Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures (2012)

news.ubc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 83 posts

Re: Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures (2012)

#51

Post by stcredzero »

If there are, "significantly higher levels rape, kidnapping, murder, assault, robbery and fraud in polygynous cultures" and going to monogamy reduces these, then I wonder what happens if we turn that dial even further? What happens when society moves towards polyandry?

Polyandry had particular high logistical costs for most of our history, because of childbirth. However, birth control technology has developed to the point where such arrangements are now practical. My current girlfriend and various women I knew in college have reported to me encounter frequencies of 3X per day during their 20's, along with their male partners at the time basically complaining of that rate being "unsustainable." It may well be possible for certain women to be able to sustain polyandrous relationships, and for them to benefit from such relationships while acting as a moderating force in society. (The "Attila" stories by Antonio Sequra and Jose Ortiz have a character who engages in this arrangement in a post apocalyptic world. In the stories, the polyandrous arrangement also serves as a small military force, highly motivated to protect its leader. These stories are probably NSFW, so no links posted here.)

Oddly enough, a there is a very "easy" legal/social framework for allowing the establishment for what is effectively a "loosely bound" polyandry: legalized prostitution. Of course, "easy" is in quotes, because, while the legal framework would be very straightforward, the political and cultural barriers to passing the enabling legislation are huge. Also, only a subset of the activity enabled by such legislation could be fairly called a "loosely bound polyandry."

EDIT: If we note the prevalent pattern of human behavior, humans are pretty much "serially monogamous" -- where our attentions are mostly, but not exclusively, given to one particular partner at a time. However, the state of nature seems to indicate a pattern of having secondary and tertiary partners or transitory dalliances as well. Given the availability of effective birth control and mechanisms for preventing the spread of sexually transmitted disease, we are probably overdue for a reshaping of societal norms to better fit the actual historical behavior of "monogamous" people.

EDIT: I was informed that polyandry was practiced, so was possible before modern birth control.

Re: Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures (2012)

#52

Post by superuser2 »

FD3SA wrote: post #13
blisterpeanuts wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the U.S. moving away from monogamy? I'm not against polygamy or polyandry, but I don't see a trend in the near term. On the other hand, we've long had a tradition of traditional married couples where the man keeps a mistress on the side, usually in secret (though secrets don't tend to last very long).

Yes, it is. Marriage rates are at an all time low, divorce rates are at an all time high, never married rate is at an all time high, out of wedlock births are at an all time high, and there is no deterrent for adultery. The west has been in a soft-polygamy system since no-fault divorce was instigated. The only reason the illusion of classical marriage limps on is because the vestiges of the old system, mainly the ide…

People do not feel a need to register and seek permission for their relationships with the church, that doesn't mean they aren't having them.

>The west has been in a soft-polygamy system since no-fault divorce was instigated.

What? Are you implying that seeking a new partner after divorce is polygamy?

>Thus, young average men enter into marriage with women assuming lifelong monogamy, and are surprised to find their wives spending time with above average men.

You're implying that only women cheat in significant numbers, which is where the misogyny accusation comes from. A quick Google shows competing statistics claiming a slight lead in both directions, which leads me to believe the infidelity rates are about equal.

If you're looking for an explanation of why civilizations that share your values are doing so well compared to everyone else, you need to first consider the hypothesis that your supposed inferiors were actually doing fine until colonial powers that share your values decided to forcefully exploit them. Moral explanations of how only societies ruled by white Christian capitalist men can ever prosper are an entire genre of pseudoscience and generally discredited in the modern world.

Re: Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures (2012)

#53

Post by dragonwriter »

Digit-Al wrote: post #50
dragonwriter wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not against polygamy or polyandry Pedantic, perhaps, but while its generally acceptable to use "polygamy" to mean "polygyny" when you aren't discussing "polyandry" (because virtually all real-world polygamy is polygyny), if you are explicitly discussing both forms, its should be "polygyny and polyandry", "polygamy" includes both. > On the other hand, we've long had a tradition of traditional married couples whe…

Possibly even more pedantic, have you noticed how, even though the authors clearly know the difference between polygyny and polygamy, they seem to somtimes use both terms interchangeably?

> Possibly even more pedantic, have you noticed how, even though the authors clearly know the difference between polygyny and polygamy, they seem to somtimes use both terms interchangeably?

