Jump to content

Visual Novels and Polygomy (harem)


babiker

Recommended Posts

Incest is harmful to the gene pool rather than society...  the nude pictures of children thing is harmful to individuals, both the perp and the victim.  The banning of illegal drugs is responsible for the creation of powerful gangs throughout Latin America.

 

Polygamy was approved and present in more than ninety percent of humanity's cultures at one point or another.  Even in the few matriarchal societies, it was present.  The reason it isn't present in Christian-related nations is because Christianity denied the validity of such marriages.   However, Judaism (pre-historical) allowed wealthy individuals and kings to have multiple wives or husbands, though modern Judaism doesn't.  Polygamy was just a pragmatic arrangement, rather than a moral one, originally because those with wealth were obligated to spend that wealth on multiple spouses and children, which made sense from a community standpoint.  The reason polygamy is seen as taboo in modern cultures is precisely because it usually wasn't consensual (in fact, most marriages weren't consensual pre-Christianity). 

 

Edit:  Consensual marriage and love-marriages were rare pre-Christianity, as spouses were generally decided by parents or other authority figures in civilized societies.  That is because marriage generally involved an exchange of wealth, the merging of bloodlines, and new social ties, which all affected the family/clan/tribe as a whole.  Thus, who someone married was rarely left to the individual if the society had any sort of wealth.  The customs of 'buying' brides and dowries are remnants of this era, incidentally.  At this point, it is just a tradition, rather than something that holds practical value as it did in the past.  As such, it should be no surprise that most nations with such practices present seek to abolish them.  The same goes for the tradition of anti-polygamy in western cultures... at this point it is just a taboo with no logical context.  On the other hand, the legal issues (joint accounts, federal benefits, etc) surrounding marriage do make the legalization of polygamy somewhat impractical in the US, at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We ban all sorts of things because we deem them harmful to society, such as incestual marriage, distribution of nude pictures of children in non-sexual situations, and the use of "illegal drugs" such as cocaine. Why should polygamy be granted special status?

Hehehe, I was waiting for this question. (actually, you could say the purpose of this thread was to answer it. So behold!)

You can not prove that polygamy is as harmful to society as something like drugs or incest (# aids). What is the harm of allowing people to have more than one wife? If anything, though this is according to each country, many developed countries are facing a very high drop in birth rate. And immigration alone cannot solve the issue, unless you have no problem with one race being dominant over ther rest. That's exactly what's happening with some western countries (#France, #Germany) were people are just starting to realize their own race is threatened with extinction. America is hardly stable even with opening it's doors widely to immigration.

And now to the so called "evils of polygamy", the main and most famous reason for the ban, is that :"polygamy is oppressive to women" for those who believe this, simply don't marry  men who want more than one wife! No one is forcing you. But to allow the government to ban second and third wives their rights... No No,to support the government in this?!

(btw, other reasons are either too outdated or have nothing to do with polygamy to count) And this brings me to my second point:-

"The evils of BANNING polygamy"

Now, in countries that ban polygamy, their not actually stoping the practice, they just deny the second or plus wife her rights. So what happens? These wives end up fleeing from society, sometimes forcing their family's to flee as well. And you end up with wives with no rights. Wich is why there's no surprise that such family's end up in much chaos. And another evil, when one of the married couple is not sexually satisfied, they end up seeking sex from other sources, and then you have cheating, and then you have divorce, and broken familys... Now, if he just had a second wife, maybe all of this could have not happened...

Other smaller evils would include more unmarried people, less children, more divorces... Etc.

And so I conclude that all the evils of BANNING polygamy out weigh the evils of it's existence. In the end, people have been living for thousands of years with it, it is a practice that has been supported by the major religions, Islam, Christianity (i don't care what some priests say, the bible says Solomon had 1000 freaking wives) and Judaism and more, and now humanity calls it a sin? Now, of all times?

... I'm not forcing everyone in the world to have a second wife, but in the modern age of so called "freedom and democracy", can't we at least have the freedom of having multiple wives?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"polygamy is oppressive to women" for those who believe this, simply don't marry  men who want more than one wife! No one is forcing you. But to allow the government to ban second and third wives their rights... No No,to support the government in this?!

Misogyny is like racism: it's an attitude that has far-reaching consequences.  The idea itself is toxic, whether you're the immediate target or not.

