Polygamy
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-07-2015, 01:52 PM (This post was last modified: 07-07-2015 01:59 PM by TheBear.)
Polygamy
Women can only have one man in their lives, while men can have multiple women at one time. Sorry ladies, but those are the rules .... apparently ... according to many religions' roots.

This entire concept opens up many areas of questioning, critique and criticism, each of which can have their own talking points. So, talk about anything related in this thread topic of polygamy.


I'll start -

Was there an evolutionary advantage to that practice?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2015, 01:54 PM
RE: Polygamy
...............
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2015, 01:58 PM
RE: Polygamy
(07-07-2015 01:54 PM)TheBear Wrote:  ...............

You make some good points.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like unfogged's post
07-07-2015, 02:06 PM
RE: Polygamy
(07-07-2015 01:58 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(07-07-2015 01:54 PM)TheBear Wrote:  ...............

You make some good points.

Hey, thanks! Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2015, 02:12 PM
RE: Polygamy
(07-07-2015 01:52 PM)TheBear Wrote:  Was there an evolutionary advantage to that practice?

I'll rephrase that. Did that practice build evolutionary advantage?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2015, 02:22 PM
RE: Polygamy
Hey you guys, there is a thing called Polyandry that was (is?) practiced in some of the Himalayan regions. There was such a high mortality of men dying because of the difficult terrain that women would marry several men to make up for the losses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyandry

I need several husbands. One to fix everything in the house that goes awry, one to massage my back, one to help me with all the yard work, one just for cooking and one just for sex. Tongue

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes dancefortwo's post
07-07-2015, 02:31 PM
RE: Polygamy
(07-07-2015 02:12 PM)TheBear Wrote:  
(07-07-2015 01:52 PM)TheBear Wrote:  Was there an evolutionary advantage to that practice?

I'll rephrase that. Did that practice build evolutionary advantage?

I'd think it would depend on the level of resources available. Polygamy would maximize number of offspring of the male and thus his genes have a better chance of surviving. In times when resources are scarce, polyandry makes more sense: fewer children, but better provided for. I am assuming that with fewer kids in the household, the adults are spending more time gathering resources.

Of the two structures, I prefer polyandry.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2015, 02:58 PM
RE: Polygamy
Polygamy isn't something I could go for..... First off -- you'd ALWAYS get out-voted on what you're watching on TV.......

And, you'd never get to see the inside of the bathroom.

...........

True story ---- a woman that I lived with years ago - came from a family of 6 -- mom, dad, and four daughters..... When dad built the house, he installed two toilets in the main bathrooom - thinking (erroneously) that that would halve the time the women were in the bathroom.......

The poor delusional bastard......

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes onlinebiker's post
07-07-2015, 05:05 PM
RE: Polygamy
(07-07-2015 02:22 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  Hey you guys, there is a thing called Polyandry that was (is?) practiced in some of the Himalayan regions. There was such a high mortality of men dying because of the difficult terrain that women would marry several men to make up for the losses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyandry

I need several husbands. One to fix everything in the house that goes awry, one to massage my back, one to help me with all the yard work, one just for cooking and one just for sex. Tongue

Why name it "polyandry"? I get it, historically it was usually a lot of wives, but polygamy means "many marriages", not "many wives".

And you know, I'm the expert on everything "Poly" Wink But I'm digressing here...

孤独 - The Out Crowd
Life is a flash of light between two eternities of darkness.
[Image: Schermata%202014-10-24%20alle%2012.39.01.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes The Polyglot Atheist's post
07-07-2015, 05:45 PM
RE: Polygamy
(07-07-2015 01:52 PM)TheBear Wrote:  Women can only have one man in their lives, while men can have multiple women at one time. Sorry ladies, but those are the rules .... apparently ... according to many religions' roots.

This entire concept opens up many areas of questioning, critique and criticism, each of which can have their own talking points. So, talk about anything related in this thread topic of polygamy.


I'll start -

Was there an evolutionary advantage to that practice?

Was there an evolutionary advantage to polygamy?
The OP was referring specifically to 'polygyny'; multiple woman and a male, so I'll run with that.

The answer is yes. There is an advantage to be had. If I may be blunt, it's resource monopolization.

In many species, females are the limiting resource when it comes to reproduction thanks to their system; eggs are produced once (usually), are few in number, carry a very high cost, and only a few births can occur over a give time-frame via one female.
Males are a lot freer since their gametes are always being produced, are incredibly cheap, and require very little investment themselves to use; just stick in in and let'em fly.

It is to the advantage of males to copulate with as many females as possible to ensure the virulent spread of their lineage by giving genetic variation and increasing total likelihood of some offspring surviving to breed on their own be numbers alone. But this is rather difficult with other males going about and mating as well. It introduces paternal uncertainty: the bane of all males' existence.
The male solution is the establishment of harems; the male gathers a group of females as his breading stock and guards them from other males, hopefully ensuring his paternity and reproductive success.

This goes well with female interests; it ensures that they will have the best males available (males lacking will soon lose their harem to other males), which usually translates to good genes (as demonstrated by the fitness of the male) and plentiful resources, both of which mean a greater likelihood of their offspring being successful themselves. It also increases their own safety from predators and hopefully defends their young from potentially infanticidal rival males.
However, it does go against the interest of females in that the male will not invest as much in their offspring specifically, but probably spend his time defending the harem or territory, rather than helping around with the kids.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: