Give me one LOGICAL reason I can't have several wives

>>1689932
You can't even get girlfriend, not to mention wife.

>>1689932

You are a ugly and unninteresting to them.

If one man has several wives, that would leave another several men with no wives, they will either radicalise and commit terror attacks or check out from wagecuck jobs and not contribute anything to society.

>>1689932
nanny state democracy placates to the lowest common denominator and brings the rate of progression to its theoretical minimum

>>1689940
pretty much this

/thread

>>1689963
But it's already like that

A great deal of men aren't getting laid at all, and all the women flock to local alpha guys while the losers get nothing

>>1689932
That would require several women being attracted to you.

>>1689971
You are either 16 or have some pretty loser friends, almost all the guys my age I know have girlfriends or had them

>>1689971
No, the betas still marry the whores when they're washed up in their 30s. They still get to have families and something to look forward to and work hard for.

>>1689963
its hard in times of no war, correlates to this fucking autism and other mental illness spike shit like gender identity disorder because for most of human history there has been excess females per male because of the whole war and dieing thing thats done exclusively by men

>>1689971
No. No it's not. If you put a little bit of effort into maintaining your body, say 30 pushups, 60 situps per day, you can look good. You have to be comically ugly in the face to not be considered attractive based on your body if you just take care of it. Then all you have to do is go out with friends occasionally and not be a fucking sperglord when girls approach you. Assuming you're around 20 at uni. If you're a highschooler then my only advice is that you wait until everyone sluts up in uni.

>>1689993
t. chad

>>1689971
The idea that there's a silent majority of suffering men who can't get laid is a myth. In fact, this problem is local to you and your friends at /r9k/. Most people have sex and relationships, if you aren't you probably just don't approach girls.

Reminds me of Elliott Rodger, who expected women to just walk up to him and offer to be his GF. I doubt he made one significant attempt to be social or outgoing.

>>1689993
>say 30 pushups, 60 situps per day

/fit/ here, lmaoing at your life

>>1689972
You talk like that's a hard thing

Men these days are so pussified you can get laid just from walking up to a woman and TALKING NORMALLY

Also, 95% of girls are okay with you sleeping around as long as you're honest
So WHY can't I have 3 girlfriends, who all know about each other, and eventually move them into my apartment?

Where did this rule come from?

>>1689999
not him, but what would you recommend in place of op, mr /fit/
t. pillsbury doughbear

>>1690020
Lift heavy weights up and down

>>1689999
Yeah I don't have time for more than that, but it's just maintenance, not building anything (I prefer to stay lean anyway, I don't enjoy gymming much, but actually enjoy running so that's the build I aim for). I also left off the rest of the yoga shit because I figured OP was a fat fuck who needed to be eased into it.

/r9k/ was a mistake, all it does is create a place where people make each other sad and angry for no reason.

Have you had ONE girlfriend dude? You need to put in fucking work for one relationship. I ain't got time for 2. Also jealousy between girls will cause strife.

>>1690017
You literally can though. Like in all literal seriousness no one will stop you. It's just a matter of you getting the chicks to agree. But according to you the vast majority of women are whores who would be okay with it so I guess all that's left to do is go out there and test your theory. And as >>1690034 said, why would you want more than one girlfriend anyway? Sex is pretty easy to acquire, so all that's special about a girlfriend is the comfiness and the cuddliness.

How the fuck do I talk to girls

>>1690042
Same way you talk to dudes, but think of them sucking your dick as you do it

>>1690042
You already KNOW how to talk to girls
The problem is just that you're too SCARED to DO IT

So stop asking for ADVICE and go OUTSIDE to talk to them

>>1690027
>people make each other sad and angry for no reason
asspergers

>>1689999
Not everyone's trying to get fuckin ripped a really simple bodyweight routine like that is enough to keep most people from being horrible skinnyfats as long as they don't eat shit.

>>1690022
This. You can also push them but they must be heavy.

