= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
wiresnips comments on Unknown knowns: Why did you choose to be monogamous? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (651)
Polygamy is definitely to women's advantage. Since there's no real limit to the number of children a man can father, women can agree to share the very best male genetic material amongst each other and leave all the other men out in the cold. Think of the private harems that any number of rulers have maintained. In a monogamous culture, any given sub-excellent male has a much better chance of mating.
Polygyny (not necessarily generic polygamy) is to women's genetic advantage insofar as the selection of husbands depends on things that correlate with valuable genes. It is not necessarily to our advantage in other ways or under other circumstances.
Women weren't the ones who set up those harems.
Evolutionary fitness is not morality. It doesn't have a thing to do with our preferences. We are adaptation-executers, not fitness-maximizers.
Consider the stereotype: Beautiful young woman marries rich older man, cheats on him with the handsome young pool boy.
There is an element of truth behind what you say, but ask yourself what your desired response was to this comment and whether it is the optimal way of eliciting that response.
Far more care is required when presenting facts that could support positions that are not politically correct. Without such care such claims can actually immunize against future acceptance of the information.
</condescension> ;)
See Shattered Dreams: My Life as a Polygamist's Wife for an extended example for why there's more to life than reproductive fitness.
The author is from a fringe Mormon sect which pushes families to be one man, seven wives, and as many children as possible.Going on welfare isn't feasible because of fears that the illegal arrangement might be discovered. The result is not only a serious level of poverty, but an emotional mess because of jealousy among the women. They each wanted more time and attention from their husband than he had available.
I feel like I should point out that the official Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has officially repudiated polygamy (except insofar as men can be "sealed" to several wives if it happens that each dies before he marries the next). I've lived in Utah and this repudiation is carried out in everyday social stigma; it's not just on paper. Since "Mormon" is recognized as a nickname for that religion more readily than its spinoffs, calling polygamist sects "Mormon" instead of the distinct "Mormon fundamentalism" is misleading and perpetuates stereotypes. "Fringe" is a nod to this, but it doesn't specify what it's on the fringe of (even standard-issue Mormonism could be considered on the fringe of, say, generic Christianity).
How would you recommend that I describe such groups? Always mention that what they're doing is repudiated by the vast majority of Mormons?
You call them "fundamentalist Mormons", or name the specific sect.
I think that naming the specific sect is a lot more likely to miscommunicate than "fringe."
I agree on that.