Polyandry as a Theme in a Plymouth, England Theatre

Martin Freeman reports at plymouthherald.co.uk about a woman and her play... 

“In parts of northern India there are 300 women to 1,000 men,” says Sharmila [Chauhan]. “Polyandry is not normal but it is becoming more common.”

The latest new drama to come to the Drum, Theatre Royal Plymouth, might sound heavy stuff but is not all darkness.

“There are lighter moments. It is turned on its head.

“It looks at the relation between the husbands. There is a feeling of brotherhood and tenderness.

“It is intense but there are moments that are surprisingly funny.”

Sounds like it would  be interesting.

She says, though, that polyandry and matriarchal societies are not as rare as many believe, especially if you travel in history or in time. “I went to Kerala (southern India), to see the way of life of the Nair people who used to be matriarchal. I have done lots of research about polyandrous communities across the world in Africa, parts of the Far east and south Asia.

It is happening in polyamorous homes all over the world.

The Husbands is at the Drum, Theatre Royal Plymouth, from Wednesday to Saturday, February 12-15.

If you see it, let us know what you thought!

Read more »

Posted in: polyandry,polygamy,UK

19 Responses to Anti-Polyamory

Much thanks to MultipleMatch.com for running my defense of ethical nonmonogamy, such as polyamory, polygamy, and so on.

Click here to read "19 Responses for Answering Anti-Polyamory & Plural Marriage"

Bumped up.

Read more »

Posted in: group,myths,open,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,polygyny,prejudice,swinging

We Get Letters

This blog is visited by people all over the planet, and welcomes comments and I also welcome your emails and private messages. Everyone once in a while I publish some of those messages in a blog entry, which is what I’m I’m doing here.

Responding to an entry on hostility towards as grandfather-granddaughter couple, Anonymous wrote...

I would like to see an unbiased discussion of the ethical issues involved in grandfather/grandaughter mutual erotic atttaction and expression. With the ready availability of contraception, the fear of consanguinous offspring being possible is set aside. The likely negative reaction from other family members is still a very serious issue as is that of friends, etc. If the granddaughter is at or above the age of consent, the "between consenting adults" rule s h o u l d reign, but the many negative consequences would seem to outweigh the "reward."

Serious study of consanguinamorous relationships would be great.

After "Intergenerational Relationships Can Work," Anonymous wrote...

My wife and I, both 62, are in a committed relationship with a 34 year old man. This has been the most energizing invigorating experience imaginable. Jealously has never been an issue, and my wife believes that she is the luckiest woman on the planet because we love spoiling the crap out of her. Although we two guys are not bi, we are completely comfortable hugging, kissing and cuddling in bed with my wife in middle.

I asked if Jenny Erikson was stir crazy after something she wrote at TheStir on polyamory, and IchigoRadiance wrote...

 

This really caught my eye. "I can only imagine the psychological damage to a child who has to live with a revolving door of his parents’ various love interests."

This right here really has nothing to do with polyamory. Actually it sounds a lot more like what my older childhood was like. When I was in my teens after my mother divorced her abusive husband, and my, at the time step-father, she dated other men. Sometimes she dated them for long times and sometimes she dated them for short periods. Some of them had their issues, hence why she would quit dating them, so up until my eleventh grade of school, you could consider her relationships somewhat of a revolving door.

Here's the thing, while at times things were a little unstable. It wasn't because of her moving on to other men, the problems were the men themselves. By moving on, she was dumping trash, trying to find a guy that was better than all of that, and she eventually found a man who she is happy with. But she never would have found him had she stuck with any of the jerks in an attempt to keep a "stable" life.

And stable isn't exactly the word I think this person is looking for. Instead, consistent is the word. When we still lived with my ex-step-father. We had a consistent life. It masked itself as stability, but none of us were happy. It was consistent, but consistently bad.

So if say she dated more than one guy, I don't think my life or our life in general would have been all that destabilized. It might not have been consistent, but it would have been preferable to that douche who used to be her husband.

Of course, to be honest. I saw that and immediately wrote this, I went back up and saw that you talked about the revolving door as well.

IchigoRadiance also commented on "Hate Adds Pain to Genetic Sexual Attraction"...

I agree, no matter whether you both eventually end up in a relationship or not, it is best to wait until she is older.

As for if the feelings pass. I can't speak for everybody, and I myself count as someone with GSA or just someone who fell in love with his younger half-sister. But after ten years, my feelings have never disappeared. At times they have waxed and other times they have waned. But they are always there.

Anonymous self-reported after an entry on self-reporting of consanguineous sex that the first time he had sex, it was with his sister, who was three years older than him, and that they've been sexual partners for more than 12 years now, but they don't want to live together, or marry. Another person added her experiences with her brother, which included some childhood experimentation and an adult encounter.

There were a few comments left after my entry answering how common consensual incest is. One Anonymous entry recounts experimenting with his older sister and eventually moving in together as husband and wife...

Eventually after about 5 years of soul searching and testing of our love relationship,we moved to our new home as husband and wife.In our new home we had our first intercourse.It was an incredible feeling to have my thing inside her.I still love and respect her as my elder sister and abide her decisions.I always want to love her as I know she wants me only.I never want to break this relationship of love, trust,and deep understanding.We both are extremely happy together and have never felt the urge to be with someone else.We both feel extremely sad whenever we are separated for just a few hours.Now I am 55 years old and she 62 ! It has been a long journey.We have 4 daughter,three are married and well settled.while the youngest is in school.

After the entry on why consensual incest is still illegal in many places, Anonymous wrote...

