A case for polygamy

[g5000]

Just as a side note, boys are the preferred child in China. During China's "One Child" rule, parents were aborting their kids if they were female and would try again until they got a boy.

As a result, the ratio of boys to girls in China is now 114 to 100.

This has had the interesting outcome of the girls in China becoming very materialistic as they search the big crop for the boy who can do the most for them lately.

How...counter-revolutionary of them...

 

[Correll]

It's just plan common sense that polygamous societies devolve into pedophilia.

If the male-to-female ratio is 1:1, and the husband-to-wife ratio is 1:2 (or greater), then child brides become mathematically inevitable.

It is what we see in the Muslim world. It is a strong statement to claim that it is inevitable.

 

[Vastator]

Simple. Women overwhelmingly choose to cut and run with half of their former spouses shit. They seldom stay single if they can help it. If that's not a testament to the reality of things; nothing is.

It's in her rational interest to do that.

If she's married to an attractive guy who's financially unstable, she should have an affair with a guy who makes more money.

If she's married to a guy with money who's boring and unromantic, she should have an affair with a guy who's more attractive and offers better genetics for her kids.

Unless a guy is both at once, there's no reason she shouldn't do what's in her rational interest for her and her offspring.

And once a man understands this basic instinct women have.; it makes handling them easier. And makes a man much less likely to bet half his lifes labor and accomplishment against it. Look at that... We agree on something. Whoda' thunk it?

No reason you should be allowed to live if you don't offer something of value, either money or genes, which you seem to admit yourself.

So why should the remainder of the men let you live autonomously if you admit you don't have enough value either in money or genetics to offer anything to women - if anything, men like that could just be eliminated and reduce the surplus population. Cold, calculated, and rational.

Too late feminazi. I've already reproduced and am seeing my genetic contribution thrive. It just wont directly be benefiting your type. Nor can you leverage the power to make your fantasy a reality. Funny you think other men would throw their own lives away, trying to kill me, on your behalf. You truly are delusional...

I'm sorry you think capitalism is feminazi.

Women dumping losers for more attractive mates with better financial or genetic prospects benefits the survival and fitness of the species, there's no reason she should restrain her rational self interest to find better mates just because of your "feewings". Heh.

I couldn't sock write better responses if I tried. You may be of some use after all...
How about those quotes you keep refering to?

 

[bripat9643]

Simple. Women overwhelmingly choose to cut and run with half of their former spouses shit. They seldom stay single if they can help it. If that's not a testament to the reality of things; nothing is.

It's in her rational interest to do that.

If she's married to an attractive guy who's financially unstable, she should have an affair with a guy who makes more money.

If she's married to a guy with money who's boring and unromantic, she should have an affair with a guy who's more attractive and offers better genetics for her kids.

Unless a guy is both at once, there's no reason she shouldn't do what's in her rational interest for her and her offspring.

And once a man understands this basic instinct women have.; it makes handling them easier. And makes a man much less likely to bet half his lifes labor and accomplishment against it. Look at that... We agree on something. Whoda' thunk it?

No reason you should be allowed to live if you don't offer something of value, either money or genes, which you seem to admit yourself.

So why should the remainder of the men let you live autonomously if you admit you don't have enough value either in money or genetics to offer anything to women - if anything, men like that could just be eliminated and reduce the surplus population. Cold, calculated, and rational.

Too late feminazi. I've already reproduced and am seeing my genetic contribution thrive. It just wont directly be benefiting your type. Nor can you leverage the power to make your fantasy a reality. Funny you think other men would throw their own lives away, trying to kill me, on your behalf. You truly are delusional...

I'm sorry you think capitalism is feminazi.

Women dumping losers for more attractive mates with better financial or genetic prospects benefits the survival and fitness of the species, there's no reason she should restrain her rational self interest to find better mates just because of your "feewings". Heh.

Why would a rational man marry one of these bitches?

 

[bripat9643]

Simple. Women overwhelmingly choose to cut and run with half of their former spouses shit. They seldom stay single if they can help it. If that's not a testament to the reality of things; nothing is.

Women initiate divorces more because men cheat more. It is pretty simple.

Horseshit. The fact is that women have everything to gain from a divorce, and men have nothing to gain, other than freedom.

The low view men on this forum have of women is just plain alarming sometimes. I hope none of you have daughters and treat them this way.

Who Cheats More? The Demographics of Infidelity in America

View attachment 294365

What do men gain from divorce?

The same thing women do.

Nope. Women gain the legal right to half of your assets.

