Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter
reductio ad absurda or ponzi scheme is the argument.
In a finite population, if some males have multiple spouses then other males are lacking.
In small polygamous communities, such boys are driven out by one means or another.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by glatt
I'm not following you on either point. Can you flesh those out at all?
|
I was making the argument against polygamy, not gay marriage,
in a finite (small) population... and assumed there were "multiple wives"
If there are 100 men and 100 women, and 30 men have a total of 60 wives,
there would be only 40 single women left to wed among the remaining 70 single men.
The married men (in power) see this problem coming,
and so force the excess males (boys) out of the community.
Of course, gay marriage would be one solution to this situation.
as would reversed polygamy where those 40 women have multiple husbands.
Don't laugh, supposedly the latter happened in isolated Eskimo families
In other (very large) cultures this "ponzi scheme" kind of problem is not as apparent,
particularly if the polygamous males are only a minority among the male population.
The bachelors probably still aspire to polygamy, so they are content with hope and dreams
.