 

I'm actually curious why you chose to focus on one male <-> multiple women polygamy rather than try to make a general argument for marriage to multiple partners.  What about marriage "chains" where a male is married to two women, and one of those women is married to two males?

 

What is marriage?  What is its purpose?  What does it signify?  Does it necessarily need to be coded in law?  I think these are important questions you need to address before you even begin discussing the issue of polygamy from a philosophical standpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that marriage is a cultural institution just like monogamy is in many cultures.

 

In most countries marriage affects inheritance and in some countries married couples are even taxed as one unit. However that marriage doesn't need to be religious, it can be civil. I guess the most efficient way to make polygamy legal is to make the law independent on marital status and keep marriage as a "tradition" for those who wants it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Misogyny is like racism: it's an attitude that has far-reaching consequences. The idea itself is toxic, whether you're the immediate target or not.

I'm actually curious why you chose to focus on one male <-> multiple women polygamy rather than try to make a general argument for marriage to multiple partners. What about marriage "chains" where a male is married to two women, and one of those women is married to two males?

What is marriage? What is its purpose? What does it signify? Does it necessarily need to be coded in law? I think these are important questions you need to address before you even begin discussing the issue of polygamy from a philosophical standpoint.

Meh, the reason why I didn't discuss female polygamy is that I have hardly heard of its existence. Infact, it has its own word, but you and I didn't use it, why? We hardly ever hear of it. The only place I've heard it happens is some place in the Himalayas, so yeah, its there, but its not even popular enough to deserve mention in this discussion.

And, while I can answer the question of marriage and its worth and meaning, it definitely deserves its own thread, plus a lot of typing, so I'll leave that for another day...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, the reason why I didn't discuss female polygamy is that I have hardly heard of its existence. Infact, it has its own word, but you and I didn't use it, why? We hardly ever hear of it. The only place I've heard it happens is some place in the Himalayas, so yeah, its there, but its not even popular enough to deserve mention in this discussion.

You acknowledge that a major criticism of polygamy is that it's misogynistic.  Yet you premise your discussion on gender inequality.  You're not really doing yourself any favors by comparing to contemporary cultures that feature polygamy, as by and large those cultures come burdened with all the socioeconomic woes we associate with the developing world.  "We should be more like Ethiopia" is a tagline that won't win you many debates.

 

Polygamy is a sub-concept of marriage, and you can't really have a thoughtful philosophical discussion about polygamy without going back to the fundamentals of what marriage exists to do.  You're not going to make a convincing argument without addressing that.

 

 

 

What is the harm of allowing people to have more than one wife?

Well...

 

 

The study noted that the temptation for sexual intercourse that has often come with polygamy, regardless of whether a man has multiple wives or vice versa, has been a major contributor to the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa.[114]
 
A 2012 study from the University of British Columbia shows that, in polygamist cultures, "the intra-sexual competition that occurs causes greater levels of crime, violence, poverty and gender inequality than in societies that institutionalize and practice monogamous marriage".[115]
 
A 2013 study published in the International Journal of Psychology and Counselling showed "that there is a significant difference in the overall academic achievement of students from monogamous families and those from polygamous families" and "that life in polygamous family can be traumatic and children brought up in such family structure often suffer some emotional problems such as lack of warmth, love despite availability of money and material resources, and disciplinary problems which may hinder their academic performance."[116]
 
Seems like pretty convincing evidence to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the stuff and studies you mentioned are studies in africa, where I'm afraid to say almost nothing is civilized. I never said the west should be more like Ethiopia, but I should say more like the middle east, were polgamy has it's laws and it's limits. Sure, both the east and west surpass the middle east on many levels, but especially when it comes to family relationships, both can learn many lessons from there. ( I was bringing examples from Saudi Arabia earlier, hinting this)

If you wanna bring studies, bring them from there.

And, even if we said polygamy does cause all that stuff, it's still not enough to ban it. It can be argued that prostitution causes all that and much more, but are prostitutes denied their rights, the same way multiple wives are? The last I checked, no... And a lot more stuff that give the same conclusions are not banned either...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being from a society that is heavily influenced by Christianity, I can say that I honestly don't care how many people are in a single relationship as long as it's consensual, as long as everybody agrees why not? 