 

[g5000]

It's just plan common sense that polygamous societies devolve into pedophilia.

If the male-to-female ratio is 1:1, and the husband-to-wife ratio is 1:2 (or greater), then child brides become mathematically inevitable.

It is what we see in the Muslim world. It is a strong statement to claim that it is inevitable.

Look at any polygamous society. You always find they devolve to child brides (pedophilia).

See: Warren Jeffs.

See: Mormons.

 

[Vastator]

It's in her rational interest to do that.

If she's married to an attractive guy who's financially unstable, she should have an affair with a guy who makes more money.

If she's married to a guy with money who's boring and unromantic, she should have an affair with a guy who's more attractive and offers better genetics for her kids.

Unless a guy is both at once, there's no reason she shouldn't do what's in her rational interest for her and her offspring.

And once a man understands this basic instinct women have.; it makes handling them easier. And makes a man much less likely to bet half his lifes labor and accomplishment against it. Look at that... We agree on something. Whoda' thunk it?

No reason you should be allowed to live if you don't offer something of value, either money or genes, which you seem to admit yourself.

So why should the remainder of the men let you live autonomously if you admit you don't have enough value either in money or genetics to offer anything to women - if anything, men like that could just be eliminated and reduce the surplus population. Cold, calculated, and rational.

Too late feminazi. I've already reproduced and am seeing my genetic contribution thrive. It just wont directly be benefiting your type. Nor can you leverage the power to make your fantasy a reality. Funny you think other men would throw their own lives away, trying to kill me, on your behalf. You truly are delusional...

I'm sorry you think capitalism is feminazi.

Women dumping losers for more attractive mates with better financial or genetic prospects benefits the survival and fitness of the species, there's no reason she should restrain her rational self interest to find better mates just because of your "feewings". Heh.

I couldn't sock write better responses if I tried. You may be of some use after all...

It's in her rational interest to do that.

If she's married to an attractive guy who's financially unstable, she should have an affair with a guy who makes more money.

If she's married to a guy with money who's boring and unromantic, she should have an affair with a guy who's more attractive and offers better genetics for her kids.

Unless a guy is both at once, there's no reason she shouldn't do what's in her rational interest for her and her offspring.

And once a man understands this basic instinct women have.; it makes handling them easier. And makes a man much less likely to bet half his lifes labor and accomplishment against it. Look at that... We agree on something. Whoda' thunk it?

No reason you should be allowed to live if you don't offer something of value, either money or genes, which you seem to admit yourself.

So why should the remainder of the men let you live autonomously if you admit you don't have enough value either in money or genetics to offer anything to women - if anything, men like that could just be eliminated and reduce the surplus population. Cold, calculated, and rational.

Too late feminazi. I've already reproduced and am seeing my genetic contribution thrive. It just wont directly be benefiting your type. Nor can you leverage the power to make your fantasy a reality. Funny you think other men would throw their own lives away, trying to kill me, on your behalf. You truly are delusional...

I'm sorry you think capitalism is feminazi.

Women dumping losers for more attractive mates with better financial or genetic prospects benefits the survival and fitness of the species, there's no reason she should restrain her rational self interest to find better mates just because of your "feewings". Heh.

Why would a rational man marry one of these bitches?

Overwhelmingly men are choosing not to. That's what has feminists so pissed.

 

[g5000]

Again, common sense.

1:1 male-to-female, 1:10 husband-to-wife.

Child brides become mathematically inevitable.

 

[Questioner]

It's just plan common sense that polygamous societies devolve into pedophilia.

If the male-to-female ratio is 1:1, and the husband-to-wife ratio is 1:2 (or greater), then child brides become mathematically inevitable.

It is what we see in the Muslim world. It is a strong statement to claim that it is inevitable.

Look at any polygamous society. You always find they devolve to child brides (pedophilia).

See: Warren Jeffs.

See: Mormons.

Let's assume the argument here is consenting adults only.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Women initiate divorces more because men cheat more. It is pretty simple.

Horseshit. The fact is that women have everything to gain from a divorce, and men have nothing to gain, other than freedom.

The low view men on this forum have of women is just plain alarming sometimes. I hope none of you have daughters and treat them this way.

Who Cheats More? The Demographics of Infidelity in America

View attachment 294365

What do men gain from divorce?

The same thing women do.

Nope. Women gain the legal right to half of your assets.

And the man has legal rights to half the assets.

How is that not the same thing?

In a marriage there are no "his assets and her assets", there are just assets unless there is a legal agreement made before the marriage to change that.

