Is polygamy legal yet?

If it was ruled unconstitutional to not recognize gay marriages, then doesn't it follow that this is a precedent to recognize polygamous marriages? I mean that's a hell of a lot more natural than two dude fucking each other in the ass.

I will respect your full house with a bump

I'm actually kind of surprised I never see threads about this on Sup Forums. I've seen discussion where beta manlets are upset about Chads getting all the girls and how society would grind to a hault if nerd virgins don't have the incentive to continue being NEETs or something, but I highly doubt it. It's not going to make you people any more or less attractive to women than you already are. So why shouldn't guys who are capable of maintaining multiple females be allowed to repopulate the white race?

Thank you, Mr. Leaf.

The idea is that betas won't be motivated to work hard if they can't get partners and progeny because the alphas horde the women. Betas are the ones contributing the most to society.
Polygyny would be better than single motherhood. But it would take something to appease and motivate the surplus betas.

>But it would take something to appease and motivate the surplus betas.
Maybe a 'lil something like robowaifus? If I knew I could get that I'd take a second job in a heartbeat.

I don't think it really would affect them. There are so many guys who go to their shitty beta jobs every day and still don't have anything going on with women. I just can't see that being their motivation.

If anything, the guys who have three wives and 14 kids to take care of is motivated as fuck. This is probably going to be the guy employing these betas who just have enough motivation to cover the rent on their tiny apartment and pay for their crappy car for themselves.

I think it's the glorious beta future.

>There are so many guys who go to their shitty beta jobs every day and still don't have anything going on with women. I just can't see that being their motivation.
Yup. And many drop out. Which is bad. Judeo-christian societies prospered and took over the world because it put the immense industrial potential of betas to use (instead of continually oppressing them). It gave them opportunities and a chance at having a family.
But this is less and less true.
But I think all we need is to get something worthwhile out of our work. Doesn't have to be a reasonable chance at women or families. Just something. We might be due for the carrot instead of the stick.
Because polygyny would fix the birth rates I believe. And it would make women happy; it's natural for them.
That'd be nice desu. That's far from being there though.

Would it? Most of these so-called alpha males aren't necessarily wanting commitment and children, they just want to fuck.

Plus, it will take massive amounts of welfare for this to work, and I cannot in good conscience support that.

You can barely find one, bud.

...

So why are you conflating one man having multiple wives with oppressing the ones who can't attract them anyway? That's just crab mentality.

Because they will have to pay taxes to support your family.

Plus, we've been screwed over by elites enough. Last thing I want is to reward them even more.

I'm just wondering what's holding back gay incest marriage in the west
19 year old son married to 41 year old father type of thing

don't worry about polygamous and lowering of age of consent
enough muslims and you're there
germany is half way threre, for example

>Most of these so-called alpha males aren't necessarily wanting commitment and children, they just want to fuck.
But with multiple wives, they might get all the fucking they want (and with enough diversity). They often don't want to settle because they don't want to commit to a single woman. The divorce laws would have to be changed to make this not too risky for them.
>Plus, it will take massive amounts of welfare for this to work
Or not. Lots of alphas make a lot of money. And their wives could have jobs. Even if they don't make much money individually, it would add up. Large families like this can be much more efficient.
And if they took part time jobs or took breaks, they should have plenty of time to raise their children in a healthy manner. So many children are "occupational orphans" now.

>betas contribute most to society

Beta faggots actually believe this

Can't have an army with only generals user. Besides, most alphas are too prissy to get their hands dirty when the time comes.

>Because they will have to pay taxes to support your family
Where do you get the idea that they will be supported by welfare?

>we've been screwed over by elites enough
You really think being able to attractive a mate or three makes a person an "elite" though? Hardly.

Unfortunately, based on the Constitution and that SCOTUS ruling on gay marriage, I don't think anything is stopping it, if somebody took it that far.

>don't worry about polygamous and lowering of age of consent
>enough muslims and you're there
Which is precisely why we shouldn't be putting ourselves at a disadvantage against savage enemies. We are getting out-bred by a race of retards and putting all these additional handicaps on ourselves.

And how does this benefit me? Or most of my people or friends? I have no reason to support a few guys hoarding all the wealth and women.