>>1690061
This is a masterwork.

The subtle "just b urself", the bonhomme attitude, the stress capitalization, the summer camp teacher style; all blend in together to create the perfect /r9k/ bait post.

To you and your creativity; I say bravo, anon

>>1689932
>redpill shit

a u t i s m

>>1690075
It's true tho /r9k/ doesn't like that answer because the responsibility for their bitter loneliness lies squarely on them instead of some genetic determinism or broader societal change. Robots would rather entertain the notion that they just can't get laid rather than make any effort to improve or change.

>>1690042
you lie to them
fake it to you make it
be clean, go to gym
ask for her number after establishing small chit chat from whats the time to what time do u finish work and wanna go hang out after and get a drink
make her laugh at least smile
skin contact if contextually appropriate, as soon as possible either first or second encounter

>>1690083
>people fucked over by unfortunate genes don't exist, everyone can attract a mate they just aren't trying hard enough
truly a privileged opinion to hold.

>>1690094
Unless you have treacher-collins you probably aren't a hopeless case. You know damn well that most of these guys aren't mutants they're just shy.

>>1690094
Wait are you asking him to...check his privilege?

>>1690094
>I'm lonely because pretty girls don't talk to me
>be ugly as fuck

No shit you're going to have problems trading a Ford Pinto for a Mercedes.

Maybe you should be less shallow.

>>1690094
Unless you have Downs syndrome or you're 4'5 you have no reason to complain, asswad

>Baaaw I'm not chad

>>1690097
life isn't a Disney movie. Only 40% of all males that ever lived managed to reproduce. At some points in human history women outbred men at a rate of 17 to 1.

Genetic determinism makes people very uncomfortable but it's certainly a thing. Humanity is not above its base animal foundation.

>>1690122
Well I can't verify the extremely vague statements you made about the past but today in the modern world I know it's not hard to get a girlfriend. Again, unless you have a severe birth defect the problem very likely lies within things you can control.

You don't have to be a golden skinned athlete dude bra with a lantern jaw or whatever the fuck robots think is the only type of guy that gets laid. Just talk to that cute girl in the library. You'll probably fuck up and look and feel like an asshole every once in a while but thems the breaks.

>>1690141
>the modern world I know it's not hard to get a girlfriend.
Again this is a very privileged position to take and is contradicted by the growing male virginity rate.

>>1690169
Yeah because there's a bunch of sadbrains motherfuckers who are too nervous to approach girls. Bad parenting or something, it's not that you weren't born with the "alpha" gene or whatever retarded bullshit and it's within your power to fix.

>>1690172
>genes like don't exist it's all environmental and shit like just pull yourself up by your bootstraps and shit
really what do you get out of denying that a sizeable portion of the male population is absolutely repulsive to women through no fault of their own?

File: 1473577001538.png (105KB, 291x359px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 291x359px

>>1690098

>>1690188
That kind of attitude is exactly why you are repulsive to women. Nobody wants to be around a sad sack loser who blames his own faults on everyone else. Grow some fucking testicles dude

>>1689932
>Give me one LOGICAL reason I can't have several wives

This question has never been asked by anyone married more than 10 years.

>>1690208
girls dont want to be around failures fullstop
unless they actually love you

>>1690208
I guess you can chalk up all your success with women thanks to your hard work and super human strength of will to overcome. Same way Paris Hilton earned her billions :^)

>>1689932
You're more likely to get STD's

>>1689940
First post best post.

>>1690098

But this is true...

Are you retarded ? This is not because Feminist use this term of privilege that privilege people do not exist.

>>1689932

That's not how female sexuality works at all.

>>1690226
t. Cuck

File: 1462407657222.jpg (207KB, 650x1033px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 650x1033px

>>1689932

>wanting more than one wife in our current era
>wanting a wife at all, even one in our current era

>>1690234
If this model of female sexuality is true, there should be no cucks, dumbass.

