649. Polyandry And Polygyny Are Not Mirror-Inverted
Superficially seen, polyandry by women and polygyny by men seem to be mirror-inverted but identical constellations. When omitting the blurring factor of what makes a union a marriage, as this differs widely between countries and cultures, both forms of polygamy can be defined as:
Superficially seen, polyandry by women and polygyny by men seem to be mirror-inverted but identical constellations. When omitting the blurring factor of what makes a union a marriage, as this differs widely between countries and cultures, both forms of polygamy can be defined as:
One person of one gender has at the same time more than one non-temporary intimate relationship with a person of the other gender.
But in spite of the superficial appearance, it is far from mirror-inverted. The subconscious biological differences between male and female instincts cause decisive distinctions.
Both varieties are in general biased in favor of male decision, male needs, male consent, male attitudes derived from their instinctive urges, while they are imposed upon women without an alternative and without the power to reject it. Men do have the advantage of power by greater innate physical strength, and polygamy is not exempted from its effects.
I am saying in general, as I am of course ignorant of the possible existence of exceptions.
Polyandry:
I just read in a newspaper about a society somewhere in Asia, where it is the custom, that several brothers marry one woman and they all live as one family. This reminded me of once chatting with a man, who was looking for a woman to be shared with his buddy. I already talked about them in entry 300.
Such behavior can be explained by evolutionary biologically and by the specific male instinctive predispositions.
Polyandry:
I just read in a newspaper about a society somewhere in Asia, where it is the custom, that several brothers marry one woman and they all live as one family. This reminded me of once chatting with a man, who was looking for a woman to be shared with his buddy. I already talked about them in entry 300.
Such behavior can be explained by evolutionary biologically and by the specific male instinctive predispositions.
When men perceive women mainly as toilets for their body waste and not as companions for nonphysical intimacy, then it is not at all surprising, when they are emotionally and intellectually much closer and much more bonded to their brothers and to their buddies known since childhood.
When they trust each other to share their assets and commodities as is a car, a machine or a home, then they perceive the body of an objectified woman just as one more commodity to be shared the same way.
When men claim the right to and even fight over the exclusive control over the access to their mates' bodies, this does not automatically imply any emotional attachment. Some men can be indifferent to the woman's affective preferences, but they just want to be sure, that they are only burdened with raising those children, who do carry their own genes and not those of someone else.
But when men decide themselves, with whom to share a woman by the exclusion of all others, and they feel close enough, then this includes the willingness to also participate in the burden of raising children, who are genetically the descendants of one of them, but of nobody else.
Polygyny:
Polygyny is much more widespread than polyandry. It reflects the biological discrepancy between the frequency of male dishomeostasis and the reluctance of many women to cooperate to restore the homeostasis of those men, who do not fulfill the women's emotional needs in return. Instead of learning to give women, what they need emotionally and intellectually, these instinct driven animals attempt to solve their biological problem by the concurrent use of more than one female body.
So far, I have not yet heard of any two women doing the same as the men in the cases of polyandry, which means to decide to share one man. Nor have I heard of any man entering such a constellation by passive compliance with two women's decision.
Polygyny is a man's decision for his benefits only, and it is rarely welcome by the women. Where it is a legal option, the second marriage is usually imposed upon the first wife, no matter what she really wishes. The second and further wives are usually pressed into such a marriage by the family.
When men claim the right to and even fight over the exclusive control over the access to their mates' bodies, this does not automatically imply any emotional attachment. Some men can be indifferent to the woman's affective preferences, but they just want to be sure, that they are only burdened with raising those children, who do carry their own genes and not those of someone else.
But when men decide themselves, with whom to share a woman by the exclusion of all others, and they feel close enough, then this includes the willingness to also participate in the burden of raising children, who are genetically the descendants of one of them, but of nobody else.
Polygyny:
Polygyny is much more widespread than polyandry. It reflects the biological discrepancy between the frequency of male dishomeostasis and the reluctance of many women to cooperate to restore the homeostasis of those men, who do not fulfill the women's emotional needs in return. Instead of learning to give women, what they need emotionally and intellectually, these instinct driven animals attempt to solve their biological problem by the concurrent use of more than one female body.
So far, I have not yet heard of any two women doing the same as the men in the cases of polyandry, which means to decide to share one man. Nor have I heard of any man entering such a constellation by passive compliance with two women's decision.
Polygyny is a man's decision for his benefits only, and it is rarely welcome by the women. Where it is a legal option, the second marriage is usually imposed upon the first wife, no matter what she really wishes. The second and further wives are usually pressed into such a marriage by the family.
Whenever an additional wife is indeed welcomed as someone to share the burden of household chores with, this is no evidence of the acceptance of polygyny as sharing a man, it really is an expression of the extreme plight and despair of women in dire poverty, who are deprived of the relief of machines or paid help.
But a form of polygyny exists even in modern western societies, but it is usually not considered nor recognized as such. Whenever a man starts a non-ephemeral extramarital affair with a woman, he creates for himself the benefits of a polygynous constellation. But the two women involved do not agree. The first one is either kept ignorant or she is tied by circumstances as having children. She wants her husband to fulfill his promise of being monogamous, she does not consent to share him. The second woman is foolish enough to compete with the first wife attempting to take her place and then have him to herself. Both women suffer, only the polygynous man is motivated to prolong this situations, as long as he gets enough benefits for a low price.
Thus, in the case of the polyandry by the men's decision, the men can often be content and satisfied. in the case of polygyny, which is installed by a men over more or less disagreeing women, it is also the man, who benefits, while the women suffer.
Only the balanced monogamy gives women a fair chance of getting as much advantages and benefits as do men.
But a form of polygyny exists even in modern western societies, but it is usually not considered nor recognized as such. Whenever a man starts a non-ephemeral extramarital affair with a woman, he creates for himself the benefits of a polygynous constellation. But the two women involved do not agree. The first one is either kept ignorant or she is tied by circumstances as having children. She wants her husband to fulfill his promise of being monogamous, she does not consent to share him. The second woman is foolish enough to compete with the first wife attempting to take her place and then have him to herself. Both women suffer, only the polygynous man is motivated to prolong this situations, as long as he gets enough benefits for a low price.
Thus, in the case of the polyandry by the men's decision, the men can often be content and satisfied. in the case of polygyny, which is installed by a men over more or less disagreeing women, it is also the man, who benefits, while the women suffer.
Only the balanced monogamy gives women a fair chance of getting as much advantages and benefits as do men.
