Author Topic: Polygamy  (Read 16731 times)

Offline sparrow

  • Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 625
  • Karma: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #15 on: July 02, 2011, 06:08:43 AM »
Just had a new website idea:  1chickAday.com
;D

Offline Paleo Curmudgeon

  • Major
  • ***
  • Posts: 819
  • Karma: 57
    • View Profile
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #16 on: July 02, 2011, 06:57:17 AM »

Is that a challenge? 


Why not?


Offline samjohn

  • Global Moderator
  • General
  • ****
  • Posts: 2563
  • Karma: 154
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #17 on: July 02, 2011, 07:37:41 AM »
It is possible for you to get a different woman pregnant everyday.

Every 3rd day would be stable and repeatable from the mans side, but the actual fertilisation is the crap shoot.

Offline Chantelle

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Karma: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #18 on: July 06, 2011, 07:09:05 AM »
2 points

1)There are cues that women can pick up on to establish when they are fertile. Do they work for every woman, I don't know, but I know they worked for me and for plenty of other women. I got pregnant on the first try because I had been monitoring said cues.

2)There is a tendency of women living in close proximity to synchronize their cycles, I don't think that would help your chances of impregnating them at different times of the month. I don't know how far apart they need to be, or how much time spent apart to counter this.

Destor

  • Guest
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #19 on: July 06, 2011, 09:04:01 AM »
If the goal here (and the driving force behind having multiple mates) is to spread your genetics as far and wide as possible, technology can accomplish things that no amount of real sex could!  Sowing your seed as broadly as possible now would have to come down to artificial insemination.

I read a story a few months ago about a doctor who was a regular sperm donor that now estimates he has 400+ (I believe that was the number) biological children out there thanks to a poorly regulated system.

There are downsides obviously, it's not natural, you don't get help around the house and you don't get the sex.  On the plus side you don't have to share the finances and the children aren't your responsibility!


Offline Kimbits

  • Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 617
  • Karma: 45
    • View Profile
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #20 on: July 06, 2011, 09:39:34 AM »
If the goal here (and the driving force behind having multiple mates) is to spread your genetics as far and wide as possible, technology can accomplish things that no amount of real sex could!  Sowing your seed as broadly as possible now would have to come down to artificial insemination.

I read a story a few months ago about a doctor who was a regular sperm donor that now estimates he has 400+ (I believe that was the number) biological children out there thanks to a poorly regulated system.

There are downsides obviously, it's not natural, you don't get help around the house and you don't get the sex.  On the plus side you don't have to share the finances and the children aren't your responsibility!

Haha, can you imagine if several of his biological children unknowingly got married to each other and had kids? Inbreeding FTW! At least they'd only be half-siblings. Gross lol

emcs

  • Guest
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #21 on: July 06, 2011, 12:45:28 PM »
My friend and I were discussing this earlier today actually, what would have been considered a 'paleo' relationship? Very interesting subject.

I think we would have partnered up with others, I remember reading a while ago that they had dug up remains of a woman, man and child who had obviously been buried together. Because there were no obvious signs of it being an aggressive death were the attacker may have just abandoned or covered up the bodies, it was assumed that they had been buried 'as a family' by others of the tribe, I'm sure they were buried with some artefacts as well that would suggest normal burial tradition, I don't have the information to reference but it was compelling.

However I do think there would have been no restrictions on who you could fling around with, I think the communities would have been a free for all sexually, people would have partnerships and share love, but I don't think monogamy would have been expected from anyone really. As someone else said, women in close circles (tribes) would become fertile and menstruate at the same time, I don't think anyone really knows why that is, or whether or not it's being fertile at the same time or bleeding at the same time is socially advantageous.

Can't say I'm really taken with the idea of polygamy, I don't see how how having 5 wives is any more paleo than 1, as I simply don't see how marriage is paleo at all? Plus I'm one of those bossy women who likes to have my own money and opinion, so I guess I'm not exactly a polygamist's dream  :-*

Let's keep this topic going I'd love to hear more views!

