>>16689470 Well for the main part, having multiple spouses isn't legal. I don't think most people give a fuck about what you do in your bedroom or personal life, so go ahead and have as many girlfriends as you want. Polyamory is a trending thing now.
>>16689470 I guess people in general are just conditioned to the idea of one person being someone else's number one. In my opinion, it's pretty nice having one person to share that kind of bond with. Then again I'm not some sex craved freak who needs to have sex all over the place with random people to feel satisfied physically or emotionally. But that's just me.
We have come to your world in search of resources. Whether your actions drive us back or we take what we want and move on, the outcome is the same. We will depart from your wretched planet, leaving you behind. And in a thousand years, you will not have changed from this contact with another world. You will remain in your trees, hunting your prey, communing with your goddess, until your sun burns out and your world dies.
>>16689503 Yeeeah it seems like men hold onto this ideal more than women do, which is weird because us men are the ones being called out for "only ever thinking about sex" and all that. Modern women hate romance, yo.
>>16689470 because muh morality/religion/legal shit/etc etc etc. personally, i believe polygyny is the way nature intended us to live. and i think its only a matter of time before polygamous marriage is legalized.
>>16689522 >i believe polygyny is the way nature intended us to live There are animals that mate for life. The fact that humanity has evolved to call out your kind as freaks and deviants means you're the wrong ones as far as nature goes. >Jesus: 1 >Atheists: Are you even trying?
3/4ths of all of the nations are monogamous today. You think they are all Christian or western? You think China or Japan were ever Christian nations and that's why they have a monogamous culture and laws?
Monogamy is the norm for human cultures, especially the most current and advanced. The 25% of nations that are polygamous are almost entirely polygynous and African and/or Muslim.
>>16689653 Retard the atheist 0, christianity1 is an old meme, but yea op by enlarge most men married 1 person but a small amount of alpha males, mostly by status or money had more than one wives, even in muslim countries only a few have multiple wives
DESU one-one relationships are inherently more stable than any others for a simple reason: time and resources are limited.
If you had unlimited time, resources and attention it wouldn't be that way, but when you have multiple concurrent girlfriends (as I have in the past) you're forced to split time between them. As a result those relationships have less depth to them, which makes them more easily broken.
I could see certain poly arrangement working out okay if and only if each person in the arrangement is interested/committed to each other person. Threeway seems possible, four and more seems likely to split into two/two situations, but of course this is all dependant on the person. One of the girls I used to date wanted an open relationship because she was a very private, solitary person and didn't want to put in an entire relationship's worth of effort into a relationship. So I spent whatever fraction of my time with her (~33%) and the rest dating other women.
Which would be VERY hard when children come into play.
And then there's the question of default inheritance rules in complex social arrangements... hard to do. I don't see polyamory being legalized due to this problem.
>>16689528 there are also many animal species that are polygynous. as a matter of fact, the vast majority are. there have been (and still are) many human cultures that practice polygyny, and even a few that practiced polyandry. the fact that so many people still think that "calling out" the actions of others even though they are not affecting you or causing harm to anyone means youve got a lot to learn.
>mentally ill adults with imaginary friends:0 >science, logic, and common sense:1
>>16689690 > As a result those relationships have less depth to them, which makes them more easily broken. mongamous relations dont have a great track record as of late. source: divorce rate statistics, most threads on /adv/
>>16689707 first, I was talking relatively, not absolutely. Even with a supposedly declining rate (as others point out, that's not necessarily true), I would posit that monogamous relationships are more stable than poly ones, although if you have stats saying otherwise, I'll look at them.
Also, "marriage" is different than "monogamous relationship" (although marriages might be even more stable still)
>>16689738 i would agree that most poly relationships are much more unstable than their monogamous counterparts, but i speculate that it is due to immature people participating in them. that being said, i have seen most monogamous relationships of my own and of those around me actively hinder many aspects of their participants lives, both during and after. i know very few couples (married or not) that have actually stayed together long term, my parents being one of them. it can definitely work with the right people, but the same can be said for poly relationships. i would also like to clarify that i only support polygyny. with mature, emotionally stable people involved, and with all parties on board and on the same page, a very large and healthy family unit can result. with 3+ adults earning income, you can make things pretty comfy at home. and there will always be someone available for childcare, eliminating the need/expense for others to look after your children. polyamory and polyandry are degenerate and illogical in my opinion.
>>16689730 Divorce rates are actually the most accurate statistics. Anything involving marriage is actualy the most accurate data in any field of study, because you have to file with the government when you marry or divorce.
Most common times of divorces : After 2 years of marriage. It takes 1 year to truly fully know a person.
Second place: The 20 year mark. Kids are other of the house and all they have is each other to truly notice how much they don't like each other.
After marriage and divorce, each new divorce over multiple times increases the chances of divorce. 4th marriage is like 80%
>>16689844 >Divorce rates ate actually the most accurate statistics That is very false.
the divorce rate is 50%, but that doesn't mean 50% of people get divorced. People get married and remarried, and that skews the statistics. A lifelong partnership only enters the statistics once, but a divorce can enter several times. Also, that 50% number is comparing he number of marriages in a single year to the number of divorces THAT SAME YEAR not the number of those marriages that end in divorce. The number of divorces per year have been going down, but there's no way to know when they got married, so it's hard to say how many end in divorce the average divorce happens 8 years into a marriage, and in 2006 there were 2.2 million marriages and 8 years later, there were 800,000 divorces. Which means that, if ALL of those divorces were from 2006 marriages, it would be 36% but we know plenty of them were not (in all likelihood, less than half) so that means that around 82% of marriages in 2006 made it through the most likely year of divorce.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.