 

Check this out then http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_marriage. This actually happened in America during the 19th century. Scroll down and read the "In modern U.S cultures" section. Also I agree with you, as long as everything is consensual and everybody is happy I don't see a problem with it. 

 

 

 

 

Incest is harmful to the gene pool rather than society...  

 

I'm only going to dig into this topic because you've stated that Anthropology is an interest of yours, and we discussed this in my Anthropology class last semester. Incest isn't as damaging to the gene pool as people make it out to be. It does slightly increase chances of damaged genes, but the slight increase isn't nearly as bad as many people make it out to be. The specifics of Incest taboo's vary largely from each culture. For some cultures marrying and sleeping with a first cousin is repulsive, for others first cousins are A-ok. In fact what's interesting is that hypothetically speaking if two individuals entered a consensual incestuous relationship they wouldn't be harming anybody. And even if you consider the slight increase of unfavorable genes as harmful, then in that case they don't have to have kids. They could have all the safe sex they want and they wouldn't be hurting anybody. That said, while I'm played the devil's advocate I want to make it clear that like everybody else I grew up in a culture with incest taboos and incest grosses me out too. But this is purely for cultural reasons.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hehehe, I was waiting for this question. (actually, you could say the purpose of this thread was to answer it. So behold!)

You can not prove that polygamy is as harmful to society as something like drugs or incest (# aids). What is the harm of allowing people to have more than one wife? If anything, though this is according to each country, many developed countries are facing a very high drop in birth rate. And immigration alone cannot solve the issue, unless you have no problem with one race being dominant over ther rest. That's exactly what's happening with some western countries (#France, #Germany) were people are just starting to realize their own race is threatened with extinction. America is hardly stable even with opening it's doors widely to immigration.

And now to the so called "evils of polygamy", the main and most famous reason for the ban, is that :"polygamy is oppressive to women" for those who believe this, simply don't marry  men who want more than one wife! No one is forcing you. But to allow the government to ban second and third wives their rights... No No,to support the government in this?!

(btw, other reasons are either too outdated or have nothing to do with polygamy to count) And this brings me to my second point:-

"The evils of BANNING polygamy"

Now, in countries that ban polygamy, their not actually stoping the practice, they just deny the second or plus wife her rights. So what happens? These wives end up fleeing from society, sometimes forcing their family's to flee as well. And you end up with wives with no rights. Wich is why there's no surprise that such family's end up in much chaos. And another evil, when one of the married couple is not sexually satisfied, they end up seeking sex from other sources, and then you have cheating, and then you have divorce, and broken familys... Now, if he just had a second wife, maybe all of this could have not happened...

Other smaller evils would include more unmarried people, less children, more divorces... Etc.

And so I conclude that all the evils of BANNING polygamy out weigh the evils of it's existence. In the end, people have been living for thousands of years with it, it is a practice that has been supported by the major religions, Islam, Christianity (i don't care what some priests say, the bible says Solomon had 1000 freaking wives) and Judaism and more, and now humanity calls it a sin? Now, of all times?

... I'm not forcing everyone in the world to have a second wife, but in the modern age of so called "freedom and democracy", can't we at least have the freedom of having multiple wives?

 

You see that's a problem here, today society stands for equality between man and woman and therefore you can't allow just man to have multiple wives and not allow woman to have multiple husbands. And if you do allow both man and woman to have multiple wives and husbands that would destroy families as we have them now. I mean imagine one man having 3-4 wives and each of those wives having 3-4 husbands and each of those husbands having 3-4 wives... you wouldn't have an end or beginning of family any more and that would destroy the very purpose of getting married. It wouldn't be any different then disbanding marriage all together.

 

Also Incest is not any more harmful to society then gay marriages or marriages without children (Either because they can't or won't have children) as neither of them add to berth rate. Also looking at things globally berth rate should be decreased and not increased anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Polygamy is largely one-way and misogynistic in nature. At least, in the ways that it is commonly practiced. How many countries that allow men to have multiple wives allow women to have multiple husbands, for instance? Polygamy as it was historically practiced represented a patriarchal society where women were practically commodities. I wouldn't mind a totally open society where anyone can marry anyone of age, regardless of gender or other relationships, but to get there I think most countries, including America, still has a ways to go with the way women are treated and represented before such a society can be feasible. I mean, even here women in VNs who have multiple partners are looked down upon while men with multiple partners are commended or idolized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incest isn't as damaging to the gene pool as people make it out to be. It does slightly increase chances of damaged genes, but the slight increase isn't nearly as bad as many people make it out to be. 