Offline Il Capo

  • General
  • ****
  • Posts: 1169
  • Karma: 56
    • View Profile
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #22 on: July 06, 2011, 02:53:51 PM »

Offline goodsamaritan

  • General
  • ****
  • Posts: 1506
  • Karma: 59
  • I'm on Raw Paleo
    • View Profile
    • Cure Manual
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #23 on: July 16, 2011, 12:15:39 PM »


TV Stars Ask for Polygamy Law to be Lifted

SALT LAKE CITY, Ut. (CNN) -- The stars of TLC's "Sister Wives" reality show are now the subjects of another real-life drama.

Today, Kody Brown and his four wives filed suit against Utah's governor. They're asking a federal judge to block the state's long-standing law against polygamy, saying it's unconstitutional. An attorney for the family says the law unfairly attacks plural families.

Read more
http://kdrv.com/page/218153

In my country (Philippines), polygamy is a totally accepted integrated law for our MUSLIMs.  Muslims are free to marry 1, 2, 3, 4.  And the non-muslims have 1 wife, multiple mistresses, girl friends and prostitutes.  And we elected on openly polygamous president in 1998.

As a global citizen, I am amazed that this kind of polygamy persecution happens simply because of fabricated lies made by intolerant oppressors in UTAH.

I follow the sister wives TV series on TLC.  Go Browns!

Offline C C G

  • General
  • ****
  • Posts: 1507
  • Karma: 98
    • View Profile
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #24 on: July 16, 2011, 02:38:41 PM »
Maybe a copy of 'Sex at Dawn'?  Get her to read the entire archives of Dan Savage?

I personally feel that humans vary enormously - and in doing so we would not be the only species where there exists different mating strategies within the same species.  Some people are naturally monogamous - either with several long-term partners (say 3-10 years each) or one person for a long time.  Some (most?) people are not and for a lot of people life-long monogamy is an unrealistic expectation.

It seems to me unlikely that most paleo couples would stay together for 20+ years.  Biologically and hormonally, 'love' fades after 2-5 years.  It makes sense for a paleo lady (or man) to spread her genetic bets and have her children with different men.  Also, people back then would have died suddenly via childbirth, hunting accident etc. 

Generally (GENERALLY!) speaking, of course women are more towards the monogamous than men - it's their biological imperative.
There are quite a lot of women who simply have no interest in or desire or understanding of casual sex - which is perfectly acceptable.  But it's these women who cannot understand that their partner may be able to sleep with another woman and not have it affect his feelings for her - because they could never do the equivalent.   And the best partners for such women, I guess, would be the men that are naturally monogamous and have no interest in extra-relationship sex (and they do exist).

 I think that in paleo times people would have been more 'polyamorous' than 'polygynous' - pair bonds for 1-5 years but extra-relationship sexual activity outside of that pairbond (like in many supposedly monogamous birds).  But I do also have a sneaking suspicion that some guys would have got nothing (c.f. oodar celibacy thread) and some guys would have had 2 or more ladies - and the reason that women do seem to be more sexually 'fluid' than men is because they may have been sharing the same guys. 

I was once watching a BBC documentary (I think it was tribal wives) were the older tribesmen had several wives, and the younger tibesmen had no wifes.  But, all the wifes had extra-martial boyfriends, usually the younger tribesmen!

Personally I have no interest in polygyny or marriage in general, but I have had in the past and will in the future, long-term 'open relationships'.  They are difficult and require absolute trust and total communication, but when they work are a beautiful thing.

 There is a big difference, I feel, between polyamory and polygyny.  The latter is inherently sexist and the woman involved are often subjugated/generally repressed and not equal partners in the relationship...more like possessions, and that I object to.

Offline Justine

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 33
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #25 on: July 17, 2011, 12:38:58 PM »
Haha, "Challenge accepted" :D

I don't understand polygami. I do understand polyamori.

Offline hannyB

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Polygamy
« Reply #26 on: July 19, 2011, 01:01:23 AM »
Polygamy is a marriage which includes more than two partners. In some states and countries, Polygamy is not accepted. The Browns, the polygamist household featured in the reality show “Sister Wives” has submitted a case against the state of Utah. The household is challenging bigamy statues that guard against polygamy. The suit requests an injunction against any criminal prosecution for polygamy, challenging that it violates their constitutional freedom. Polygamist family from Sister Wives show taking Utah to court.