>>1690247

>80 % of males are beta male
>Considered as inferior people, inferior males
>Cannot even put their eye on a girl without being put in jail for rape

>Other 20 % of male fuck and fuck and fuck and fuck a girl by night with the pornographic model of sexual practices
>Girl are literally sex toy and disgusting whore

>Beta male watch porn of these girls fucked by these 20 % and masturbate
>Have to respect like princesses this war
>Go to jail for hate speech, intolerance for saying that girl are slut

>>1690020
I liked Greyskull LP when I was starying out, but since you said you're fat, I'd recommend cardio and watching your diet until you're a manageable weight and then start doing a strength training routine with running/cardio on your off days.

In other words, read the /fit/ sticky.

>>1690188
Because I don't think there's much truth to it and I think what's really important to you is that it remain no fault of your own.

>>1689963
>>1689971

This is flawed logic. And I'll tell you why.

If every person gets one partner and they have children, then the genepool stagnates, meaning otherwise successful traits are stifled and degenerative traits (no I don't mean /pol/ definition, but this is also why there are more homosexuals now) are allowed handicaps, or even forced to survive when otherwise they should die off naturally.

Breeding should be earned, not a right. If one of anon's harem decides she's rather fuck you, there is, and should be, nothing stopping her, and like >>1689981 says, they surely will .

Also remember, that one thing that is more hopeless than an weak ugly man is a weak ugly woman.

>>1690311
>hopeless than an weak ugly man is a weak ugly woman.
Go do a comparison between who will have more trouble getting laid in a bar half an hour before closing.

Protip: it won't be the women

>>1690254
This is clearly not true however. I have no idea how people believe this at any level above exaggeration/satire, especially with the statistics.

>>1689932
this would end up in the top 1% alphas having 80% of women
KVs here would have even harder time finding a girl

>>1690323
Even more so given that there are tons of studies on this subject, all of which suggest the redpill 80/20 thing is utter BS, and if anything something closer to the reverse is true: there are relatively more women who are virgins or get very little sex, or who have lots and lots of sex, while men cluster closer to the mean.

>>1690318
Irrelevant. I was talking about in the long term and having children. Most men would seemingly rather not breed at all than breed with some obese butterface, even if they are both themselves.

>>1690343
I actually somewhat agree with the sentiment of the model (as in women are more likely to share one man than men are to share one woman), its just clearly not literally true.

But about what you said, I want to add bit of irony I've encountered.

Of the women I have known, the 5-6/10 were the one's who were getting laid, while the 7-8/10s (classically not personally before you say) were alone, and were never approached. And this was because all the men thought that the opposite was true and that they didn't have a chance.

No man can serve two masters.

>>1689932

Because marraige, as opposed to cohabitation, is a legal relationship, not an emotional one. It has consequences to things like tax and who can speak for you and immigration that go well beyond your emotional stance. Hypothetically, say you are a man with 4 wives.


Should you die intestate, which of them gets your estate? Do they divide it evenly? Does the relationship between the co-wives still endure without the husband?

If you're badly injured, incapable of making decisions, and in need of some medical decisions made about treatment, which of them gets the final say in what they do with you?

Suppose you get a divorce from one of your wives, who gets primary custody of your children together. You obviously have a parental interest in those kids. What about your co-wives? Would it make a difference if say, one of the remaining wives was the primary homemaker and caretaker of everyone's kids, not just her own? After all, legally, parenthood is not strictly a matter of biology, and taking a parental role obligates and empowers you as a legal parent.

>>1690311
>If every person gets one partner and they have children, then the genepool stagnates
Are you retarded?

It's the complete opposite.

If everyone flocks around the same male then his offspring will all share his genetic heritage.

>>1689932
Because then you aren't truly intimate with any of them.

>>1690324
This is what has historically been the case though.

https://psmag.com/8-000-years-ago-17-women-reproduced-for-every-one-man-6d41445ae73d

Women being kept by wealthy harem owners has been the societal norm.

