Is polygamy wrong or degenerate in rare instances and assuming the man is very financially well-off...

Is polygamy wrong or degenerate in rare instances and assuming the man is very financially well-off, cares about his wives and children, and is able to adequately provide for all of them?

Other urls found in this thread:

singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html
rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royptb/367/1589/657.full.pdf
psychologytoday.com/blog/darwin-eternity/201109/why-we-think-monogamy-is-normal
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_in_ancient_Rome
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Yes, only a sperg basement dweller will tell you otherwise.

I think the real question here is are mexicans/venezuelans white?

depends how much their family tree got raped by spanish invaders

Yes it's wrong because it's wrong to share your life partner with anyone.
A marriage is sacred knot between two individuals.
Any foreign entity will act as a pollutant.

Depends on the Mexican/Venezuelan desu. Most wouldn't pass as white by European-style standards but some would.

>Is polygamy wrong or degenerate
no, christianism has made cucks out of all the western people, there is litterally nothing wrong.

polygamy is awesome. more wives less men

gay

>most powerful and dominant periods for the white Europeans were the Protestant Christian periods culminating with global supremacy in the 19th century before atheism and socialism gained footholds
>degeneration from global supremacy coincides with socialism spontaneously regaining momentum as soon as women's suffrage became a thing

But yes, let's keep blaming Christianity.

would never happen
women would never share this man

It'll be legalized soon, but still not an improvement or help to society as a whole. We already have a big enough incest problem. And Feminazi's are crazy enough - they'll get worse after this. Any man of any level value will be hunted down by desperate women who slammed into the wall.

The faggots already tried bastardizing marriage (didn't work as homosexuals don't really exist, it's a behavior and culture - not a genetic trait). Polygamy, incest, and pedophilia will do insurmountable damage to the institution.

>It'll be legalized soon
why would anyone do that? You can already have sex and live with them, in fact it would be better since your other "wives" would be single moms and get the benefits

>Is polygamy wrong or degenerate

PROTIP - Don't act like a rutting hog.

Having affairs is normal and every single person has them. Religions made people feel guilty about them for some reason.

> why would anyone do that?
At least in America legally it will probably happen unless people prevent it to save face since legal precedent from the gay marriage ruling in 2015 means there's no consistent reason in the law that it can be outlawed.

you would know all about pollutants

its never wrong
people can choose who they want to fuck


the only people who take issue with this
are people who arent getting fucked

>is the destruction of the family unit and western society wrong

Gosh OP, I'm not sure.

its wrong if youre a beta. its ok if youre a chad.

Nah you're just a sociopath, stop making excuses

Did you read the OP? You do know that it's still a family unit, right, just with more people? Polygamy isn't even unheard of in European history or anything, Charlemagne and many other kings, chieftans, etc. did it.

3,2,1

Even if it works for the wives and kids it fucks things up for everyone else. For every alphaman+harem there's a dozen frustrated betas with no stake in society.

That is a big word..... But I am a good looking guy and have never met a single girl that was not sexually interested in me or didn't want to sleep with me. You wouldn't know what that is like, but I know the truth and you don't.

Too much drama. Plus i only have 1 cock.

he obviously means the nuclear family

I pointed out it would be rare. Plus let's assume that only a couple of people do it, overwhelmingly with only 2/3 women, some possibly only as girlfriends. In a big city there are some men/women uninterested in it anyway, or who are already in relationships, who are cycling through, etc. If somewhat rare it wouldn't be as much of a problem, especially considering there are more women than men.

>family unit
the family unit only has merits for the poor and weak underclass. a powerful wealthy man should rather build a network of relationships.

Incest and pedophilia wasn't unheard of in European history either you nation wrecking kike

nigga wut

Only a few people doing something doesn't make it less degenerate.

We did our best, but few men can't fuck a continent.

while the venezuelan is hot, her feet are not.

kekee

Source??

Not questioning you, but wondering if you know of any good literature discussing this

There is nothing wrong with being polygamous or being in an open relationship. The only reason why monogamous relationships exist is due to social pressure and statist constructions. As long as you take care of your health and make sure your partners do not carry any STDs you can fuck as many people you want whenever you want and be with as many of them at the same time as you want as long as everything is consensual. Monogamy is unnatural and unhealthy.

>inb4 childless virgins start complaining about muh family and muh think of the children

You say that as if it's a bad thing.

If a weak male cannot gain a mate, and a strong male can gain several; that's the natural order of things isn't it?
Look at lion prides, to elephant seals.
It's how the best genetic stock is passed down.
Today's sense of entitlement that everyone is "good enough" to be allowed to marry and breed is false.
Think for a moment about how much better of our evolutionary path would be if retards, pussies, and generally unmotivated leaches weren't permitted mates.

