What happens to the extra men?
From what I understand of the philosophy behind Christian Polygynous, most men aren't interested in having families. Understand you there. They wouldn't be good fathers, and most women want children. Hence Christian Polygynous allows for women to group around the few who are good fathers and form supportive communities.
Great.
But what about the bad fathers?
Most men are not happy celibate, either. In fact, most men, without a woman in their lives, become rather violent. Just look at prison populations, or the old west. Women, in general, provide a civilizing force for the men in their lives. It might be genetic, or it might be cultural. Either way, if most men aren't married, we'll have an unmarried underclass that will have high rates of crime. Fist fights, etc.
Now, my solution to this is to have the few women who don't want children to marry these men. Give them a family. Polyandry, and they can get along and form a happy community of adults.
But I have the feeling you don't approve of that lifestyle. A wife with two husbands will have a hard time being obedient to both of them—a man cannot serve two masters, and neither can a woman.
I also don't think you'd approve of the men having sex with the wives of the man who wants children, and just making the good father raise them. It seems horribly unfair, doesn't it? Plus the whole “adultery†thing.
So how do you address this concern?
Should the men remain celibate?
If their choices are "Be without someone to welcome you home at night, or have several wives and children" won't there be the same problem there is in today's society? That of men feeling like they are supposed to be fathers, when they really don't want to be fathers.
Note: I am not Christian. I just like studying the bible and other's interpretations of it. I also am in favor of polygamy.
More Women
There are more women in the world than men. I know all three times I was in the hospital haveing my girls, out of the 5 or so women having babies there was only one haveing a boy. I have 3 girls, a step daughter and a step son. That's 1 to 4. My sister has 2 boys. My mother has 5 girls and a boy. There are more girls in classes than boys, now, and when I was in school. So as far as there being lonely men, there are plenty of women out there. It's up to the man that doesn't want children to find a woman that doesn't want children as my brother in law did. It's hard, but no harder than finding a woman into polyamy these days.
Faith McClain
actually that is false
actually that is false, upon conception there is a 60% chance you have produced a son and a 40% chance you have produced a daughter.
Its a question of world peace not celibatcy
I would like to humbly submit that in fact the reason for the degrading of our society is due to this exact question. Should the men remain celibate? Yes they should be but unfortunately society does not encourage this this behavior but actually promotes loose relationships which is leading us into spiraling divorce rates and increasing same sex relationships. Not all men can follow this but far more could reduce their desires and urges to act if it was not pushed on to them at every second in every media... and it was encouraged that celibacy was a noble and highly elevated lifestyle choice. It takes grave courage and determination to control the desires of lust and for anyone who even try's should be praised and respected, even if they fall we should praise and respect them and we should encourage them to try again.
To control the genitals is to control the mind, to control the mind one can control anger, once we truly control anger within the heart... we become at peace within our selfs...
Please see... for peace to be in the world.... every single man must be first at peace within himself... otherwise what is the question of world peace?...otherwise there will always be war and wars to kill our men and rip our nations into pieces... historically speaking war is always leaving us with far more women than men.
I hope you find what you are looking for...
Cencus data indicates more
Cencus data indicates more women than men.
In first world countries it's relitively small, Canadas 2007 cencus from Statscan gave it a rougly 3.9% discrpancy. App 311,400 more Women than men. The discrepency increases slighly with age, but even by the early twenties there are more women than men. Other first world nations have 2-5% discrepencies, US and England at least. Now, Countries at war have MUCH greater discrepancies, My aunt who worked in for the UN under Taliban protection untill 9\11 later told me that there was getting to be a problem with a MF ration passing 4\1, too many women even for a polygynus society.
Exactly what casues these differences I do not know enough to say, but it is there. The real question is what do we do with the the extra women? It supports the stance that monogymy promotes prostitution and devalues women. Its just a question of how big is the problem.
I dont advocate polygamy for everyone, but it should be an option to fill the gap, Monogamy has nothing good to do for its extra women, and there are, even at peace, moreso at war.
The extra women are senior citizens
It is not true that "there are more women in the world than men."