The society today is rather disturbing, i see no reason that relationships between to consenting adults be illegal. As i am a female currently in a committed relationship with my [brother]. We did not grow up together due to circumstances when we were children. but after 30 years of searching for my family i found one of 5 of my siblings and the day we met was like magic, i instantly felt a fire start to burn inside and it wasnt that of us finding each other after so long it was instant love. i have waited my whole life for this feeling and the moment i saw my brother i knew he was the one.. we dont have to worry about having children cause i am fixed and we just want to be together.. is there any place we can go and have a open relationship. it pains both of us to have to hid it from everyone.. 

Liz Smith, a longtime friend of this blog, commented on an entry about female animals who mate with their close male relatives...

All I will say is that inbreeding does not automatically lead to children with problems. I have talked with people who were inbred, or who had children with family members, and I have not heard of any who had problems as a result of it. I myself had a daughter with my brother and she has turned out just fine. I am aware that constant inbreeding, generation after generation, can possibly lead to problems, but often times it is not as big a problem as many make it out to be.

IchigoRadiance commented again after that entry, too...

When people bring up the mutated baby argument, they forget that most problems arose from several generations of inbreeding. Which coincides with what you said. Most children born from consanguinamory are healthy,

Those that use cases such as royalty don't realize that that is a case where inbreeding was encouraged if not outright demanded. Most of it was to consolidate power. In the modern day, under non-abuse, most people will not choose to date or have children with a family member, and the frequency is not to be worried about. In other words, I think we would have to require inbreeding for it to become a problem. As it is, tolerance and/or acceptance won't cause it.

The other part of the coin is that our technology has improved, so we can easily tell if the child will have problems.

If people want to support eugenics, they need to do so on a consistent level and base it on more practically. They don't really care right now about the child, just filling a moral quota to show off.

Liz commented on a couple of more entries. After "Ten Myths About Sibling Consanguinamory" she wrote...

It happened between me and my brother. Why? Not because of abuse, but because we were close when younger and as we got older we fell in love. I love him, and I wish the world would accept relationships like ours. We will always be together. We have a daughter and may have more children one day. I know that we will have to explain our situation to them and help them understand, but nobody is ever going to convince me that loving my brother is wrong because I know in my heart that it is right.

After "Consanguinamory and Reproduction" she wrote...

I am in a relationship with my brother. My story is available on this blog here. My brother and I have a daughter together. She is perfectly healthy and happy, and we do plan to have more children. I've chatted with many people who had or who were incest children and they turned out fine. I believe that the risks are simply not as bad as we have been led to believe.

After "She Has Been Denied Her Freedom to Marry," Anonymous wrote...

I love what you had to say it was hard for me and my son at first but now we enjoy so much in each other. We both have one thing that turns both of us on and that is we both like the idea of us having sex with other people to. My son and I enjoy seeing each other in that way, sharing one another's love with others at times or all at the same time. This is keep all between us all. I never knew their was other family lovers like us untill now. We have changed other family's minds on this matter, once they gave it a try they agree that incest can be the most loving thing in the world to have between family members and friends alike.

And finally, after "He's on Cloud Nine," Anonymous wrote...

My mother and I began a consanguniumaous relationship with my mother when she was 48 and I was 28. Her second husband was dying of cancer and in a moment of weakness we both gave in to our urges and had sex. We were a couple for nearly six years when we decided not to risk anyone finding out so we stopped living together.

Although my mother got pregnant with our child she had a miscarriage and even though we not trying for a child my mother and I were hopeful she would get pregnant again but she began menopause and that was that.
 

We are still sexually active, even today but, like most relationships it has changed to us getting together occasionally to remember the strong love we still have for each other.

Thanks again to all who comment or who send emails or private messages.

Read more »

Posted in: brother-sister,children,consanguineous,grandfather-granddaugther,GSA,mother-son,polyamory,polyandry,pregnancy,reunion,siblings

Gonna Need a Bigger House on the Prarie

A scientific study says polyandry pays off for female prarie dogs. As always, I note that what happens in other species isn't always applicable to humans, but this is another example refuting the claim that polyandry is "not natural." In this case, polyandry has increased the likelihood that a female will have more surviving offspring. I found this report at phys.org.

Credit: Elaine Miller Bond (elainemillerbond.com)

Mating with more than one male increases reproductive success for female prairie dogs, despite an increase in risks. This is according to a new study published in The Journal of Mammalogy by behavioral ecologist John Hoogland, Professor at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science's Appalachian Laboratory.

Mating entails significant costs such as increased susceptibility to predation and increased exposure to diseases and parasites. So why would a female prairie dog take the risk to mate with multiple males? The answer is simple and clear: female prairie dogs that mate with two or more males rear more offspring than those that mate with only one.

So, if you're a woman looking to have a lot of offspring, polyandry might be a strategy.

Prairie dogs are herbivorous rodents of the squirrel family, and forage aboveground from dawn until dusk. They live in colonies of territorial, contiguous family groups that contain one or two sexually mature adult males, three or four sexually mature adult females, and one or two sexually immature yearling males.

Know any families like that?

More information: "Why do female prairie dogs copulate with more than one male? Insights from long-term research" was published in the September issue of The Journal of Mammalogy: www.umces.edu/sites/default/files/Polyandry%2C%20JM%2C%20September%202013.pdf

I find science fascinating.

Read more »

Posted in: academia,children,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,science

Gonna Need a Bigger House on the Prarie

A scientific study says polyandry pays off for female prarie dogs. As always, I note that what happens in other species isn't always applicable to humans, but this is another example refuting the claim that polyandry is "not natural." In this case, polyandry has increased the likelihood that a female will have more surviving offspring. I found this report at phys.org.

Credit: Elaine Miller Bond (elainemillerbond.com)

Mating with more than one male increases reproductive success for female prairie dogs, despite an increase in risks. This is according to a new study published in The Journal of Mammalogy by behavioral ecologist John Hoogland, Professor at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science's Appalachian Laboratory.