Bu they don't: the authors of the "Media Release", who are writing for the general public using language as familiar as possible, use the term "polygamy", but never in quotes from the authors of the study -- which always use "polygyny". The study itself always uses "polygyny" (and, at least at one point, more specifically "non-sororal polygyny"); the only times "polygamy" (or related forms like "polygamous") appear in the paper itself are in discussions of what other others studies found, one mention discussing forms of pair-bonding as "monogamous and polygamous", and in titles of works cited.

Re: Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures (2012)

#54

Post by danharaj »

carsongross wrote: post #24
RyanRies wrote: post #4

How do we know which one is the cause and which one is the effect? Or that it's not just yet another case of correlation mistaken for causation? Do more intense levels of gender inequality lead to polygamous marriage, or does polygamous marriage lead to more intense levels of gender inequality?

Reduced male fighting over mates, males having relative certainty over paternity and, therefore, increased genetic interest in participating in the raising of children turns out to be useful for building a civilization. The causality is obvious, given a bit of reflection.

> increased genetic interest

This only makes sense if you think the individual is the primary site of selection pressure. It need not be. In fact, it probably isn't. Genes compete and cooperate with each other across populations. An example of selection pressure that is supported beyond the interest of one individual's reproductive success is the gay uncle hypothesis: Kin selection means that genes that favor a group's reproduction while dooming an individual member's chances can be successful.

In a social species like Homo Sapiens it is far too naive to examine fitness at the level of individuals. Our fitness is a function on ensembles of human beings, not just individuals. How the fitness of an individual and the groups they belong to are related is deep and fascinating.

Cooperation and collectivism are as much our essence as competition and individualism. There is no dichotomy between them. We are related to both Chimpanzees and Bonobos.

Anyway, this relates to your reasoning in this way: A group of human beings who freely procreate with each other and maximizing paternal uncertainty maximize their mutual interest. Such a reproductive strategy strongly selects for behaviors that maximize group cohesion and mutuality.

If we assume a reproductive strategy, the set of behaviors and their underlying genetics gain fitness relative to that reproductive strategy. A reproductive strategy that emphasizes the propagation of individual's genes specifically works well with genes that favor individualistic behavior while a reproductive strategy that emphasizes the propagation of a coherent population's genes works well with genes that favor collectivist behavior.

The converse implication holds as well. The population of human beings and the genes that are distributed amongst it are not driven by one master impulse, but instead ebb and flow according to external and purely human pressures. If a dictatorship arose tomorrow and instituted collective breeding, that would be quite a tumultuous change in pressures for individualism and against collectivism. Human nature is in a non-linear feedback loop.

Take a coherent set of behaviors and the genes that support them. Take another set that are at odds with those behaviors. You can ask how those evolve as if they were competing as organisms. There are no clean lines drawn in biology. Genes propagate and evolve, organisms propagate and evolve, populations of organisms propagate and evolve, ecosystems propagate and evolve, behaviors propagate and evolve.

So what I'm trying to say in a long-winded way is that your focus on individual interest is much too narrow and misses the forest for the trees.

Re: Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures (2012)

#55

Post by nova »

FD3SA wrote: post #29
TorKlingberg wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fewer married people and more divorces do not equal polygamy. Rather people have a series of monogamous relationships. You post then ventures into outright misogyny that doesn't belong here. Also the front page of 'rexresearch.com' is not very confidence inspiring.

Biology is misogyny? "Words that do not belong here"? A dismissal of science combined with an accusation of blasphemy. Fascinating. Furthermore, instead of immediately attacking the host of a file, perhaps consider first indulging in its contents. The book is by Sir John Glubb, a noted historian.

Evolution doesn't apply from the neck up, didn't you know?

Re: Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures (2012)

#56

Post by jerf »

marknutter wrote: post #38
beccasanchez wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has nothing to do with gender equality. It has to do with economic inequality between males. Economic inequality between males means more and more women are competing for a smaller supply of wealthy males. Increased demand for top males leads to gender inequality as more and more women compete for a smaller pool of rich men, reducing the bargaining power of every individual woman and increasing the bargaining powe…

> Economic inequality between males means more and more women are competing for a smaller supply of wealthy males. Increased demand for top males leads to gender inequality as more and more women compete for a smaller pool of rich men, reducing the bargaining power of every individual woman and increasing the bargaining power of the few males who are marriage material. I don't see how any of this holds up in today's…

"I don't see how any of this holds up in today's society where women are earning just as much as men, and in some relationships, more."