The male-to-female ratio for the entire world population is 1.01 males/female, with 1.06 at birth, still 1.06 for those under 15, 1.03 for those between 15 and 64, and 0.79 for those over 65.
So, for the world there are more men than women in every age group except old people well past their childbearing years. Also I would say, well past wanting to get married if they haven’t already, or marry again if they have.
It is true that there are about 4,303,361 "extra women" in the United States.
The male-to-female ratio for the population of the United States is .97 males/female, with 1.05 at birth, still 1.05 for those under 15, 1.02 for those between 15 and 54, and 0.82 for those over 54; 51 is the average age for menopause in American women.
All of the "extra women" are 54 years or older. So, if 2 or 3 million polygynists would commit to marrying all the extra women over age 54 I'm sure that would make them happy.
Please use statistics wisely and correctly.
I know that accepting this information as fact will seriously undermine your mathematical defense of polygyny. However, perhaps this just means that you will have to focus on other aspects besides statistics.
For instance, polygyny could be posited as the demographic counterpart to male homosexuality, and perhaps you could argue that as long as adults are free to make these choices, both lifestyles are acceptable. (Although you might have a hard time putting this past female homosexuals.)
Or, you could argue from a biological standpoint, where as with lions, the females mate only with the most desirable male and thus strengthen the gene pool because the other males are unable to pass on their less-desirable genetic information.
Or, you could say that polygyny is perfectly acceptable from a moral standpoint as long as it is used wisely. For example, it can be traditionally recognized as a useful means to populate or repopulate an area when this has to be done quickly, and then the practice can cease until it needs to be used again.
Sources: CIA World Factbook and US Census Bureau.
more wmen i agree
i teach in day care with one year olsa and currently we have 6 girls in the class and two boys. last year it was five girls and three boys. In the baby room this year we have 7 girls, soon to be my next class. i agree completely with you Faith.
-katie
Extra Men
why would you wish a bad man on anyone? some men just shouldn't be with anyone and they definitely shouldn't breed.. doesn't mean that they will all end up in prison.. many will just wander around their entire lives and find plenty of women who are jerk magnets to keep them happy. or just be single jerks til they die.
Yes, there are more women than men in the world...
But they're all senior citizens! Most of them, too, are widows, so they are not "occupying" a specific man. Here are some statistics which are actually RELEVANT to the discussion going on here:
"The value for the entire world population is 1.01 males/female, with 1.06 at birth, still 1.06 for those under 15, 1.03 for those between 15 and 64, and 0.79 for those over 65."
That is to say, until women (and many men) are beyond childbearing age, there are in fact...unbelievable as it seems...
MORE MEN THAN WOMEN.
period.
Ratio-Women to Men
If I recall correctly, the Ensign, an LDS monthly publication, printed a few years ago that the number of unmarried women within the singles' wards of their Church are growing. The article struck me profoundly, considering Mormons are so marriage/family-minded, but the statiticians asserted there are more and more unmarried/single women within the Church and their numbers are growing; many sisters being over the age of 30 and yet unwed.
"Now, my solution to this is
"Now, my solution to this is to have the few women who don't want children to marry these men. Give them a family. Polyandry, and they can get along and form a happy community of adults."
Funny, this is one of the oldest professions on earth. Whores, (what a horrible word) are sort of what you talking about here. Women that give comfort to men that are not willing, or not able, to commit to a family.
Men are by their nature, jealous and possessive. (Women also) But men tend to be more willing to fight and kill over it.
In "reverse" polygamy, the woman would have to be the strong one, the one that maintained order. The sort of comfort that most men seek is the type that makes them feel like they are in control. If men needed less control, their need for comfort would be less. Unfortunately, that is why women with multiple husbands are looked at they want they are. The chances of her husbands needing her just so they can feel like they in control are strong, which means that for a few moments, she becomes submissive.
Men of this type, do have a family, but one that is not a warm and friendly. Their family is the Human Family.
Everyone is exactly where God would be, if He were in their shoes.
What is the male population
What is the male population vs the women population of GODS people???? With consideration that that number is hopefully going to incress on either side in favor of both.
Very good point about the left over men.
The bible does say it is better for a man to be alone because if you are married you will have many troubles.