I take it you are not married? or at least not happily.

 

[Correll]

It's just plan common sense that polygamous societies devolve into pedophilia.

If the male-to-female ratio is 1:1, and the husband-to-wife ratio is 1:2 (or greater), then child brides become mathematically inevitable.

It is what we see in the Muslim world. It is a strong statement to claim that it is inevitable.

Look at any polygamous society. You always find they devolve to child brides (pedophilia).

See: Warren Jeffs.

See: Mormons.

The "math" of why it has happened in past examples, is clear. It is not clear that that tendency could not be fought. Just saying.

 

[Questioner]

It's in her rational interest to do that.

If she's married to an attractive guy who's financially unstable, she should have an affair with a guy who makes more money.

If she's married to a guy with money who's boring and unromantic, she should have an affair with a guy who's more attractive and offers better genetics for her kids.

Unless a guy is both at once, there's no reason she shouldn't do what's in her rational interest for her and her offspring.

And once a man understands this basic instinct women have.; it makes handling them easier. And makes a man much less likely to bet half his lifes labor and accomplishment against it. Look at that... We agree on something. Whoda' thunk it?

No reason you should be allowed to live if you don't offer something of value, either money or genes, which you seem to admit yourself.

So why should the remainder of the men let you live autonomously if you admit you don't have enough value either in money or genetics to offer anything to women - if anything, men like that could just be eliminated and reduce the surplus population. Cold, calculated, and rational.

Too late feminazi. I've already reproduced and am seeing my genetic contribution thrive. It just wont directly be benefiting your type. Nor can you leverage the power to make your fantasy a reality. Funny you think other men would throw their own lives away, trying to kill me, on your behalf. You truly are delusional...

I'm sorry you think capitalism is feminazi.

Women dumping losers for more attractive mates with better financial or genetic prospects benefits the survival and fitness of the species, there's no reason she should restrain her rational self interest to find better mates just because of your "feewings". Heh.

Why would a rational man marry one of these bitches?

If she's a competitive woman, she probably has good genetics. You just hate capitalism, and you're claiming I'm a "feminizai" just for being consistently capitalist. Go freaking figure.

 

[Questioner]

As for a serious response, I'm not an expert on state marriage laws, however most of the laws are a holdover from older eras, where women working supporting themselves on their own income was rarer, and men were therefore more socially expected to be the main financial providers for her and her children.

I'm aware that times have changed, and the laws probably haven't always updated to reflect this reality - I think people who find this a problem should work to change the laws if they are that invested in it, rather than whining because they're unable to accept reality or human nature as it is.

 

[Correll]

Again, common sense.

1:1 male-to-female, 1:10 husband-to-wife.

Child brides become mathematically inevitable.

IF, the motive for polygamy was the vast amount of money available to the super rich or even the rich, the numbers involved could be small enough to not drive average guys to widen their mate selection to include child brides.

Toss in a society, like ours, that celebrates homosexuality and/or trans shit, ideas that have NOT been tried very often, at least not in modern times, and it is possible that the results could vary.

 

[Vastator]

And once a man understands this basic instinct women have.; it makes handling them easier. And makes a man much less likely to bet half his lifes labor and accomplishment against it. Look at that... We agree on something. Whoda' thunk it?

No reason you should be allowed to live if you don't offer something of value, either money or genes, which you seem to admit yourself.

So why should the remainder of the men let you live autonomously if you admit you don't have enough value either in money or genetics to offer anything to women - if anything, men like that could just be eliminated and reduce the surplus population. Cold, calculated, and rational.

Too late feminazi. I've already reproduced and am seeing my genetic contribution thrive. It just wont directly be benefiting your type. Nor can you leverage the power to make your fantasy a reality. Funny you think other men would throw their own lives away, trying to kill me, on your behalf. You truly are delusional...

I'm sorry you think capitalism is feminazi.

Women dumping losers for more attractive mates with better financial or genetic prospects benefits the survival and fitness of the species, there's no reason she should restrain her rational self interest to find better mates just because of your "feewings". Heh.

Why would a rational man marry one of these bitches?

If she's a competitive woman, she probably has good genetics. You just hate capitalism.

No. It doesn't. Also children of single mothers perform poorly across every known beneficial metric on average; which undercuts your theory that cut and run women have better Gene's. Better Gene's produce better offspring that reach sexual maturity at the highest level. You're only fooling your self. Maybe cuddle with one of your cats? You'll feel better...

 

[Correll]

It's just plan common sense that polygamous societies devolve into pedophilia.