Plus the father will be spread quite thin to spend time with his children as he will be very busy with his job and have 20+ kids to take after. Having mothers only in the household is not a good idea, we've seen the negative effects of not having a dad around.

Plus, I have no reason to work for a man who just sees me as another number. That's why Trump was so popular because he cared about the common man, and not just the upper crust.

Alphas are more likely to get their hands dirty. What the fuck are you talking about? They're the ones who are working the physical jobs.

I'm not saying betas are contributing in their own way, but to say that they contribute the most is retarded.

Please, most men and the working class are by definition beta.

Your alpha types are the wealthy financiers who control society. Women are attracted to power, and the elites have it.

I guarantee the top 10% of men who plan on having 8 wives apiece are not going to make enough to support their 40 kids. Plus with all the additional taxpaying men, we know that money is going to be diverted to your children.

Sorry bro, I owe you nothing in life. And I'm certainly not going to subsidize your sex life. Good Lord, I thought Trump supporters were populists but it seems you just want to be like the Soros of the world. Just don't have the right top men in charge!

Can't have an army full of betas AND women either.

Maybe it's different in America.

Seriously i bet they also believe the "your smart just lazy" meme i sit in a room with millionaires n sometimes billionares n every single one of thm works harder thn any "beta" fagget ive seen

Literally 25-40year old children in this board

>I have no reason to support a few guys hoarding all the wealth and women
Nobody is asking you too. I don't think you understand how welfare works.

Right, you need a combination of both. You need a society that incentivizes participation of both the alphas and betas.

You, being the feminist that you are, would prefer 90% of the male population just fuck off so you can live in a constant state of orgy supported by bank loans and taxpayer monies.

Yeah, it's not ideal. I think more people having their own family is for the best. It makes more people invested in society and its future. It spreads around the responsibilities of raising the future generation. It's a good, meaningful life they should make people happy, etc.

But right now we've got a lot of single motherhood and women who can't find good enough men to settle down with. Polygyny would just make up for it a bit. Most families would still be monogamous.

>Alphas are more likely to get their hands dirty. What the fuck are you talking about? They're the ones who are working the physical jobs.
weird, didn't know NZ was a hunter-gatherer society
we're now here: alpha = one of these: very good looks, lots of $, extremely charismatic/ charming
to place themselves in power
while betas slave away, all white & blue collar jobs

>most alphas are too prissy
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

>Sorry bro, I owe you nothing in life
Nobody wants anything from you. Typical beta tier shit. I'm talking about real male providers being able to take care of multiple women who raise children and you're trying to make it about your indispensable role in somebody else's family. Yeah right it has nothing to do with you. You're saying it should be illegal just out of spite.

Because you get a beta revolution. Marriage was an institution created to prevent thirsty betas from uprising.

Beta/alpha can mean a lot of things. In this case, alphas are just the most desirable to women. For whatever reason. It doesn't matter why. In this sense, there aren't a lot of alphas by definition. The majority are betas. Many woman would prefer sharing an alpha to having their own beta, if society and economics allowed it.

You think those alpha males are going to volunteer to take in single mothers and raise other men's kids? You're as fucking crazy as OP is.

Most of these pump and dumpers who create single moms want nothing to do with commitment.

Bullshit we all know where this ends up. Corporate subsidizes, special projects. The working man gets screwed every time and all you can do is say "it's good for you goy, pay for my sex life because I'm alpha as fuck".

I care about my people, my community, and I sure as hell don't want my people to lose out in life. But many would under your system. Call it out of spite but I believe people deserve a fair shake in life, and if that makes me a beta then so be it.

Anything to get the birth rates up.

The only reason China hasn't boiled over is their lack of funs

...

>feminist
Show me an example of a feminist saying that women should be at home making babies and not serving on the front lines in the military and I'll accept your label of feminist. Otherwise, I think you're mistaken about feminist ideals.

No, but there should be less single mothers happening in the first place. Because polygyny takes nothing away from women. It just gives them more choices. It makes MORE betas available to them, and gives them the option of sharing an alpha. So more women would find husbands.

And yeah this is pretty bad for the ordinary guy. Having a family would be much harder to manage for them. So there really ought to be something to make up for it.

What do you disagree with? Society is engineered to promote monogamous families right now. If this changes, the alpha/beta dynamic would be amplified a lot.