A lot of this study isn't about "today's society". Also notice the last paragraph: "Monogamous marriage has largely preceded democracy and voting rights for women in the nations where it has been institutionalized, says Henrich, the Canadian Research Chair in Culture, Cognition and Evolution in UBC’s Depts. of Psychology and Economics. By decreasing competition for younger and younger brides, monogamous marriage increases the age of first marriage for females, decreases the spousal age gap and elevates female influence in household decisions which decreases total fertility and increases gender equality."

Re: Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures (2012)

#57

Post by avn2109 »

TorKlingberg wrote: post #23
FD3SA wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it is. Marriage rates are at an all time low, divorce rates are at an all time high, never married rate is at an all time high, out of wedlock births are at an all time high, and there is no deterrent for adultery. The west has been in a soft-polygamy system since no-fault divorce was instigated. The only reason the illusion of classical marriage limps on is because the vestiges of the old system, mainly the ide…

Fewer married people and more divorces do not equal polygamy. Rather people have a series of monogamous relationships. You post then ventures into outright misogyny that doesn't belong here. Also the front page of 'rexresearch.com' is not very confidence inspiring.

Without making any claims about the truth or falsehood of @FD3SA's claims, his source is undeniably written by a reputable author, published by a non-crank publisher, and seems relevant to his claim. The source merely happens to be reproduced on a site that is unusual for HN.

Re: Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures (2012)

#58

Post by dragonwriter »

stcredzero wrote: post #51

If there are, "significantly higher levels rape, kidnapping, murder, assault, robbery and fraud in polygynous cultures" and going to monogamy reduces these, then I wonder what happens if we turn that dial even further? What happens when society moves towards polyandry? Polyandry had particular high logistical costs for most of our history, because of childbirth. However, birth control technology has developed to the…

> Polyandry was not possible for most of our history, because of the logistics of childbirth.

Logistics of childbirth don't make polyandry as an institution impossible; the societies in which polyandry, fraternal or otherwise, was practiced have not generally been modern societies or otherwise especially relieved of the natural logistics of childbirth.

Re: Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures (2012)

#59

Post by NTDF9 »

IMO, humans, male or female, seek the best mate. "Best" is subjective but usually easy to understand. Men want youthful, beautiful women whereas women want strong, resourceful men.

In enforcing monogamy, we ensured that male got what they wanted (a young woman) and now, that male can focus his attention on work. This worked well for women too (if they had a choice of male) since they now have a partner as well. Adultery was looked down upon to preserve the "sanctity" of this 1:1 relationship. This also kept men working hard to build the society (since they didn't have to deal with family issues much) and women preserved morality and guarded home upbringing.

Today, since adultery/serial monogamy/polyandry/polygamy etc. is a joke and widely "accepted", there is no incentive to get married. So many 18-35 waste their youthful lives just dating, dating, meeting jerks, partying, jumping from partner to partner....instead of focusing on building a REAL stable relationship.

By early 30s, most folks are sick of dating and all illusions of love are gone.

Monogamy is not practical without heavy penalties on non-monogamous relationships.

Re: Monogamy reduces major social problems of polygamist cultures (2012)

#60

Post by dragonwriter »

NTDF9 wrote: post #59

IMO, humans, male or female, seek the best mate. "Best" is subjective but usually easy to understand. Men want youthful, beautiful women whereas women want strong, resourceful men. In enforcing monogamy, we ensured that male got what they wanted (a young woman) and now, that male can focus his attention on work. This worked well for women too (if they had a choice of male) since they now have a partner as well. Adult…

> In enforcing monogamy, we ensured that male got what they wanted (a young woman) and now, that male can focus his attention on work. This worked well for women too (if they had a choice of male) since they now have a partner as well. Adultery was looked down upon to preserve the "sanctity" of this 1:1 relationship.

Adultery has been "looked down on" (to put it mildly) for a lot longer than monogamy has been a norm.

Post reply on HN