Polygamy: Should it be allowed?

xssve said:
The argument being, if I can't get a woman, it's going to make me unsociable, and I won't be alone - that is going to be taking place around you.

How will you not be able to get a woman if there's a nice woman open to polygamy with a few husbands but can afford to take on another?

People "can't get a woman" or "can't get a man" all the time on the basis of any number of ego or social theories. That doesn't mean you are handed a woman at the door as your right.

I'm the one with a waiting list for a harem, I'll be all set.
 
Recidiva said:
How will you not be able to get a woman if there's a nice woman open to polygamy with a few husbands but can afford to take on another?

People "can't get a woman" or "can't get a man" all the time on the basis of any number of ego or social theories. That doesn't mean you are handed a woman at the door as your right.

I'm the one with a waiting list for a harem, I'll be all set.

I'm so glad you said it, because I would've been much ruder. All this "poor men, won't be able to get a woman" is about to make me pound my head on my desk in frustration. :rolleyes:

(am I on the list?)
 
cloudy said:
I'm so glad you said it, because I would've been much ruder. All this "poor men, won't be able to get a woman" is about to make me pound my head on my desk in frustration. :rolleyes:

(am I on the list?)

You're welcome regardless of the state of the law.
 
Recidiva said:
How will you not be able to get a woman if there's a nice woman open to polygamy with a few husbands but can afford to take on another?

People "can't get a woman" or "can't get a man" all the time on the basis of any number of ego or social theories. That doesn't mean you are handed a woman at the door as your right.

I'm the one with a waiting list for a harem, I'll be all set.

Don't be perverse - now you're dictating to me how I should live, I'm not talking about ego or social issues, I'm talking about simple opportunity. And no, I wouldn't mind a harem at all, except that I would probobly run out of space - but I do realize that if I end up surrounded by a mob carrying torches in the middle of the night it might be in my best interests to be a little less greedy.

Fortunately, I simply don't think this is going to catch on like that.
 
You're both quite welcome to join my harem, but somebody might have to sleep on the couch.
 
xssve said:
Don't be perverse - now you're dictating to me how I should live, I'm not talking about ego or social issues, I'm talking about simple opportunity. And no, I wouldn't mind a harem at all, except that I would probobly run out of space - but I do realize that if I end up surrounded by a mob carrying torches in the middle of the night it might be in my best interests to be a little less greedy.

Fortunately, I simply don't think this is going to catch on like that.

Well, asking me not to be perverse never works. I'm not dictating, I'm suggesting.

Take it from someone who has been chased by mobs with torches a lot. They're generally not all that bright. Fear of them shouldn't dictate how you live your life. Then you've essentially become one of them.

Choosing to care for more than one person, isn't greed.
 
xssve said:
And yes, I'm an excellent shot.

I already have a husband who is an excellent shot. Who do you think keeps me away from the mobs with torches?
 
Recidiva said:
Well, asking me not to be perverse never works. I'm not dictating, I'm suggesting.

Take it from someone who has been chased by mobs with torches a lot. They're generally not all that bright. Fear of them shouldn't dictate how you live your life. Then you've essentially become one of them.

Like I said, I live right in the belly of the beast, my POV is not one of remote objective fantasy, my ex is Navajo and Pawnee, my kids half N/A, and I'm into BDSM, I have a sister who is a lesbian, etc. - I deal with bullshit from every direction and I've seen what people are capable of.
 
xssve said:
Like I said, I live right in the belly of the beast, my POV is not one of remote objective fantasy, my ex is Navajo and Pawnee, my kids half N/A, and I'm into BDSM - I deal with bullshit from every direction.

You wouldn't want me in your harem, then. ;)
 
Why not? I love N/A women, i'm addicted in fact - that skin, it's like buttah...
 
xssve said:
Like I said, I live right in the belly of the beast, my POV is not one of remote objective fantasy, my ex is Navajo and Pawnee, my kids half N/A, and I'm into BDSM - I deal with bullshit from every direction.

Your kids are half non-applicable?

(sorry, that's directed toward cloudy, pay it no mind)

Dealing with bullshit is fine, dealing with it well is better.

Mathematically, open relationships provide theoretically a place for everyone, if they can manage. It's write your own ticket. 1:1 ratio allows for less diversity. I like diversity.
 
xssve said:
Why not? I love N/A women, i'm addicted in fact - that skin, it's like buttah...

Well, my rather large Ojibway SO might object. You can ask him, though, if you like. :D
 
There are in fact, more women than men in my area, possibly because of the high attrition rate among Dineh males.
 
I like diversity too, the difference is that I've been studying the historical and psychological data for half my life - imbalance is seldom a good thing, that pretty much what the data suggests.
 
xssve said:
I like diversity too, the difference is that I've been studying the historical and psychological data for half my life - imbalance is seldom a good thing, that pretty much what the data suggests.

A system that can sort imbalance into balance is a good thing.

At least so everyone's getting some.

I would say the monogamy experiment isn't going all that well, and it might be time to make some revisions to the theory.

That doesn't mean you won't be allowed to keep your monogamy, means that other people will be allowed to keep their under-the-table polygamy and get the same benefits.
 
xssve said:
Here I'm defending dog fucking fer chrissakes, how much more tolerant can you get?

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?p=23581728#post23581728

Somewhere I have an extensive post on the difference between agrarian and urban social ethics, with respect to monogamy, if I can't find it maybe I'll repeat it.

Yes, I remember you defending dog fucking pretty clearly. I don't think that's tolerant, I think that's fucked up.

Your extensive post won't really convince me, any more than someone referencing the bible will convince me that gay is bad.

Historically, people have been dumbasses.

The same issue remains. Consent. People should be able to consent to what they choose in their lives.
 
OK. I've calmed down, a little.

I've thought of what I have to say, I'm going to say it and that's the last time I look at this thread.

First, I'll admit I'm selfish and I'm not willing to share. If I care enough about a woman to share her life I want her for myself. I'm not going to consent to being #2 or # 3 in her life.

Second, I don't like my gender as a general principle. Sharing living space with them is not something I have any great interest in. I might like some men and even be friends with them, but I'm not going to live with them.

Third, polygamy, in my opinion, will increase the competitiveness of the mating game. As I said earlier, it means the most desirable people, those regarded as the best mates, stay on the market. Those wealthy enough and powerful enough to attract a lot of mates will do so. They'll take a share much larger than the rest of us can possibly achieve.

Some may sneer at the idea of 'can't get a mate', but I know from experience this is the case for some people. Polyamory, in my opinion, would reduce the chances of getting a mate for these people from 'Chinaman's' to 'Hell freezing over'.

That's it. I'm done.
 
Back
Top