If the male-to-female ratio is 1:1, and the husband-to-wife ratio is 1:2 (or greater), then child brides become mathematically inevitable.

It is what we see in the Muslim world. It is a strong statement to claim that it is inevitable.

Look at any polygamous society. You always find they devolve to child brides (pedophilia).

See: Warren Jeffs.

See: Mormons.

Let's assume the argument here is consenting adults only.

Not good enough. G5000's point about the "math" of depriving large numbers of males of mates, is true. JUst dismissing it, is not a valid answer.

YOu must address it more seriously than that, or be dismissed at this point.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Hypothetically, if polygamy was legalized, this would mean that the top 1% of of males (e.x. Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Mark Zuckerberg) could marry multiple women, and potentially father more children.

This might help to reduce poverty and low education, by encouraging women not to marry "average men", but compete to marry the top 1% of men. (It might also encourage "average men" to become more personally productive, knowing that their wife could leave them for a better option, such as Warren Buffet).

What would be the concerns in regards to this?

(Of course, I don't expect this to actually happen, but hypothetically speaking...)

Why is this in Politics?

 

[Questioner]

No reason you should be allowed to live if you don't offer something of value, either money or genes, which you seem to admit yourself.

So why should the remainder of the men let you live autonomously if you admit you don't have enough value either in money or genetics to offer anything to women - if anything, men like that could just be eliminated and reduce the surplus population. Cold, calculated, and rational.

Too late feminazi. I've already reproduced and am seeing my genetic contribution thrive. It just wont directly be benefiting your type. Nor can you leverage the power to make your fantasy a reality. Funny you think other men would throw their own lives away, trying to kill me, on your behalf. You truly are delusional...

I'm sorry you think capitalism is feminazi.

Women dumping losers for more attractive mates with better financial or genetic prospects benefits the survival and fitness of the species, there's no reason she should restrain her rational self interest to find better mates just because of your "feewings". Heh.

Why would a rational man marry one of these bitches?

If she's a competitive woman, she probably has good genetics. You just hate capitalism.

No. It doesn't. Also children of single mothers perform poorly across every known beneficial metric on average; which undercuts your theory that cut and run women have better Gene's. Better Gene's produce better offspring that reach sexual maturity at the highest level. You're only fooling your self. Maybe cuddle with one of your cats? You'll feel better...

I'm a male entrepreneur, I don't blame women for dumping whiny manbabies and wanting to cheat with me, and I was nice enough to say "no" if I found out they were married, you should thank me for that, since it was rationally in my interest to hit it and quit it and let some poor schumk raise my genetically superior offspring, he he he.

Why do you hate capitalism so much? You're unamerican. lolol

 

[Vastator]

Hypothetically, if polygamy was legalized, this would mean that the top 1% of of males (e.x. Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Mark Zuckerberg) could marry multiple women, and potentially father more children.

This might help to reduce poverty and low education, by encouraging women not to marry "average men", but compete to marry the top 1% of men. (It might also encourage "average men" to become more personally productive, knowing that their wife could leave them for a better option, such as Warren Buffet).

What would be the concerns in regards to this?

(Of course, I don't expect this to actually happen, but hypothetically speaking...)

Why is this in Politics?

Because "marriage" is a legal concept. Law, and politics go hand, in hand.

 

[Vastator]

Too late feminazi. I've already reproduced and am seeing my genetic contribution thrive. It just wont directly be benefiting your type. Nor can you leverage the power to make your fantasy a reality. Funny you think other men would throw their own lives away, trying to kill me, on your behalf. You truly are delusional...

I'm sorry you think capitalism is feminazi.

Women dumping losers for more attractive mates with better financial or genetic prospects benefits the survival and fitness of the species, there's no reason she should restrain her rational self interest to find better mates just because of your "feewings". Heh.

Why would a rational man marry one of these bitches?

If she's a competitive woman, she probably has good genetics. You just hate capitalism.

No. It doesn't. Also children of single mothers perform poorly across every known beneficial metric on average; which undercuts your theory that cut and run women have better Gene's. Better Gene's produce better offspring that reach sexual maturity at the highest level. You're only fooling your self. Maybe cuddle with one of your cats? You'll feel better...

I'm a male entrepreneur, I don't blame women for dumping whiny manbabies and wanting to cheat with me, and I was nice enough to say "no" if I found out they were married, you should thank me for that, since it was rationally in my interest to hit it and quit it and let some poor schumk raise my genetically superior offspring, he he he.

Why do you hate capitalism so much? You're unamerican. lolol

Sure you are cup cake.