Mating entails significant costs such as increased susceptibility to predation and increased exposure to diseases and parasites. So why would a female prairie dog take the risk to mate with multiple males? The answer is simple and clear: female prairie dogs that mate with two or more males rear more offspring than those that mate with only one.

So, if you're a woman looking to have a lot of offspring, polyandry might be a strategy.

Prairie dogs are herbivorous rodents of the squirrel family, and forage aboveground from dawn until dusk. They live in colonies of territorial, contiguous family groups that contain one or two sexually mature adult males, three or four sexually mature adult females, and one or two sexually immature yearling males.

Know any families like that?

More information: "Why do female prairie dogs copulate with more than one male? Insights from long-term research" was published in the September issue of The Journal of Mammalogy: www.umces.edu/sites/default/files/Polyandry%2C%20JM%2C%20September%202013.pdf

I find science fascinating.

Read more »

Posted in: academia,children,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,science

Accept That Your Grown Children Are Adults

Emily Yoffe's Dear Prudence column got a polyamory question. Stuck in the Middle With Him wrote...

Our daughter "Amanda" lives in another state and has been married to "Jacob" for several years. Theirs is an open relationship, and I have always known that. My husband, however has kept his head in the sand regarding this. My daughter has a boyfriend, "Tom,” whom Jacob knows about and has a great friendship with. They are all planning to come to our home this Christmas, but my husband insists that Tom (who has visited us previously) is not welcome. Do I tell our daughter, son-in-law, and daughter's boyfriend to make other holiday plans? My opinion is that they are all consenting adults, there are no children involved, and always behave appropriately in public.

The letter writer's husband is being a jerk. The letter writer sounds like a reasonable person. I would be interested in knowing if they have any other children, and if the non-spousal partners and friends of those children are also banned? I would also be interested in knowing how Jacob and Tom's families are about the situation. Maybe Amanda, Jacob, and Tom should go to see them for the holidays? Or they can host their own holiday get-togethers and invite all who will come?

Yoffe's reply...

Perhaps a generation from now many families will be having a very polyamorous Christmas. But we aren’t there yet. I support your conclusion that your daughter and the men in her life are consenting adults and as long as they behave with decorum, what they do in private is none of your business. But they are also open about their open relationship, so I can understand your husband’s point of view that he attended Amanda’s wedding to Jacob, where she vowed to forsake all others, including every Tom, Dick, and Harry.

Not everyone makes that vow, and not everyone who makes that vow means that they will have no involvement whatsoever with anyone else. Also, agreements are mutually modified all of the time, and if Amanda and Jacob mutually agreed to their situation, they that's all that should matter.

Suggest this year she come only with Jacob. Surely she knows there are simply occasions when she must make a choice about which man to bring.

Hmm. Tom is part of Amanda's life. This is a rejection of Amanda's autonomy over her own sexuality and social life, and a rejection of Jacob as well, since he agreed to this. Parents aren't always going to like the decisions their adult children make, but those grown children are going to live their own lives, and their parents can either be a part of it or not.

Read more »

Posted in: family reaction,media,polyamory,polyandry,prejudice

3rd International Conference on the Future of Monogamy and Nonmonogamy

Ethical nonmonogamy will continue to gain understanding, acceptance, and recognition as we move towards full marriage equality and relationship right for all. Conferences like this one will help with the process. From the website...

This event will happen February 21-23, 2014, in Berkeley, California, USA.

This conference will explore issues related to monogamous and nonmonogamous relationships from an interdisciplinary perspective. This event will be devoted to presentations of scientific and academic research related to polyamory, open relationships, swinging, other forms of consensual nonmonogamy and related subjects. The conference does not take a position on whether any particular type or style of relationship is healthy or pathological. The intention of the event is explore the subject in as objective and unbiased a manner as possible. Presentations will cover various topics that offer some possible progress to a deeper and more complete understanding of the phenomenon of consensual nonmonogamy.

This event will happen at:
THE CLARK KERR CONFERENCE CENTER, BUILDING #14, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY
The street address of the event is:
2601 WARRING STREET,
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA, 94720.

Read more »

Posted in: academia,boundaries,group,monogamy,open,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,polygyny,swinging

When Polyandry is Natural

Many monogamists and some polygynists and even a few polyamorists will assert that polyandry isn't natural. It is Discredited Argument #5 and at thealmagest.com I found another example of polyandry in nature.

Researchers at Bielefeld University and the Technische Universität Braunschweig are the first to confirm the benefit of multiple paternities for a vertebrate under completely natural conditions. Together with their team, Dr. Barbara Caspers and Dr. Sebastian Steinfartz have shown that female fire salamanders mate with several males under natural conditions (so-called polyandry). This grants them fitness-relevant benefits by increasing their number of offspring. The results of their study are being published this Friday (29 November) in the Early View version of Molecular Ecology.

Since humans have sex for many reasons, not just reproduction, it can have other benefits in humans.

For a long time, it was assumed that females in the animal world are monogamous, that is, they mate with only one male. Males, in contrast, can increase their reproductive success by mating with several females. Nowadays, however, polyandry is assumed to be the rule in the animal world and monogamy to be more of an exception.

Interesting.

By subjecting these tissue samples to genetic paternity analyses, the researchers could precisely reconstruct how many males each female had mated with and whether or not the sperm of the different males had been mixed – female salamanders can store the sperm of different males for several months in internal receptive organs called spermathecae. The eggs of the female will only be fertilized with the stored sperm, if environmental conditions are optimal and after eggs have developed into full larvae these are deposited in streams and ponds.

Fascinating.

