So, I was reading Newsweek (March 20, 2006 issue, pg. 52) and there was an article on Polygamist activists, mostly females.

I was kind of interested in the topic since I never gave the topic any serious thought. From a guy's perspective, there are some interesting pros and cons. The ability to mate with multiple females is obvioulsy was springs forth to most guy's minds. But think about the cons! Multiple emotions to contend with, the group empowering effect some women have, the shopping sprees. Pretty expensive and emotionally taxing.

I then thought about it from the female perspective, what could be the advantages for the girls? Well, from a little internet research it turns out there are many pros. For example, househole responsibilities are divided so women actually have to do less work over all. Also, if one women is career-minded, she can pursue her career without having to worry about leaving her child with day care. Plus, maybe it wouldn't be so expensive provided they all shared the same roof. After all, cooking for more people doesn't get all that much more expensive, and the mortgage wouldn't change. There is also apparently some benefit of having close female relationships in an extended family like that. The cons for the female are obvious: sharing the guy. But so long as the guy doesn't play favorites and the family only includes as many wives as can be loved (maybe only two).


Seems there is some societal benefit as well. First of all, in many cultures infant girls are killed because they do not provide the benefit of a male child. Knowing that the girl will have a better chance of finding a husband may reduce this. Secondly, the gene pool of humanity is changed for the better because the most capable men will be the ones able to take in multiple wives. The genetically inferior men are left unable to procreate and pass along their deficiencies.

There may be a benefit to the economy as well, since more women will be free from child-rearing to work, pursue education, and contribute to social improvements. Not to mention that more money will be free in the household to be spent since many of the costs associated with traditional marriages will be reduced: more efficient use of food supply and natural resources, no money being spent on child care or housekeeping.

Also, it seems that nature has kind of supported this concept. The menstrual cycles of women living in close quarters all quickly adjust to a common time. This seems to favor procreation in that the man is able to avoid non-stop PMS; he only has to worry about a few days each month. The common cycle also means that the women will be fertile at the same time, thus creating an atmosphere of...erm..excitement, thus encouraging intercourse. This also means that the women can share the burdens of pregnancy and child-rearing. And lastly, should a wife be unable to have children, the multiple wives in the relationship ensure that the geetically strong male is able to procreate with a fertile female.

I was thought it was just one of those things that society shuns for morality reasons but there is biblical precedent to it. It seems we have adopted the traditional family unit just like the monkey-banana problem.