Blah blah blah, more men
Blah blah blah, more men than women, more women than men... population control, aborting baby girls, those poor, poor unmarried men...
I say who cares if there ends up with millions of unmarried men?
Today, pretty much everywhere in the world. Women are treated as 2nd class citizens. In many places it's even worse than that where they're treated as possessions to be bought, sold or traded for whatever suits a man's whim.
Even here in the US, there are obvious dual standards for women. They do the same job and get 75% of the pay. If a woman gets upset due to inappropriate actions of a man, she's being irrational or it must be "that time of the month". Women get the short end of the stick constantly.
Thus, I say, to heck with all the extra men. Let them start to realize that they're going to have to clean up their act and actually make an effort to be WORTHY of these women.
Just my $.02 but, even as a man myself, I really do get sick of hearing "what about those poor, unloved and unappreciated extra men?"
:)
Absolutely right.
Goblal social policies
Once you get to global level statistics you need to account for social policies outside of North America and Europe. Canada does verifiability have more women than men even in early 20's, enough for a need of about 5% polygamy.
The problem you're seeing is India and China, massive population countries both of which have social policies favouring abortion of baby girls. India is because poor families cannot afford dowries and has been labelled an epidemic problem by the UN, China because of population control measures and a tenancy to place a very high value on a male heir.
The reason for the jump in difference in older age is directly related to WWII.
It stands that unless you favour systematically killing baby girls polygamy stands as the viable balancing social family structure. This goes straight back to Rome, which also had a policy of leaving many unwanted baby girls to die. That is the historical root of monogamous culture.
Country per country and culture by culture there are many more women than men, the countries that kill their women can deal with their own stews, I would favour banning immigration from such places if there was not a use in getting some people out of such cultures.
Economics of Sex
An economist with obviously NO religious or moral standing was considering this from the standpoint of STDs. His premise was this. Suppose an office party was held. A particular celibate and a monogamously married guy was interested in a particular female coworker. Also at the party was going to be the office stud who prided himself on new prey. The Miss Coworker has become interested in some way in all three men.
Comparing them, Mr. Celibate and Mr. Married are the better of the two to reduce the spread of STDs and protect the virgin female coworker. However, if Mr. Celibate decides to forgo the office party to protect his celibacy or Mr. Married to maintain his monogamous marriage, the only guy left to hit on the female coworker is Mr. Stud who's likely going to give her an STD tonight.
The economist's solution was condoms. The Bible's solution is marriage. If the clean guys go to the party, they are much better contestants for the female coworker's affections than El Studdly. That said, since they're seeking a long-term marriage situation, which she'd likely also be seeking, they are more likely to capture the heart of the coworker than Mr. One Night Stand.
Thus by keeping the "good men" in the hunt for the women, the "bad men" are ELIMINATED. "Losers" have to either clean up their act or go without. Even more convincing for the female coworker would be if Mr. Married brought his wife to the party. The coworker could then talk to her about the possibilities of marriage with the husband and discover the truth about Mr. Married that girls love to gossip about. With the number of men outnumbered by women, the men have more control over the marriages in monogamous cultures. By keeping the men in the hunt, the women have more control since a bad husband will get discovered and noone else will want to be married to him. Would you marry a man that you knew beat his current wife?
Mr. Celibate is a pig in a poke, but that's better than a carousing selfish idiot.
Economics
C.S. Lewis was not nice to economists in his writing, nor to any 'science' too close to human interests. I've seen a couple economics papers concerning it, they are generally extremely limited in their usefulness like economics in general. But quite right, Poly weeds out the weeds. As you said it is a good point overall.
Economic Sciences
Economics is merely an understanding of human behavior. Regardless of what stresses government, religion, or other entity might make on the laws of economics, supply and demand still rule. You can take it to logically immoral conclusions or to logically moral ones. The difference is not in the law that's being applied, but in the person applying it. The Laws of Thermodynamics are true whether you believe in God or not. Belief in God allows us to see farther down the road to the next logical step faster than our self-deluded counterparts. Circular dating methods only work in the make believe world of an evolutionist's mind. Wife beating is only enjoyable to a hellspawn. Eventually, self-inflicted misery will induce a change that all the sermons for eternity can't produce. Life can be a HARD taskmaster which is why people want to make it "easier" on others. In smoothing the bumps now, they only succeed in making life even harder for the recipient of their foolishness later.