Through paternity analyses, the researchers were able to show that some females had mated with as many as four different males. The mixing of the sperm from various males in the spermatheca of the female seems to have quite positive effects, leading to more eggs being fertilized and, as a result, more larvae were finally deposited. Accordingly, polyandry and sperm competition seems to be an important mechanism to increase reproductive success and therefore fitness of a female in this terrestrial vertebrate species.

If you're interested in the details of the data, you can find more information in these places...
http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/biologie/vhf/SF/b_caspers.html
http://ekvv.uni-bielefeld.de/blog/uninews/entry/the_more_the_better

This blog supports the rights of all adults, including those in, or who want, polyandrous relationships, or polygynous relationships, or polyamorous relationships of any sort.

Read more »

Posted in: academia,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,science

When Polyandry is Natural

Many monogamists and some polygynists and even a few polyamorists will assert that polyandry isn't natural. It is Discredited Argument #5 and at thealmagest.com I found another example of polyandry in nature.

Researchers at Bielefeld University and the Technische Universität Braunschweig are the first to confirm the benefit of multiple paternities for a vertebrate under completely natural conditions. Together with their team, Dr. Barbara Caspers and Dr. Sebastian Steinfartz have shown that female fire salamanders mate with several males under natural conditions (so-called polyandry). This grants them fitness-relevant benefits by increasing their number of offspring. The results of their study are being published this Friday (29 November) in the Early View version of Molecular Ecology.

Since humans have sex for many reasons, not just reproduction, it can have other benefits in humans.

For a long time, it was assumed that females in the animal world are monogamous, that is, they mate with only one male. Males, in contrast, can increase their reproductive success by mating with several females. Nowadays, however, polyandry is assumed to be the rule in the animal world and monogamy to be more of an exception.

Interesting.

By subjecting these tissue samples to genetic paternity analyses, the researchers could precisely reconstruct how many males each female had mated with and whether or not the sperm of the different males had been mixed – female salamanders can store the sperm of different males for several months in internal receptive organs called spermathecae. The eggs of the female will only be fertilized with the stored sperm, if environmental conditions are optimal and after eggs have developed into full larvae these are deposited in streams and ponds.

Fascinating.

Through paternity analyses, the researchers were able to show that some females had mated with as many as four different males. The mixing of the sperm from various males in the spermatheca of the female seems to have quite positive effects, leading to more eggs being fertilized and, as a result, more larvae were finally deposited. Accordingly, polyandry and sperm competition seems to be an important mechanism to increase reproductive success and therefore fitness of a female in this terrestrial vertebrate species.

If you're interested in the details of the data, you can find more information in these places...
http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/biologie/vhf/SF/b_caspers.html
http://ekvv.uni-bielefeld.de/blog/uninews/entry/the_more_the_better

This blog supports the rights of all adults, including those in, or who want, polyandrous relationships, or polygynous relationships, or polyamorous relationships of any sort.

Read more »

Posted in: academia,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,science

Differing Ideas About the Origins of Monogamy

At irishtimes.com, William Reville wrote about conflicting theories about the origins of monogamy.

Two big studies were published exploring the origins of monogamy in mammals, which these researchers define as males and females living in breeding pairs (this does not necessarily mean each animal is always faithful).

So even when an animal is listed as monogamous, it might not actually be. Living together, having sex, and raising children are not all the same things.

Birds are quite socially monogamous – 92 per cent stay with a mate for at least a mating season – but monogamy is relatively rare in mammals. This is because both male and female birds can carry out parenting duties such as incubating eggs and feeding chicks, whereas male mammals cannot help gestate or breastfeed.

Overall, 9 per cent of mammalian species are monogamous, whereas about 25 per cent of primate species live in pairs. Monogamous animals include swans, wolves, bald eagles, vultures, Arctic foxes, coyotes, grey seals, meerkats, red foxes, snow leopards, rhinoceroses, beavers, gibbons and mole rats.

Hmmm. Calling someone a "fox" might bring a different image to me now.

The Cambridge study concluded that monogamy evolved independently 61 times in mammals and, in almost all cases, when females lived separated far from each other. The researchers concluded that, under these circumstances, males would have difficulty mating with multiple females, and they would fare better by sticking with a single female and guarding her against advances from other males. Such “one-woman” males would produce more offspring than males who attempted to spread themselves about and, consequently, genes predisposing for monogamy would accumulate in the species.

Humans tend to live in close proximity to each other.

On the contrary, the UCL group concluded that the stimulus for the evolution of monogamy in primates was the high risk of infanticide by males. It is noted today that infanticide rates are very low in monogamous primates, and higher in non-monogamous primates. Males in non-monogamous species may benefit by killing babies sired by rival males.

 Usually in humans, killing a woman's children means you're not going to be having sex with her.

They have no interest in investing resources in fostering rivals’ offspring; also, losing a baby forces the mother to enter her fertile period sooner. Monogamy evolved, the UCL researchers propose, as a counter strategy among males who stayed close to their mates and offspring to defend them.

The Cambridge and UCL researchers are talking to each other but there is much to resolve. The Cambridge group found no evidence that infanticide drove the evolution of monogamy in primates, and the UCL group claims monogamy arose in primates before females moved into separate discrete territories.

The two groups disagree over the implications of their research for human evolution. The UCL team says human monogamy evolved to minimise the threat of infanticide. The Cambridge team says its own results have little bearing on humans because humans evolved from ancestors that lived in social groups, so their theory on monogamy and females living far apart doesn’t apply.

Right.

Indeed the Cambridge group wonders whether humans ever evolved monogamy at all, because in many traditional societies one man may take several wives. According to George P Murdock’s Ethnographic Atlas (University of Pittsburgh Press, 1969), among 1,231 societies around the world, 186 are monogamous, 453 are occasionally polygamist, 588 are frequently polygamist and four practise polyandry (married to more than one husband).

