Feminists for Polygamy
If feminists had any sense, they would campaign for polygamy.
Women would be the major beneficiaries of a polygynous society.
It would mean that instead of competing for males, with less attractive women having to make do with less attractive men, they could share more attractive men. It would in no way decrease their chances of having as many children as they wanted.
The other big winner would be the species as a whole, with a greater proportion of children having a more attractive father.
If we were to do away with our current socialistic monogamous system, the biggest losers would be unattractive men.
So I am amazed that feminists are not campaigning for the introduction of polygyny.
Women would be the major beneficiaries of a polygynous society.
It would mean that instead of competing for males, with less attractive women having to make do with less attractive men, they could share more attractive men. It would in no way decrease their chances of having as many children as they wanted.
The other big winner would be the species as a whole, with a greater proportion of children having a more attractive father.
If we were to do away with our current socialistic monogamous system, the biggest losers would be unattractive men.
So I am amazed that feminists are not campaigning for the introduction of polygyny.
posted by Patrick Henry at 21:16
3 Comments:
Patrick Henry,
Your proposed scheme has wider undesirable implications. At least some of the remaining unattractive men would most likely direct their energies and talents into socially disruptive activities and/ or otherwise become a burden on the alpha males and their harems.
The winners would then have to spend some of their efforts protecting themselves from the losers, which seems to happen in any social order which results in signficant inequalities which the losers do not believe can be overcome by legitimate application of more effort. The current nominally monogamous partnership market at least presents the illusion that everyone is in there with a chance - if only they tried a little bit harder.
Good point, Frank.
I will have to think a bit harder in order to come up with some nifty reasoning to support my prejudice.
My answer is this:
True to some extent. I am not convinced what you describe would happen to the extent you imply.
Perhaps the solution is polyandry, with beta males sharing gamma females.
Post a Comment
<< Home