I'm pretty sure this a meme but

>>2455732
It's not monogamy, it's ownership over a womb and the children it produces. The number of wives is largely irrelevant because only the ultra-rich own more than a couple of wives and concubines anyway.

>>2455732
No. Control of (and to) sexual access is element. Dowries, the concept of 'premarital' sex, clerical gatekeeping of marriage (traditionally the only access to sex), the sacredness of virginity, etc.

Other civilizations have been fairly successful with polygamy, occasionally polyandry, concubine systems, open prostitution, pederasty, you name it. Monogamy is nothing special, in fact it's failure in the absence of other strict control measures only shows how neurotic is. (For the record, I'm a happily married oldfag and father of one.)

There is no one driving force anyway.

>>2455776
Gee, correlation is suddenly causation...

>>2455871
not him but this response is a straw man. pointing out there is a correlation between marriage laws and living conditions does not necessarily suggest causation.

Post the original pic

>>2455954
posting a meme by itself also doesn't prove anything.

Even in most places where polygamy is legal (i.e. Islamic nations), it is not common. About as common as Mormons in the US. It is somewhat more common in Africa, among certain ethnic groups, regardless of religion. You'll find examples in say, Afghanistan, Indonesia or Morocco, but it's pretty uncommon due to the Sharia regulations that go along with it. If you're super rich and enjoy 24/7 catfights, that's about it.

Read this study

http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royptb/367/1589/657.full.pdf

In short, polygamy dramatically increases crime, lessens women's rights, and gives rise to the sexual abuse and murder of children