What about places where it is common and accepted for at least one spouse in a "monogamous" marriage to have a long-term lover on the side?

However, the actual practice of polygamy in a tolerant society may be low. In many monogamous societies the divorce rate approaches 50 per cent, and re-marriage is common. In reality, these “monogamous societies” practise serial monogamy, a form of plural mating.

Well, yes, that is the whole "serial monogamy" or "serial polygamy" thing.

How many humans go through their entire life with only one sex partner?
How many humans go through their entire life only having/raising children with one other person?
How many humans go through their entire life only ever living the same one partner?
How many humans go through their entire life only marrying on person?

Considering all of this, it makes it less plausible to say monogamy is or should be the norm for humans. I'm not someone who says nobody should be monogamous. Although I am polyamorous, I do not think polygamory is for everyone. I fully support someone's right to be monogamous, and if they're happy being monogamous I am happy for them. In turn, I welcome monogamous allies for the rights of the polyamorous, especially in light of the scientific facts.

Read more »

Posted in: children,human origins,monogamy,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,polygyny,pregnancy,science

Differing Ideas About the Origins of Monogamy

At irishtimes.com, William Reville wrote about conflicting theories about the origins of monogamy.

Two big studies were published exploring the origins of monogamy in mammals, which these researchers define as males and females living in breeding pairs (this does not necessarily mean each animal is always faithful).

So even when an animal is listed as monogamous, it might not actually be. Living together, having sex, and raising children are not all the same things.

Birds are quite socially monogamous – 92 per cent stay with a mate for at least a mating season – but monogamy is relatively rare in mammals. This is because both male and female birds can carry out parenting duties such as incubating eggs and feeding chicks, whereas male mammals cannot help gestate or breastfeed.

Overall, 9 per cent of mammalian species are monogamous, whereas about 25 per cent of primate species live in pairs. Monogamous animals include swans, wolves, bald eagles, vultures, Arctic foxes, coyotes, grey seals, meerkats, red foxes, snow leopards, rhinoceroses, beavers, gibbons and mole rats.

Hmmm. Calling someone a "fox" might bring a different image to me now.

The Cambridge study concluded that monogamy evolved independently 61 times in mammals and, in almost all cases, when females lived separated far from each other. The researchers concluded that, under these circumstances, males would have difficulty mating with multiple females, and they would fare better by sticking with a single female and guarding her against advances from other males. Such “one-woman” males would produce more offspring than males who attempted to spread themselves about and, consequently, genes predisposing for monogamy would accumulate in the species.

Humans tend to live in close proximity to each other.

On the contrary, the UCL group concluded that the stimulus for the evolution of monogamy in primates was the high risk of infanticide by males. It is noted today that infanticide rates are very low in monogamous primates, and higher in non-monogamous primates. Males in non-monogamous species may benefit by killing babies sired by rival males.

 Usually in humans, killing a woman's children means you're not going to be having sex with her.

They have no interest in investing resources in fostering rivals’ offspring; also, losing a baby forces the mother to enter her fertile period sooner. Monogamy evolved, the UCL researchers propose, as a counter strategy among males who stayed close to their mates and offspring to defend them.

The Cambridge and UCL researchers are talking to each other but there is much to resolve. The Cambridge group found no evidence that infanticide drove the evolution of monogamy in primates, and the UCL group claims monogamy arose in primates before females moved into separate discrete territories.

The two groups disagree over the implications of their research for human evolution. The UCL team says human monogamy evolved to minimise the threat of infanticide. The Cambridge team says its own results have little bearing on humans because humans evolved from ancestors that lived in social groups, so their theory on monogamy and females living far apart doesn’t apply.

Right.

Indeed the Cambridge group wonders whether humans ever evolved monogamy at all, because in many traditional societies one man may take several wives. According to George P Murdock’s Ethnographic Atlas (University of Pittsburgh Press, 1969), among 1,231 societies around the world, 186 are monogamous, 453 are occasionally polygamist, 588 are frequently polygamist and four practise polyandry (married to more than one husband).

What about places where it is common and accepted for at least one spouse in a "monogamous" marriage to have a long-term lover on the side?

However, the actual practice of polygamy in a tolerant society may be low. In many monogamous societies the divorce rate approaches 50 per cent, and re-marriage is common. In reality, these “monogamous societies” practise serial monogamy, a form of plural mating.

Well, yes, that is the whole "serial monogamy" or "serial polygamy" thing.

How many humans go through their entire life with only one sex partner?
How many humans go through their entire life only having/raising children with one other person?
How many humans go through their entire life only ever living the same one partner?
How many humans go through their entire life only marrying on person?

Considering all of this, it makes it less plausible to say monogamy is or should be the norm for humans. I'm not someone who says nobody should be monogamous. Although I am polyamorous, I do not think polygamory is for everyone. I fully support someone's right to be monogamous, and if they're happy being monogamous I am happy for them. In turn, I welcome monogamous allies for the rights of the polyamorous, especially in light of the scientific facts.

Read more »

Posted in: children,human origins,monogamy,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,polygyny,pregnancy,science

19 Responses to Anti-Polyamory

Much thanks to MultipleMatch.com for running my defense of ethical nonmonogamy, such as polyamory, polygamy, and so on.

Click here to read "19 Responses for Answering Anti-Polyamory & Plural Marriage"

Read more »

Posted in: group,myths,open,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,polygyny,prejudice,swinging

His Mother Fell For Two Brothers

Someone named Thomas had a question/complaint at a certain Big Internet Portal's question-and-answer service. I would have answered his question directly, but the flaws of how the system there is set up allowed (what was probably) one person who simply didn't like my opinions to get me banned from participating. Anyway, here's what Thomas wrote...