>I think more people having their own family is for the best.
Nobody is stopping them. Again, you beta fags make it all about your insecurities, instantly worrying about how you will get cucked by a Chad just because MARRIAGE to multiple women is legalized. They can already fuck multiple women who aren't going to fuck you, so what does it matter if they settle down with only three and actually raise a family? They will probably be leaving more women in the field for you betas to chase.

You are a feminist because you value female life over male life.

You don't care about your society, you only care about yourself.

Your society has already been tested out, where only a few wealthy men benefit while rest are told to fuck off - it's called Saudi Arabia. Sorry that I prefer European monogamy over your low trust shithole that would inevitably lead to religious and/or political fanaticism among the unwanted.

How about instead of codifying feminism, we actually work to make monogamy and marriage work again? It's the best system out there, nothing can beat it.

Like I said, your way of life is with the Saudis. Good luck having a successful society outside of a few people in that case. Just be sure to keep armed guards with you at all time (though you might need to offer them a turn with one of your wives to get them to work for you).

Yeah because marriage is so sacred and you don't all just get cucked and dumped and left with child support and/or alimony.

You guys seriously can't step back from your insecurities with women long enough to realize that this is good for a society as a whole. I think somebody doesn't want the white race to be well populated in spite of being a global minority.

There will never be a beta uprising. Supreme gentlemen eternally BTFO.

You gotta realize that this has been done before. It is natural for alphas to hoard all the women and for betas to not have families. This has large consequences on society.

Right now this is discouraged in many ways. Society is more engineered that most people realize.

Hell it doesn't have to be an "alpha." Anyone who can attract multiple women and marry them should be allowed to, if that's what they want to do. Why not?

Whites populated themselves quite well being monogamous.

Birth control technology and the growth of mass society and population density has largely reduced our birth rates.

Cheers!

>How about instead of codifying feminism, we actually work to make monogamy and marriage work again? It's the best system out there, nothing can beat it.
I guess. But it would be hard to. People have become very liberal about this. The problem is biology. Women aren't attracted to betas. They would rather share alphas. Right now they'd even rather stay single and even raise children by themselves.

Society is failing hard if that was actually a plan.

Because it doesn't work. And I sure as hell don't want America to become Saudi Arabia in terms of the power structures.

Just because you CAN do something doesn't make it right, nor does it mean it will be good for the country overall.

But you, being the feminist that you are think that women's desires are all that matters in life. That's no surprise as most polygamists are some of the biggest feminists out there!

>I'm only doing this because it's what women want! And that's all that matters!

And did European society advance itself based on the whims of women? Nonsense. In fact, those Europeans largely rose to the occasion because they put societal needs in front of feminine self-actualization.

The fact that you care so much about women's opinion makes me think you are a beta. That society should only be built on a woman's feelings would lead to a state of chaos, because those feelings are always changing.

Marriage is a tribal thing. We evolved for groups no larger than 150 people. In this state polygamy is a bad thing. Homosexuality doesn't suffer the same problem, is readily witnessed in many many species.

>Anyone who can attract multiple women and marry them
Alpha by definition, in this sense.
>Why not?
Because the consequences could be pretty severe. Especially if this isn't properly planned out.
Muh freedums is just brainwashing. They make people believe that they are free and that things "just happen" as a result of it so that they never realize that their society has been and is still being engineered. People are for the most part free to act, but they are being manipulated. This isn't necessarily for the worst. Societies DO NOT survive without some degree of engineering. They decay and they disintegrate.
In a way, Americans are the ones understanding the least how their society works as they believe they are the most free. Real economic freedom is actually pretty damn low for most people. America is not particularly free. Except in a very specific sense that they like to think about.
We're a Judeo-christian society. It does work. You start dismantling that, you need to replace it with something else.
I think polygyny could be OK as long as it is exceptional. But it would also cause problems. Most people want a partner and would want a family if things go well with them. If your society does not make this possible for a large quantify of your people (even if this is the result of some kind of freedom (which is a very selective interpretation)), then your society has a lot of discontentment. It becomes inferior to other forms of society.

Polygamy could reduce divorce rates and produce better children.