Yea, fuck the proletariat. We bolsheviks should be able to marry as many people as we want!

Good to see other progessives itt!

No, polygamy is always evil, because marriage is one of the cornerstones of civilization, because it allows for a single male to breed with a single female and jointly care for their off-spring. The introduction of marriage in society allowed for enormous re-allocation of resources into invention, innovation, buildings, institutions, etc. Before marriage, society was largely centered around strongmen accumulating as many women as possible to breed with, to ensure the success of his off-spring. These strongmen would pour endless resources into personal security and power struggles to protect his own women and children. With marriage, individual men had a moral and religious obligation to stay united with a single woman, which allowed for the proper raising of children, and for less resources to be used in conflicts sprung from sexual/reproductive urges.

And yes, the death of marriages will have enormous long-term consequences for the West.

>not a genetic trait

Hear me out, Fall of Man introduces sin into the world. Mankind is now tainted, disease and death is prevalent. Over the course of millenia we see genetic mutations that predispose certain people to certain medical conditions. Genetic linkages have been shown for all sorts of diseases, even mental disorders and things such as alcoholism. Why couldn't there be a homosexual gene? I see it as sort of a disease/twisting of the mind. Goodluck finding a lab to search for it, but logically I see it being plausible. Of course there is nature vs. nurture involved but I'd argue there is some sort of genetic linkage involved

Yes, there are. But not many.

Polygamy is always degenerate.

>We already have a big enough incest problem

Nothing wrong with a little incest so long as it is managed appropriately. All of our domesticated plants and animals are inbred to develop superior traits.

>Western European/Gallic, Central European/Nordic, North African/Iberian

The "natural order" of things doesn't infallibly lead to a utopia. It often leads to stagnation.

Many animals are stuck in mating rituals that restrict selection to simple variables like speed, strength, resilience, and maybe cunning. That oversimplifies "best genetic stock", and it doesn't imply offspring are nurtured, which is all the more important when the species depends on cognitive performance (us).

agreed, virgin here.

In a stable society with relatively equal numbers of men and women? No, because having a large number of unmarried men with no women and children to direct their energies towards is bad.

Furthermore, someone with multiple partners cannot engage in the true and total act of self-giving that marriage really requires.

In a bad scenario where many men have been killed off and there is a dearth of men to father children, I can see it being a reasonable, but only temporary, solution to the problem, in a pragmatic way, but it still would violate what true marriage should be.

Oh so like the middle east shitskins?

> In a stable society with relatively equal numbers of men and women?
That's specifically why I said rare, it wouldn't be a common occurrence, even if legalized now culturally most people would still desire monogamy. It would be rare enough, plus the fact that there are slightly more women than men, to even it out and avoid most of the bad consequences seen when it becomes very common or the norm IMO.

You can't exceed the underlying genetic potential of your breeding stock.

it's a recipe for disaster in an advanced civilisation.

It can only exist in warring tribes.

>>In a stable society with relatively equal numbers of men and women? No, because having a large number of unmarried men with no women and children to direct their energies towards is bad.

That's going to happen anyhow. Toxic family law is already diverting many men away from marriage.

singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html

A husband and wife together and respected by their kids is master race scenario.

Venezuela is the only fuckable.

Other two are shitskins.

None of them is worth of carrying my child though.

of course he can't provide any source because he's telling literal bs

And you think we couldn't find a set off standards that would be ideal for our species? Look what rampant breeding is doing to the cognition level of your finer trailer parks and ghettos my American friend. You really arguing that mandatory birth control unless minimal criteria are met wouldn't be a good idea?

Polygamy is not twice the Sex it is twice the bitching

Hes actually not tho.

It's wrong. People tried it for thousands of years and it went nowhere.

However, it's hypocritical to ban it because people are supposed to have freedom and to decide whatever they want. If this is what others want then it should be legal, right?

So you wouldn't mind if you found out your mother cheated on your father behind his back?

What about your spouse has a child with someone else? Would you just shrug and say: "No big deal. That's fine."

> Italian not knowing his own history
The Romans had adopted monogamous marriages long before Christianity ever came around same with Japan and China.

Monogamous marriages has been one of the best indicators of a developed nation.
Getting rid of where the elite would have all the women created the following.
- More men willing to die to protect their land and family
- More people having kids so more taxes
- More efficient/better community
- Wealth developed over a lifetime can easily be passed along

Why don't you accept Islam already since you are polygamous man?
You can even own sex slaves.
And you wives can't cheat on you.
Unless they want to get stoned.
They cannot have free will.
Unless you let them.
They better stay at home.
You can beat them if they don't.