Why did my mom get pregnant to two brothers?

My guess? Because she had sex with them without using contraception effectively. I know, I know, that's not really what he's asking...

She had me with my dad. Then slept with my dads brother and got pregnant to him 2 years after I was born, and had my sister. She wasn't married to either. They were just casual things. But could she not have picked guys who weren't related? It causes so many problems within our family because she has sex with them (seperately) sometimes. Its embarrassing when people work out that my sister and I are cousins as well as siblings. Even though its not incest they act like it is. Why is she such a ho with no consideration for her son and daughter? What makes it worse is that I see my uncle as more of a dad to me than my actual father and I wish he was. Its a messed up situation all round. All because of her.

Why would it be better to be "half-siblings and nothing" as opposed to "half-siblings and cousins?" Unless the two men were having sex with each other, there's nothing incestuous about any of this. It is not incestuous for a woman to have sex with one person and then have sex with a close relative of the first person. That other people give Thomas grief (especially about something over which he had no control) indicates they are prejudiced jerks, but it is just another example of the absurdity of the irrational "othering" of anything that some people might so much as mistake for involving consanguineous sexuality.

I would have pointed Thomas to historical traditions and to the fact that in ancient books like the Bible, some people were commanded to have sex with (and marry and have children with) the sibling of their prior spouse. Even today, continuing what can be found in the Bible and other old writings, polygynists (including a family in the media) as well as polyandrists marry and have sex with siblings. This has gone all for all of human history.

Someone being a jerk about this should be asked, "So what's wrong with that?" They might think it is strange, but so what? Would it be better that the two men she had children with be complete strangers? Why?

Here's what matters about Thomas' mother: Does she love her children?

Read more »

Posted in: lack of equality harms,polyandry,prejudice,stigma

Does Polyandry Increase Offspring Health?

I found this at business-standard.com...

A joint study by researchers from four universities has suggested women could improve quality of their offspring by mating with multiple partners.

Experts examined the behaviour of an ancestor of the domestic chicken and found that mating with different males helped females produce offspring that are more resistant to disease, Daily Mail reported.

Now they claim their findings could be applied to other animals as well as humans.

I'm always cautious about citing the behavior of other species to support/oppose human behavior, but less cautious about comparing biological results.

In humans, polyandrous families (and polyamorous families in general) have found that having more adults around to assist, supervise, and protect children can always be helpful.

Read more »

Posted in: children,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,pregnancy,science

Leontiades Lauds Love, Seeks Solidarity

Louisa Leontiades covers something at huffingtonpost.co.uk that is unavoidable in ethical nonmonogamy circles, and more specifically, in polyamorous circles: differences in relationship structures and guidelines, and how that divides some. Leontiades is founder of MultipleMatch.com, where this piece was previously published.

Those who feel the inclination to love many, have to learn by doing, and are often shunned and shamed whilst doing so, making the pursuit of their relationships a thousand times harder. Indeed the fact that the polyamorous community is growing at all in the face of constant opposition, is a true testament to the power of love... and marginalization. The power that the world gives polyamorists by vilification turns it into a cause, spawning Poly-pride, support groups like PolyLiving  and not for profit organizations like Loving More. 

Polyamory has definitely been coming out of the closet, but with that come some issues.

Unfortunately despite all the good intentions, a minority's struggle for acceptance will always create a 'prisoners' dilemma' and this one is no different. In the non-monogamous community certain relationship configurations are more likely to be accepted if they align themselves to already existing precepts and/or paradigms. For example as the idealised Male-Female-Female triad slowly becomes more acceptable to the general public, it's no coincidence  that it's also the most popular choice for many newly out-of the closet polyamorists; simply because it is the most familiar, comfortable and least controversial. To the outside world that is. Because poly-activists argue that this configuration still perpetuates male privilege (a bisexual female who gets it on with another girl, is no threat to the male ego - aka. One-Penis-Policy). Such a paradigm which is perceived to perpetuate the very patriarchy and notion of possession that polyamory tries to counteract in the first place, is one of the biggest hot potatoes.

I support each person finding what is best for them. For some people, that may be living alone, even being celibate (as difficult as that is for someone like me to think of as enjoyable). For others, it will be a closed, monogamous relationship, living together or not. For others, some form of ethical nonmonogamy is best. If someone, regardless of their gender, truly prefers a closed polygynous relationship, and they've found the people who make a good match, good for them. I say the same for someone who needs or prefers an equal number of men and women in their polycule, or someone who prefers polygyny, someone who needs a same-gender polycule, and all of the other possibilities (cosleeping, fluid bonding, public dates, meeting family, ceremonial bonding, etc.) Just because something isn't for me doesn't mean it isn't for someone else.

Likewise, some proponents of polyamory like to distance themselves from promiscuity and/or swinging which are heavily frowned upon by mainstreamers - even if many polyamorists discover their inclination by through such sexual liberation in the first place. Promiscuity is harshly condemned (at least when it concerns women) and swinging is premeditated promiscuity. It is - gasp - sex for fun. Moral judgements and definitions divide the non-monogamous community because the harsh rejection by the world of the community as a whole, creates a desperate need in many to achieve acceptance at any cost.

Again, let people decide for themselves.

Ethical non-monogamy by definition can include many different preferences, none more valid than the other. Of course it's worth listening to those who condemn (questioning values is what polyamorists are good at)... But know and trust that everyone's journey is different, including yours. Because when such a community is already small and despised by the outside world, it is doubly important to stick together.