And look how much people degenerate under this practice. Enough that once proud vikings pay for shitskins to wander into their homeland and rape their women. That sounds like a much bigger loss for betas than maybe not being able to attract a female because chad has three.

>Birth control technology and the growth of mass society and population density has largely reduced our birth rates
Polygamous families generally reproduce rather than get on birth control. Also, white are a global minority. The population density meme doesn't really apply or else niggers, poo in loos, and chinks wouldn't be so much larger in population.

>I sure as hell don't want America to become Saudi Arabia
I don't see how this correlates with a shitskin theocracy in any way. You might as well claim that if we tap our own oil reserves it will make us all in to scary Muslims. Oh no!

>But you, being the feminist
You keep talking about "feminism" and it's not even remotely apropos to this topic.

Monogamy could reduce divorce rates and produce better children.

Your 20 sons who will get to see you a few hours a week probably won't do as well as a few children who have a live in father who will give him much more attention.

We've seen what female dominated upbringings do for young men, not a whole lot of good.

As to your other point, note that urban areas around the world tend to have lower birth rates than rural areas. Rural conservative whites actually have birth rates above replacement, but the liberal urban birthrate is so low you don't see this.

The Western world is far more urbanized than Africa, so yes, population density does have a role here.

Yeah I don't disagree with you.
But preserving the family unit has become difficult to argue for. Because the feminist point of view has taken hold. Family life was oppressing women they claim. People have become very liberal about it. Since it's women who are destroying it, anything that would restrict their freedom to do so (or even just try to nudge them in the right direction) is perceived as patriarchal.

>The fact that you care so much about women's opinion
I don't. I just try to be objective about it.
>makes me think you are a beta.
I must be since I'm not alpha heh. I don't really care though.

At least the leaf can make an argument for his position that isn't "B-but what if I never get any pussy because of this? NO I HATE IT! MOMMY!"

It has nothing to do with the theocracy but the power structures in Saudi society. Saudi Arabia is polygamous and what has resulted is the "alpha males", which are basically the oil barons, royalty, and other elites, hoard lots of the women and you have a number of men who have no hopes in life.

These men just so happen to be the ones who end up becoming extremist, whether it be political or religious. It happens in a lot of Islamic societies, which practices polygamy as you would want to. Also note that Islamic polygamous societies don't really have that much higher of a birthrate than the Western World. The Saudis have a birthrate of 2.2, which is just barely above replacement.

I call you a feminist because you want society to be based on feminine needs and view them as a higher form of life than those useless beta men.

>But women will be happier when they all get alpha males instead of you lowly betas!

Building your society on a woman's emotional needs will send your society into the shitter. In fact, studies have shown women are actually LESS HAPPY under this new fuck and chuck society we live under rather than the monogamous European Christian society we once held.

>Alpha by definition, in this sense
I don't consider myself "alpha" and I can still attract multiple wives. I think the alpha/beta thing is actually a pretty autistic outlook on humanity.

>Especially if this isn't properly planned out.
Why does anyone else need to plan out what I do with my family? I'm kind of astonished to see so many who readily accept fag marriage, but can't stand the idea of a man marrying more than one women, just out of envy or fear of loss.

>Only female desires are important, men do not matter.

Feminism in a nutshell. Two sides of the same coin, only this feminism is cloaked in traditionalism. So "alpha" of you..

>>Only female desires are important, men do not matter.
Why do you feel this way?

>So "alpha" of you.
I don't see what this has to do with female desires. What about your desire as a man? What about having women working together to raise the kids while you're focused on providing for your family? What about just being a man, user?

I clearly don't feel this way, but you do. You obviously think having a stable society is something reserved for whiny beta males whose needs don't matter. They should just be happy to be alive and live in your greatness right? People should work for the elites, not for themselves.

I've told you quite clearly the implications of your society, and you've reduced it to "b-but women won't get the highest quality men they want! And you betas are only complaining because you won't get laid!!!"

Which basically sounds like how a woman would argue anyway. What's next, gonna call me a virgin too? A misogynist?

It is true though. Lots of men wouldn't have partners because of this. Because it's women's natural behavior to flock to alphas. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just that the betas will suffer. And arguably women too, a little bit. They might have a tendency to flock to the alphas, but in the long run they might have been happier with their own beta. But this can take a long time to realize. Not necessarily though, since family life is becoming and a smaller and smaller part of people's lives. So none of this will matter anymore, the way we're going.