Perseption
Actually its exactly that economics is about human behavior that Lewis belittled it along with psychology and sociology. I will admit they are all useful (thought I think we agree that they are far less useful than some would have us believe) Even supply and demand deal with the precived value of an object rather than its actual function or intrinsic value.
In the vernacular I would agree that you can take sciences to a logically moral or immoral one, but I would like to submit that the only truly, unrelentingly reasonable road is the moral one. In the end I believe you have to bend, break, or pervert you're mind to believe that evil actions are reasonable or logical. The true, perfect reason is Jesus Christ, The Logos, and he did no sin.
I recently (on the request of a friend, arguing with Eviloutionits is majorly pearls before swine unless they show a hint of the spirit working) engaged in a debate concerning the problems with C14 dating. My first opponent in one post deftly disagreed with my terminology (which was taken from Science magazine, go figure) as incorrect and belittled me for it, dogmatically re-iterated that calibration curves solved all the problems and that I didn't know about calibration curves (though one of the studies I cited delt directly with them) and provided citations for many studies not directly relating to the argument while asserting studies had been done to about the most important part without citing any, go figure. Well, its about what I expected and why I don't generally bother with that kind of thing unless its in person.
That was one conversation I actually repented for starting, don't give whats holy to the dogs or cast you're pearls before swine is a real commandment after all. Antitheist zealots will squirm out of facts worse than jello on a rough concrete floor. There is a time for discussion and argument, but anonymously isn't usually it, even on the request of a friend.
Bah, I can talk seriously with people of many beleif's (even as far as some very odd new agers), but evioutionist antitheism is just so far fetched I have a hard time relating.
Good talkin, good night.
Stats and stuff
The stats world wide show more females than males. Based on a review of worldwide statistics. In some countries such as China the ratio was as high as 7 females to 1 male. However those stats have changed due to selective abortions. Should men be celibate? Yes or at least outside of the confines of marriage. Why isn't this a reality? Because we live in a society that caters to the desires of our nature rather than realizing that ancient systems were put in place to assure the well being of the species. Be blessed one and all
Selective killing is insidious
Selective abortions is a problem in India now too,and of course its against baby girls. Years ago I was reading Roman history university texts and I remember an exscript about routinely drowning baby girls in a particular river at birth at one point in Roman history. I wish I could find that Text again, because the first major mono society was Rome and if that came down a generation after the aforementioned atrocity it would really put things together. If I could find and confirm that event in history then I could definitively nail down EVERY major expansion of monogamy as being decidedly misogynist.
Ancient system is right, but western mentality is trained to have contempt for any ancient system in the state run school system. The idea that everyone who existed without television and cars are morons is less than subtly promoted on a large scale. Hopefully its a mentality that can be shaken loose.
Babylon was actually the
Babylon was actually the first major mono society.. equally as barbaric, however
As to the solution for the extra men who cannot obey societies basic rules, yet have not committed capital crimes, I have one word: Deportation
Mentalities
I truly doubt that attitudes will ever change as man seems to forget that his thoughts may not necessatily be God's thoughts. Most see the commands of the Bible as a burden and antinquated. But in truth it kinda comes under the old saying if it ain't broke don't fix it. Modern culture sees something that works and wants to make a bigger and better one. HOw can you possibly have any idea bigger and better than that of God? Be blessed one and all
Too true ATrue
I believe we've been given our current more refined ability to manipulate nature and physics for a reason. That said, I believe we've been given it, and saying that would make a lot of people mad. More importantly technological skill doesn't translate into sociological improvements. The ability to do more doesn't at all negate the precepts which constructive societies are founded. There is simply no bigger or better way to interact with people than to understand what they need and care about them enough to do it or get it. Just like you said, you cant have a bigger or better idea than honor God and love thy neighbour.
And of course loving they neighbour means NOT going over land and sea to make one proselyte then laying a weight of useless rules on them to fit a personal concept of holiness.