Yes! YES! I've long called for solidarity on this blog. It is important when it comes to Interracial-LGBT-Poly-Consanguinamory cooperation and it is important when it comes to cooperation within ethical nonmonomist communities, too. There are many colors in a rainbow and many waves in a ocean. Ever notice, when looking in-person or at an image of a natural panorama, there are many different things that comprise the beautiful whole?

Read more »

Posted in: allies,boundaries,group,lack of equality harms,open,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,polygyny,prejudice,solidarity,stigma,swinging,triads

Leontiades Lauds Love, Seeks Solidarity

Louisa Leontiades covers something at huffingtonpost.co.uk that is unavoidable in ethical nonmonogamy circles, and more specifically, in polyamorous circles: differences in relationship structures and guidelines, and how that divides some. Leontiades is founder of MultipleMatch.com, where this piece was previously published.

Those who feel the inclination to love many, have to learn by doing, and are often shunned and shamed whilst doing so, making the pursuit of their relationships a thousand times harder. Indeed the fact that the polyamorous community is growing at all in the face of constant opposition, is a true testament to the power of love... and marginalization. The power that the world gives polyamorists by vilification turns it into a cause, spawning Poly-pride, support groups like PolyLiving  and not for profit organizations like Loving More. 

Polyamory has definitely been coming out of the closet, but with that come some issues.

Unfortunately despite all the good intentions, a minority's struggle for acceptance will always create a 'prisoners' dilemma' and this one is no different. In the non-monogamous community certain relationship configurations are more likely to be accepted if they align themselves to already existing precepts and/or paradigms. For example as the idealised Male-Female-Female triad slowly becomes more acceptable to the general public, it's no coincidence  that it's also the most popular choice for many newly out-of the closet polyamorists; simply because it is the most familiar, comfortable and least controversial. To the outside world that is. Because poly-activists argue that this configuration still perpetuates male privilege (a bisexual female who gets it on with another girl, is no threat to the male ego - aka. One-Penis-Policy). Such a paradigm which is perceived to perpetuate the very patriarchy and notion of possession that polyamory tries to counteract in the first place, is one of the biggest hot potatoes.

I support each person finding what is best for them. For some people, that may be living alone, even being celibate (as difficult as that is for someone like me to think of as enjoyable). For others, it will be a closed, monogamous relationship, living together or not. For others, some form of ethical nonmonogamy is best. If someone, regardless of their gender, truly prefers a closed polygynous relationship, and they've found the people who make a good match, good for them. I say the same for someone who needs or prefers an equal number of men and women in their polycule, or someone who prefers polygyny, someone who needs a same-gender polycule, and all of the other possibilities (cosleeping, fluid bonding, public dates, meeting family, ceremonial bonding, etc.) Just because something isn't for me doesn't mean it isn't for someone else.

Likewise, some proponents of polyamory like to distance themselves from promiscuity and/or swinging which are heavily frowned upon by mainstreamers - even if many polyamorists discover their inclination by through such sexual liberation in the first place. Promiscuity is harshly condemned (at least when it concerns women) and swinging is premeditated promiscuity. It is - gasp - sex for fun. Moral judgements and definitions divide the non-monogamous community because the harsh rejection by the world of the community as a whole, creates a desperate need in many to achieve acceptance at any cost.

Again, let people decide for themselves.

Ethical non-monogamy by definition can include many different preferences, none more valid than the other. Of course it's worth listening to those who condemn (questioning values is what polyamorists are good at)... But know and trust that everyone's journey is different, including yours. Because when such a community is already small and despised by the outside world, it is doubly important to stick together.

Yes! YES! I've long called for solidarity on this blog. It is important when it comes to Interracial-LGBT-Poly-Consanguinamory cooperation and it is important when it comes to cooperation within ethical nonmonomist communities, too. There are many colors in a rainbow and many waves in a ocean. Ever notice, when looking in-person or at an image of a natural panorama, there are many different things that comprise the beautiful whole?

Read more »

Posted in: allies,boundaries,group,lack of equality harms,open,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,polygyny,prejudice,solidarity,stigma,swinging,triads

Polyandry and Prejudice in Kenya

I'm not sure why this has become such big news. Two men love the same woman. They want a polyandrous marriage. What's the big deal? From npr.org...

Polygamy is fairly common in Kenya but one forthcoming marriage is turning that custom on its head. A Kenyan woman not wanting to choose between the two men she loves, decided she will marry both of them. The men have agreed, and the trio even signed a contract to "set boundaries and keep the peace."

This happens every day all over the world.

From bbc.co.uk...

The agreement sets out a rota for Sylvester Mwendwa and Elijah Kimani to stay in her house and states they will both help raise any children she bears.

Mr Mwendwa told the BBC he loved the woman and said the contract would "set boundaries" and "keep the peace".

Lawyers said the "marriage" would only be recognised if they could prove polyandry - a woman having more than one husband - was part of their custom.

How about simply recognizing that adults should be free to marry each other?

Mr Mwendwa said her parents had given their blessing, while he is planning to pay the bride price.

The woman, a widow with two children, did not want to be named.

Mr Mwendwa told the BBC he did not marry the woman simply to satisfy his sexual desires but because he loved her and, most of all, her children.

The scrutiny has not been without cost. From standardmedia.co.ke comes this report from Willis Oketch..

A woman who was alleged to have been married to two men in Mombasa now wants to sue for damages over claims that her name has been tarnished.

And...

But one of the lovers, a 26 year-old man Mr Sylvester Mwenda who signed the agreement is believed to have been shown the door over unexplained circumstances.

Mr Mwenda admitted he was in love with the woman, he believes she was the only woman he loves and was ready to do anything to please her.

He explained that his love for the woman was so deep and was ready to do anything, including sharing her with another man.