So am to understand that most people ITT would not want three wives they love and are attracted to?

So men should just work all day and not get to spend hardly any time with their kids, because mommy should do all that.

Yeah, we've tried raising men with only female influences the past 50 years, and it's made our society even less masculine.

Lol that statement works two ways. His digits and a house full of nagging women and bratty kids.
Why on earth would anyone want this?

Women were never supposed to have rights

It was always supposed to be Alphas+Betas controlling their women, not the self consuming spiral which places women in the center and pits all others against one another.

I can't get that. That's weird to imagine desu.

But this would have consequences for other people and society as a whole. I care about this. I don't think I would want society to work like that.

>I clearly don't feel this way, but you do
Well now you're just insisting on making me into some straw man and, really, insisting that you're so deeply in touch with my true feelings is just gay.

A lot of men don't have partners. What does that have to do with the ones who do. There are an estimated 50,000 polygamous relationships in the US as is and it's not even legal. That doesn't even include those who are just polyamorous or not intending to marry and start families. That's not including tinder apps.

>So men should just work all day and not get to spend hardly any time with their kids
That's a pretty good description of the current system. Except that, currently, both parents are usually working all day.

That would amplify the situation if poly marriages were normalized. A LOT of societies were like that in the past. They don't seem to still be around though, oddly enough.

Good point.

I basically summed up your posts. Based on what you said, society should cater to the needs of women, not men.

See? You wouldn't be changing much, just accessibility. You're a feminist, like I said earlier.

What about two wives? Especially in the two income society we live in. Imagine a live in nanny you don't have to pay and you get to fuck her. That's really hard to imagine?

The west has 'soft harems' for alphas anyway, just not legal ones. My hippy beach bum nieghbour lives with 3 free spirit females. He fucks them all, encourages them to fuck other men that they can use. One female has a kid thats not his (a 7 year old boy I feel sorry for).

>Alphas are more likely to get their hands dirty. They're the ones who are working the physical jobs.

But I am not, user. You are wrong.

Yeah, just what we need more fucked up kids.

Dude even a single 3D wife is hard to imagine kek.

Yep, figured that's all it was about. You want more fucktoys, only you don't want them to fuck other men like they can in the current system.

And you still claim you aren't a feminist.

>Imagine a live in nanny you don't have to pay and you get to fuck her
that's how it used to be with your wife before the feminist movement of the 1960s

You don't even know what feminist means. The word is "feminine." Making babies and raising them is "feminine." Not "feminist."

>The west has 'soft harems' for alphas anyway
Exactly. With premarital sex being so acceptable, all taboos about having a legit family with multiple marriages are moot.

>motivate
>robowaifus
Bitch, please.

kek

Right, but your whole argument is you wanted polygamy for women's sake. After all, they don't want those beta males anyway. And women's desire are more important than men's desires, because after all, only whiny men who couldn't get pussy would disagree with you right?

You believe women are more valuable than men, and that society should be based on their desires, and that the desires of men don't matter. Women's happiness is at the center of your society. That's about as feminist as you can get my friend.

That must be why I would support exceptional polygyny heh. Since many guys aren't getting married, I figure polygyny could make up for it.
But once you start normalizing this, the tendency could start accelerating.
Just the fact that women would have so many more options now (they could jump from alphas to alphas, or pick any of the now very numerous single betas) would make them more fickle and make all marriages much less stable.

>wanting to fuck your wife is feminism
Why wouldn't I fuck my wife? You come with the most outrageous arguments, user.

>Right, but your whole argument is you wanted polygamy for women's sake
No it isn't. tl;dr

No, what I was saying was you support the current system, only with a lockdown on all your sex partners so they can't fuck other men.

Polygamy would destroy society, unless we develop extremely realistic sex dolls and artificial wombs.

I don't think it's actually illegal to be a polygamist nowadays. You just can't be legally married to two people.

I don't think merely allowing it would suddenly convince more women to want to be in polygamous relationships though.

Lmao, you said earlier the only people who opposed you were beta manlets who were pissed you were stealing their women. And that women naturally only wanted alpha males.

women doing what the do best. great sight

You fags were chased off Beaver Island.