimately receive a celestial glory than there will be men? If true, wouldn't this very easily explain why the Lord considers polygamy an eternal principal?

2 Nephi Chapter 14:

Zion and her daughters will be redeemed and cleansed in the millennial day--Compare Isaiah 4. About 559-545 B.C.

1 And in that day, seven women shall take hold of one man, saying: We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel; only let us be called by thy name to take away our reproach.

Isn't Isaiah prophesying of a day to come? If it was his day why would he say 'in that day'?

I recognize that not all will agree with my understanding or interpretation of the above scripture and I hope everyone will recognize that this IS simply my understanding and interpretation of the above scriptures and isn't supposed to be taken as the doctrinal view point of the LDS church but to me I see it as something that is still to come. While in the day that this was written a woman's status was indeed tied to her ability to marry and have children, I wonder about it's possible application during the millennium.

If you lived in a society where it was understood that one of the primary goals of this life was to get married and have children yet you being of marriageable age continued to remain single, would you not feel 'reproach' when over years and years well meaning friends and loved ones keep asking why you haven't gotten married and started a family yet? Would you not feel 'reproach' if in spite of the considerable amount of positive peer pressure that will be found there you remain single?

If the Lord does require worthy priesthood holders to live the law of plural marriage in the future, which is why I sincerely hope to be married before such a time should it come, I expect that some women will find it easier to find a spouse than others. Is it difficult to think that sisters sought out for marriage might use such a principal as a way to help their beloved sisters obtain this blessing too?

I can easily envision in this scripture a group of women banding together in the millennium who basically say that should any one of them win a man's heart, before she'll let him marry her, he'll have to agree to marry her beloved sisters as well. Now there's a situation where a man may get far more than he bargained for...

Edited by Martain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That being said, does anyone else have the feeling or impression that there will be more women both living in the millennium and who ultimately receive a celestial glory than there will be men? If true, wouldn't this very easily explain why the Lord considers polygamy an eternal principal?

I think that's complete rubbish, actually.

2 Nephi Chapter 14

Zion and her daughters will be redeemed and cleansed in the millennial day--Compare Isaiah 4. About 559-545 B.C.

1 And in that day, seven women shall take hold of one man, saying: We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel; only let us be called by thy name to take away our reproach.

Somehow this scripture envisions in me a group of women who band together in the millennium and who basically say that should any one of them win a man's heart, before she'll let him marry her, he'll have to agree to marry all of her sisters as well. Now there's a situation where a man may get far more than he bargained for...

That isn't really what the verse is about. Remember the social norms of the day when the scripture was written. A woman's status was tied to her ability to marry and bear children. This is an appeal by the women to retain social status. Remember, these are the same women who in earlier verses were derided for their love of material things.

The verse really has nothing to do with the Lord's use of polygamy, but is an illustration of excessive vanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is one opinion of that verse:

“…’seven women’ (meaning simply a lot of women) will request a man’s hand in marriage. Economic problems will be such that these women will be willing to provide their own food and clothing, contrary to the usual marriage customs. According to the Hebrew scriptures (Exodus 21:10), a man was required to provide a wife with food and clothing; but in this case Isaiah observes that the women are willing to waive that right. Having a good knowledge of the importance of marriage, they request a man to take away their reproach. In Isaiah's day and, indeed, in many parts of the Near East today, it was and is a disgrace to remain unmarried.” (Book of Mormon compendium, by Sidney Sperry, chapter 11, 2 Nephi14)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can easily argue that mono marriage - as a minimum is necessary for the preservation of human society - I know of no historical examples otherwise - not a single one. I believe thee are many historical examples of successful mono marriage spanning several successful generations in several societies. As to polygamy - can you provide even a single example that has successfully endured even 3 or 4 generations?

The Traveler

Which kind of society? the english, the muslim, the hebrew, the elite society or the impoverished society, or other society? By what do you measure succsess?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thought, however it would be difficult since women bare children. One father can get several women pregnant, but the other way seems impractical. The wife is pregnant for 9 months, and cannot bare children any faster than one man and one woman relationship can.

I agree. I don't see how a polyanderous society would even be practical, for the same reasons. I just found it interesting that the main complaints in the article seem to be ones that wouldn't apply in a polyanderous society and might even possibly be fixed by such...? :huh:

There are some animal species that are polyanderous, but not many, and those that are it's usually a female mating with several males while she is in heat but then "practicing" monogamy, by having one male help her care for the offspring, or else fending for herself without any male help at all. So even in the animal world, polyandery isn't all that common or practical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share