 

Unless you keep doing it. If a family keeps inbreeding within itself, each subsequent generation will suffer more damage than the one before until the effects are no longer trivial.

 

Marriage. Created to help men keep track of their belongings, during a time when the average life-expectancy was less than half of what it was today, in an era when it was perfectly feasible for a spouse to stay at home and raise the kids full time. These days, with countries wanting to maximise it's work force for obvious reasons and also to help stave off the effects of aging populations, with people getting married in their teens and finding out (at age 40) they're both completely different people, with the nuclear family deemed no longer adequate to serve our purposes moving to the future, marriage is quickly becoming an outdated concept. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The formality of marriage in Japan, previous to the Meiji era, was a contractual obligation between two families or between an individual and the family he/she was entering.  Love marriages were virtually unheard of in Japan previous to its reopening, and omiai (the practice of having two people of the opposite sex and appropriate age come together to a neutral location and see whether they could stand to live with one another) is a remnant of this.  To be blunt, older Japanese mostly see marriage as a means of continuing the familial unit, rather than a matter of romance.  It is the generation born post-WWII that started to seriously think of marriage as a romantic as well as contractual institution.  Also, the concept of mukotori, the idea of taking a male into the family line and having him change his surname to match that of his wife, is also a remnant of this, as it is a practical institution for those who run a family business or craft and have no children who are talented or skilled enough to run it. 

 

Previous to WWII, it was still common for wealthy industrialists and nobles to take multiple spouses (seisai and mekake).  Polygamy and its associated contractual and social institutions were only completely vanquished with their defeat at our hands and the post-WWII constitution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the stuff and studies you mentioned are studies in africa, where I'm afraid to say almost nothing is civilized. I never said the west should be more like Ethiopia, but I should say more like the middle east, were polgamy has it's laws and it's limits. Sure, both the east and west surpass the middle east on many levels, but especially when it comes to family relationships, both can learn many lessons from there. ( I was bringing examples from Saudi Arabia earlier, hinting this)

If you wanna bring studies, bring them from there.

And, even if we said polygamy does cause all that stuff, it's still not enough to ban it. It can be argued that prostitution causes all that and much more, but are prostitutes denied their rights, the same way multiple wives are? The last I checked, no... And a lot more stuff that give the same conclusions are not banned either...

Just because the study doesn't concern your favorite place doesn't mean it's irrelevant.  That third study for instance compares monogamous and polygamous families within the same culture and finds disparities in child academic outcomes, feelings of belonging, and discipline.

 

That suggests the practice of polygamy creates an environment unsuitable for raising children.  If I had to list a single compelling reason why the institution of marriage should exist, it would be to facilitate raising children.  You're free to practice de facto polygamy at the individual level in most developed nations.  However, I don't see any reason for the government to actively support a practice that has demonstrable negative outcomes by granting it legal recognition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well making poly legal under our current marriage laws would be complicated... See, it worked in ancient times because back then only men could have mutiple wives. Today though you'd obviously need to allow women to marry multiple men as well (and same sex as well ofc) and that's when you run into problems. Let's say I marry two people. And then they marry two people as well! What is my relation to my partners' partners? You'd have to revamp our marriage laws before anything like this would be possible.

 

EDIT: Ooops Okami had already posted this. Sorry!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanahtlig, if I accepted all your points, that polygamy at some situations in some places may raze the probability of aids, may make your kids less educated, may may may etc, the logical conclusion would be that most people should stay away from it, not that it should a major Global sin, as many people know it today. Most of the problems that supposedly come from polygamy, usually come from other things surrounding it. Like the fact that family's with multiple mothers tend to be less educated is mostly true, but is this the parents fault for practicing polygamy? I think not. It's his/her fault for not taking care of his/her kids.

Ugh, you know what? I'll just give you the middle eastern rules and regulations for polygamy:-

1-When you marry, you can only do so while having the full ability to support the new wife (sexually and money wise) and her future family. This goes for the first wife as well, but especially for the rest.

2-The first wife has the right to force her husband not to have another wife (if she wants)

3-The max is 4 wives.