>>1690556


>I'll just ignore the enormous rates of death in childbirth, or more properly infections from tearing due to childbirth, and what it does to things like gender balance and reproductive roles.

>>1690554
Nice eurocentrism you racist shitbag. In other countries it's perfectly normal to have multiple wives.

>>1690582
>In shitty countries, shitty people do shitty things.

Fascinating.

>>1689940
>>1689969
>>1690223
>feminists don't actually have any arguments against polygamy so they resort to namecalling
wew. I look forward to the day when polygamy becomes the new progressive agenda and you'll be retroactively arrested for hate speech

>>1690580
This has absolutely nothing to do with that you moron. The point is that for every 17 females only one male successfully reproduced. The reason for that is likely that during the early days of human settlements it was rich land owners who held all the reproductive rights.

File: overhead.jpg (12KB, 582x386px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 582x386px

>>1690597

>This has absolutely nothing to do with that you moron.

Pot, meet kettle.

>The reason for that is likely that during the early days of human settlements it was rich land owners who held all the reproductive rights.

Or, you know, women would DIE all the time. And that when you don't have a lot of women to go around, the same men tend to serially marry, or at least reproductive. They weren't being "kept by wealthy harem owners" you daft retard. There just weren't that many to go around, relative to the number of men, so the same high status people kept "winning" over and over.

Plus, circa 6,000 B.C., there wasn't even that much in the way of agriculture, or settled societies. You had a few villages here and there, but that was it. It would more likely be warrior leaders, or people viewed to have connections to the gods, not wealthy landowners, who were the societal top dogs.

>>1690615
what in the actual living fuck did I just read

>>1690623

Let me give you an example, because you seem to have trouble with abstract concepts.

A man gets married.

His wife dies

He remarries

His second wife dies

He remarries

His third wife dies

He remarries

His fourth wife dies

He remarries

His fifth wife survives him.

All of his wives bore him at least one child. Is he a "wealthy harem owner"?

>>1689932
I can give you a good reason why you shouldn't.

menstruation.

>>1690636
I don't think that's the way it actually worked, genetic analysis confirms that only about 40% of all men that lived actually went on to reproduce. There's no way you get one man reproducing for every 17 women by having them all die like that. That implies an insane excess of women that would never occur.

>>1690615
Whether it happens in a simultaneous or serial fashion doesn't really matter: the point is that it was a small subset of the male population that got to reproduce.

>>1690658

> 40% of all men that lived actually went on to reproduce.

Which isn't exactly compatible with one man for every 17 women reproducing either. Births are more or less even for males and females. And at least some women are going to die before reproductive age. If you really think you have 17 times the number of women reproducing as you do men, that's more like 3-4% of the male population reproducing, not 40.

>That implies an insane excess of women that would never occur.

On the contrary, it implies an excess of men, only unclear as to the degree of that excess.

>>1690665

>Whether it happens in a simultaneous or serial fashion doesn't really matter:


Yes it does, as the statement was

>Women being kept by wealthy harem owners has been the societal norm.

Serial marriages aren't harems.

>>1690549
Are you retarded? Do you know what the word stagnate means? Did you not read the explanation in the next sentence?

Yes anon, it would mean they'd have his offspring would have his genetic heritage. Not the same heritage mind you, like it would be with one woman, because the mothers' heritage would be different.

>>1690707
>>1690549

Oh wait, it was the same sentence.

>>1690707
This implies stagnation, since unlike a society where everyone reproduces (resulting in a more diversified genetic composition) you only carry on the traits of a few men, which might as well turn out detrimental in the long run.

>>1690798
No it doesn't. The word stagnate does not mean what you think it means.

You also clearly don't understand my post, go back and read it again.