How many other relationships are like this? Why is this news? What should be news is someone getting fired from their job for having a consensual adult relationship. From ntv.co.ke...

A man involved in a polyandrous relationship in Mombasa is now seeking help after losing his job and attracting condemnation from society. Sylvester Mwendwa is now seeking help from mens rights organisation, Maendeleo Ya Wanaume after his confession set him on a collision course with close friends and family. Brenda Wanga reports that despite the hue and cry that has come in the wake of that confession, Mwendwa says he would do it again. 

And finally, there's Safa Jinje's piece in theglobeandmail.com...

Polyandry – the practice of a woman having more than one mating partner at a time – is not as prevalent as polygyny, which is recognized in various patriarchal societies. Traditionally, polyandry has been found in egalitarian societies where fertile women are scarce, the result of a slanted ratio between men and women; or in societies where high male mortality or absenteeism rates create a higher demand for fathers.

 Why shouldn't a woman be free to marry two men, if all agree? There's no good reason.

Read more »

Posted in: Africa,coming out,freedom to marry,Kenya,love,media,polyandry,polygamy,prejudice

Polyandry and Prejudice in Kenya

I'm not sure why this has become such big news. Two men love the same woman. They want a polyandrous marriage. What's the big deal? From npr.org...

Polygamy is fairly common in Kenya but one forthcoming marriage is turning that custom on its head. A Kenyan woman not wanting to choose between the two men she loves, decided she will marry both of them. The men have agreed, and the trio even signed a contract to "set boundaries and keep the peace."

This happens every day all over the world.

From bbc.co.uk...

The agreement sets out a rota for Sylvester Mwendwa and Elijah Kimani to stay in her house and states they will both help raise any children she bears.

Mr Mwendwa told the BBC he loved the woman and said the contract would "set boundaries" and "keep the peace".

Lawyers said the "marriage" would only be recognised if they could prove polyandry - a woman having more than one husband - was part of their custom.

How about simply recognizing that adults should be free to marry each other?

Mr Mwendwa said her parents had given their blessing, while he is planning to pay the bride price.

The woman, a widow with two children, did not want to be named.

Mr Mwendwa told the BBC he did not marry the woman simply to satisfy his sexual desires but because he loved her and, most of all, her children.

The scrutiny has not been without cost. From standardmedia.co.ke comes this report from Willis Oketch..

A woman who was alleged to have been married to two men in Mombasa now wants to sue for damages over claims that her name has been tarnished.

And...

But one of the lovers, a 26 year-old man Mr Sylvester Mwenda who signed the agreement is believed to have been shown the door over unexplained circumstances.

Mr Mwenda admitted he was in love with the woman, he believes she was the only woman he loves and was ready to do anything to please her.

He explained that his love for the woman was so deep and was ready to do anything, including sharing her with another man.

How many other relationships are like this? Why is this news? What should be news is someone getting fired from their job for having a consensual adult relationship. From ntv.co.ke...

A man involved in a polyandrous relationship in Mombasa is now seeking help after losing his job and attracting condemnation from society. Sylvester Mwendwa is now seeking help from mens rights organisation, Maendeleo Ya Wanaume after his confession set him on a collision course with close friends and family. Brenda Wanga reports that despite the hue and cry that has come in the wake of that confession, Mwendwa says he would do it again. 

And finally, there's Safa Jinje's piece in theglobeandmail.com...

Polyandry – the practice of a woman having more than one mating partner at a time – is not as prevalent as polygyny, which is recognized in various patriarchal societies. Traditionally, polyandry has been found in egalitarian societies where fertile women are scarce, the result of a slanted ratio between men and women; or in societies where high male mortality or absenteeism rates create a higher demand for fathers.

 Why shouldn't a woman be free to marry two men, if all agree? There's no good reason.

Read more »

Posted in: Africa,coming out,freedom to marry,Kenya,love,media,polyandry,polygamy,prejudice

Casting Call For Polyandrous Woman

An ad was placed at realitywanted.com...

Casting Call Information
City: Any City
State: National

Casting for women who live a polyandrous lifestyle. Seeking only those in serious relationships or with families. Preferably those who can recognize and comment on the social, economic, and political influence of they're lifestyle.

I am thinking of a few women who might be good for this.

I am cautiously optimistic that someone is going to put together a good documentary or series featuring polyandrous families. Polyandry needs to be depicted more, with honesty. People need to know it is an option and that there are people living in such relationships. On the other hand, even "reality" shows are edited for the sake of getting audience attention. This could be good, or it could be bad. If the producers think it is to their benefit, they may portray polyandry in general in a negative light or any given person in the show in a negative light. Also, this form of fame can bring many challenges and complications.

If the producers handle things well, this could be a very good thing for polyamorous people and relationship rights in general, including full marriage equality.

Read more »

Posted in: media,polyamory,polyandry,USA

Casting Call For Polyandrous Woman

An ad was placed at realitywanted.com...

Casting Call Information
City: Any City
State: National

Casting for women who live a polyandrous lifestyle. Seeking only those in serious relationships or with families. Preferably those who can recognize and comment on the social, economic, and political influence of they're lifestyle.

I am thinking of a few women who might be good for this.

I am cautiously optimistic that someone is going to put together a good documentary or series featuring polyandrous families. Polyandry needs to be depicted more, with honesty. People need to know it is an option and that there are people living in such relationships. On the other hand, even "reality" shows are edited for the sake of getting audience attention. This could be good, or it could be bad. If the producers think it is to their benefit, they may portray polyandry in general in a negative light or any given person in the show in a negative light. Also, this form of fame can bring many challenges and complications.

If the producers handle things well, this could be a very good thing for polyamorous people and relationship rights in general, including full marriage equality.

Read more »

Posted in: media,polyamory,polyandry,USA