(these rules are in no way perfect. But at least their a starting point. I support THIS version of the practice. But if the west were to choose between staying the way they are and blindly copying an uncivilized form of polygamy, I'd recommend the former. )

Now, when people actually follow these rules, they can stop most of the problems that supposedly come from polygamy, like poor education. If you want an example, I believe the best would be the royal Saudi family, who are rich beyond measure, and there kids are famous for being the richest, most successful and most educated in the area. The current king has 4 wives I believe, and I betchya his more than 20 kids are pretty happy. Prince Alwaleed was the worlds 4th richest man in the year 2004.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Waleed_bin_Talal

Though I must admit that that example is a bit over the top, so I'll give you one that's a bit closer... And guess whom it is? My grandfather :D!

Yes, my grandfather, may he rest in piece, had 2 wives. My father is a doctor, has studied abroad, one of my uncles is an ambassador, and all the rest are married/have a job. I'll let you judge how messed up that sounds.

(man, is it just me or do I sound like I'm horribly boasting? I hope I'm not understood as such... :( )

You see, THAT'S when polygamy is done right. When you can fully and rightfully take care of it. My grandfather was a mayor, the king of Saudi is, well, I thinks he's self explanatory. But when you have a poor guy in the middle of Africa who can hardly afford his own life expenses looking for wives... Well, isn't it obvious how things are going to turn out?

You may have realised that I am exceptionally fueled in this topic. That is because I have seen and experienced with my very self the bright side of having multiple wives, and the... The Not so bright one. Just like I've met happy family's that practice it, I've met ... Not so happy ones. That's life man. Polygamy is like a sword, if you don't use it correctly, you'll mess up. Does this mean the sword is evil? No, it depends on the wielder. Swords are not meant for everyone, neither is polygamy.

(and for Gods sake, I've never heard of females wanting more than one husband, whether here in the middle east or in the west. No, I have no idea how it should be taken care of. Go ask somebody from the Himalayas for that. :P)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(and for Gods sake, I've never heard of females wanting more than one husband, whether here in the middle east or in the west. No, I have no idea how it should be taken care of. Go ask somebody from the Himalayas for that. :P)

 

Just as there are man who want to have more then one wive there are woman who want to have more then one husband, denying that would be denying equality between man and woman. (Also you might want to give a try to some otome VNs/Anime if you don't think that that is true, reverse harem is as usual as a normal harem in anime/VN world.)

 

Polygomy simply can't work nicely in society if it's both ways as it would destroy family, and if it goes just one way it can work but it is denying equality between man and woman, witch would bring more bad then good.

 

I am not that much against polygomy as I don't think that 3D "romantic" relationships can be much worse then they already are but I simply don't think that it can work properly in a modern socaity.

 

If you want to stand on the side of polygomy you need to think of a way for it to work both ways and to blend in modern society in order for others to accept it. You can't expect others to accept you point of view if you yourself haven't think about how would it all work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you want me to talk about something based on pure speculation? I would be lying to myself before you. The reasonI talked about all this is because I know it, aka I'm familiar with polygamy. But that's my stop light.

On a fundamental level, females should have the right to marry more husbands. Based on freedom. But then we enter the true meaning of equality. As my father use to say, "fairness is not that everyone gets the same, but that everyone gets what he needs" Do females need multiple husbands, the same way males sometimes need multiple wives? I think we need scientific proof for this.

And don't start the blind equality argument. Females are not males. They have boobs. They need bras. Based on blind equality, men should were bras. But we don't need 'em. We don't have boobs :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Polygamy itself is not a problem, unless you are a person with strong dokusenyoku.  It just depends on how well the people in the marriage get along, how they spread around their responsibilities, and whether everyone meets what is expected of them.  I think most people in the US that have been married would agree that they wouldn't want multiple spouses.  The plain and simple reason is that in the US, the desire for fairness is such a fundamental part of our political culture that marriage can't be a one-sided deal.  It has to be something both sides can be happy with... and getting three or more people to agree in matters of sex and love is... like herding cats, at least in my experience. 

 

First, I don't deny the possible (and probable) happiness of women and men in some polygamist cultures, in particular those where the tradition is that prosperity allows for multiple spouses.  Heck, why do you think that female homesexuality was frequently overlooked in some ancient polygamist cultures?  The assumption that all the lines of relation go between the male and the females, with no sidelines is one that I find a bit amusing, to be honest.  I have a cousin by marriage who was raised by two mothers (his father's two wives), after his father was killed.   He's probably one of the most well-adjusted guys I've ever met.  My grandfather hates his mothers (he's a parochial Christian) which has caused problems, but the rest of us are just fine having him married to my cousin. 