>>1690699
The reply was directed at someone who said that only a tiny minority of men would be able to reproduce which was the central argument. The harem remark was a side-note. You can't derive with certainty whether it went on in serial or in a harem fashion, but I'd wager it was the latter.

>>1690811
If only a fraction of the males reproduce you'll end up with a more homogeneous genetic pool than if everyone reproduced. If this isn't what you mean by stagnation I recommend you consult a dictionary.

>>1690825
If 100% of the males and females reproduce then everything will be passed on. No trait would succeed on its own merits.

This is what I meant by stagnate, aka cease developing, aka no flow or movement, which is what the word means.

Daily reminder that talking about gender, sexuality and most other things on the internet is correlated with being an autist weirdo that everybody IRL secretly hates.

>>1690860
Only within a diversified genetic pool can significant movement happen. If you limit reproduction to a tiny subset of the individuals you're gradually going to navigate yourself into an incestuous corner.

>>1690896
Good job I didn't then. Why don't you try reading people's posts instead of just the first couple of words of the first sentence.

>>1690910
You were advocating in favour of exactly that.

>>1690916
No I wasn't. I expressively didn't want limitations. Why don't you learn to read.

>>1690928
You were advocating in favour of letting nature do as it pleases. But that might not necessarily result in something beneficial.

>>1689963
Just why do you think we have so many wars, homocides, other anti-male social developments and promote homosexuality so much?!

I'm not even one of the elites with dozens of (effectively) concubines. But I still got three preggers out of the program.

>>1690936
Yes that was what I was in favor of, and it certainly wouldn't be 'incestuous'.

>But that might not necessarily result in something beneficial.
And that isn't the point.

>>1690042
Just be yourself.

File: Iphone 5 Pics 4368.png (530KB, 500x706px) Image search: [Google]

530KB, 500x706px

>>1690589
Hehe, you're a silly billy anon. Here, you may have a (you) for making me chuckle a little!

>>1690896
That's not how it works you braindead imbecile.
The most succesful being more likely to reproduce, and as the rate of success decrease so does the reproduction chance.
Everyone reproducing would include negative traits and abject failures reproducing.

Look up how most genetic algorithms work for an understanding of what achieves the best reresults instead of spouting your ignorant crap.

It's lolbertarians that support polygamy. Consenting adults etc.

>>1689932
You need alot of money to feed all of those cunts, also the nagging would make want to kill yourself, they would also start feuds with eachother and fight eachother causing more annoying women shrieking, and of course you would fall in love with only one which would cause problems with the others. Raising those families would break your brain.

Do what the muslims do have all our wives just be slaves with nice decorations to be shown to your friends because if you give the women free will then you are just an idiot.

>>1691064
You can love more than one person.

>>1691051
>Eugenics
LOL, I'm sure you have all perfect genes too.

>>1689932
If it continues on a societal scale and becomes widely practiced those other 4 guys will kill you and rape the women.

>>1691089
>He believes this
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA

>>1691101
I wasn't advocating eugenics and neither was that anon. It was the opposite in fact

>LOL, I'm sure you have all perfect genes too.
What a petty thing to say. And the worst is is you think it doesn't prove our point.

>>1691127
Yep, I do.

>>1691146
You cannot love more than a single person romantically.

>>1691120
Or just become bandits and be a general pain in the ass....although I guess that pretty much the same thing. Point is that society full of unfulfilled, sexually frustrated males is not a pretty sight.

>>1689932
that image is retarded
the only reason polygamy happened in some places is because fathers would charge massive dowries

>>1691152
Whatever you say lad.

There's two other /r9k/ threads. Why is this necessary?

>>1689932
you're neither charismatic nor rich enough.

harem societies don't benefit you, o plebian.

>>1689932
Try dealing with three wives. Hell, with your attitude i doubt you can even deal with one.

>why can't i get a perfect 10/10 waifu? chads must be taking all the women!

And yet robots would never even consider dating a fat or ugly chick (unless it's their fetish)