 

However, I have to stipulate that there are very few US-raised women or men that could handle the responsibility of being in a multiple-marriage.  It takes a rather unique way of looking at the world not to be bothered by your partner sleeping with someone else, if you were raised in the US.  To be blunt, there is quite simply no natural cultural machinery over here to allow for a relationship like that.  I don't think even the Mormons could handle it, really (lol). 

 

Those studies about polygamy and child-raising are based aren't exactly good examples, because those living in extreme poverty should be avoiding having kids (or at least having multiple kids) in the first place, much less having multiple spouses.  If you can't support them, don't have them.  To raise happy, well-adjusted kids, you need to at least be able to feed them and yourself without worrying about immediate starvation.  (I do understand the imperative to have lots of kids in areas with high child-mortality rates, but that just makes the problem worse with every generation)

 

Also, the practice of literally selling 'women' into marriage makes it even worse, since it means that the man is even less likely to see the women as anything more than property. 

 

One interesting fact is that polygamy tended to become more common in older civilizations right after major droughts, wars, and plagues.  This is because men and children are more likely to die in each of these situations, and the imperative to repopulate drives a cultural move toward objectification of women.  Polygamy made a huge comeback in the Middle East after the Crusades, for instance.

 

Another Japan fact *Clephas pauses for groans* is that marriage itself was uncommon in anyone that was of the farmer caste during the Tokugawa era.  This was because marriage was generally only carried out as a means of transferring wealth, arranging the production of heirs, and bringing a talented or skilled individual into a family.  Since the farmer caste generally didn't have any wealth of their own, they had no reason to marry formally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good stuff Cleph (can I call you Cleph?). I'll be sure to remember 'em.

I think what we really need is a new VN, one that discovers the other, more realistic side of polygamy... I believes it has a higher success rate at convincing than endless arguments anyways.

Annnnnd that's enough polygamy chatter for me. Of to my new VN...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol... should they have rights?  In a sense of fairness, yes.  However, in a practical sense, it isn't going to happen.  I don't have a clear stance on this issue because I think the institution of formal marriage should be abolished and all children grown in tubes  (seriously, not joking).  I'm just waiting for the tech to get to that level.  I also think romantic love is overrated, though I know I'm in the minority there. 

 

Are you happy with my response?

 

I know one polygamous informal group marriage, and they said the key was not marrying under the law.  As long as no one was unequal in the relationship, there wasn't a problem... it helps that all four of them are bisexual and they adore one another.  The big problem, they said, is the estate tax, which would only become a problem if one of them dies.  The title for the house is held jointly by all four of them, and they all work and pay equally toward the mortgage and child-rearing (regardless of whose child it happens to be).  I know, for a fact, that it can work, even here.  However, like I said before, it requires a rather unique outlook on things for it to work here.

 

Understand, I'm first and foremost a pragmatist on social issues.  I always think 'is it possible for this to change?' or 'is it possible for this to work?' as I attack a problem, then I chime in on it emotionally.  I'm a strong believer in creating a preemptive objective analysis before I bother bringing my emotions into play. 

 

So, from a practical perspective, I label it as being impossible, at least within this or the next decade.  However, emotionally, I'm willing to support those who want to bring that kind of change, as long as they don't link it to religious beliefs as a primary motivator.  The Middle Eastern custom won't work here, either, because of our views on personal freedoms.  If we ever gave the right of polygamy to the people here, we'd have to give it to everyone regardless of personal wealth or prosperity.  That would be disastrous, as those most likely to go for it are those who wouldn't be able to support multiple spouses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what we really need is a new VN, one that discovers the other, more realistic side of polygamy... I believes it has a higher success rate at convincing than endless arguments anyways.

 

They have one, it's called School Days./endtroll

 

I don't have a clear stance on this issue because I think the institution of formal marriage should be abolished and all children grown in tubes  (seriously, not joking).  I'm just waiting for the tech to get to that level.  I also think romantic love is overrated, though I know I'm in the minority there. 

 

When Aldous Huxley wrote Brave New World I don't think he actually wanted this to happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...