The paradise for any degenerate.

>>most powerful and dominant periods for the white Europeans were the Protestant Christian periods

>implying religion had anything to do with that

KEK

>singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html
This.

And women are expensive.

Those people should have been bred out years ago. Thats our tax dollars hard at work.

The children of rich polygamous men are far less likely to survive to adulthood than the children of poor monogamous men.

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

Polygamous societies also have exponentially higher rates of child abuse, murder and rape.

what did you do with the other one?

I never said I was polygamous. Also even if I was and believed in it I would have to find some belief system which was fine with polygamy but also didn't have a huge mass of other retarded shit entangled with it like Islam does.

Yes, it did. I cant take you seriously if you are unable to cognitively see the importance of Christianity in European civilization. Basically all of the western world is living in a post christian society, and its getting worse and worse.

It's wrong because monogamy takes both sexes as equal thus preventing a rift in the marital relation.

Considering females inferior in a situation when they have equal responsabilities, as in the world it is.

It's beyond retarded and reserved for backwards cultures like the arabs or the mormons.

>The Romans had adopted monogamous marriages long before Christianity
>Monogamous marriages has been one of the best indicators of a developed nation

sources now

Yes. Marriage is to be between one man and one woman.

How are things getting worse?
> Wealthier than ever
> More technology
> Highest average lifespan ever
> More access to food or health if you need it in history
> Clean water more accessible than ever
etc.

Why is wrong when you can make a harem of cosplayers?

mexicans are fatter than americans. a skinny mexican is like finding a needle in the haystack. mexican food is really good though so they have a reason to look like fat swine wallowing in their own shit.

Just Google it nigger. This is well known. Read the Bible. You will find no prescription for single marriages, but rather polygamy, concubines, etc. Christians values are derived from gentile philosophy which was combined with the teachings of Jesus. This is why it shares little in common with Judaism.

>worse and worse
define getting worse. because as far as i know your country is planning the exploration of Mars.
oh maybe you refer to lgbt and shit. should i remember you that your Freedomland was irrelevant before WW1? and guess in what period the first cultural revolutions started

>all things accomplished by past generations
>all things accomplished by societies built on Christian values.

psychologytoday.com/blog/darwin-eternity/201109/why-we-think-monogamy-is-normal

that's only true for poor mexicans, just like it is for poor americans. notice how only the rednecks, niggers and spics are the fat ones? same goes over here go to any nice educated neighborhood or city and you'll find they keep themselves in shape

Underrated and underappreciated post.

Why the FUCK would anyone want ANOTHER woman? One makes you miserable enough.

The greatest cultural revolutions were in Christian Europe. Look at architecture and high art of the Renaissance

Women don't have equal responsibilities though. In fact men and women aren't equal in any respect. If you could build an artificial womb that worked just as well as an actual womb, women would be obsolete. Literally dodo'd. Do you know why? Because having children is all women can do.

> Science and physics accomplished by enabling these things
> Everything done by Christians
> Implying most scientists believe in God or are religious

polygamy is the natural order of things for men, at least for those of us capable of it.

not seeing your point?

>Just Google it nigger
ok you have no sources
>This is well known
maybe there in Niggerstan
>Read the Bible
KEK i'm not going to get bluepilled by a kike book
>Christians values are derived from gentile philosophy
(((gentile philosophy)))
>This is why it shares little in common with Judaism
they did a great job with you, but no wonder since you are american so an easy target of brainwashing. maybe you still think you won Vietnam and shit as well

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_in_ancient_Rome

>cares about his wives and children
This is what betas do, alphas make children and drop women as single mothers.

Ja, ja, only ze purest überfraulein für Sie.

Thats hardly what I was implying.

So yeah, needle in a haystack

what do you even mean with "cultural revolution"?
i am talking about equal opportunity movements, lgbt, racism, things like that.
when these things didn't exist, you americans were still hanging from the trees eating bananas.
but then this cultural revolutions happened and yet you became the most powerful nation in the world. your argument has no sense

all mixed with white blood

I am not a Christian. Compare Christianity to Judaism and you will find relatively little overlap generally speaking. This is why people debated how to reconcile the disconnect and things like Marcionism came about. Islam is much more closely related to Judaism.

Kike

>None of them is worth of carrying my child though.
You will have enough raising your wife's son Hans

The girl from Venezuela is more than 90 percent European mainly spanish, the girl from México is also 60-80 percent European and only dominican girl is a Inca and mulatto with some white genes; this is why her rear end is so disproportionally big.

>mfw nuclear family distorts the free sexual market and redistributes womynz from alphas to betas

Let's face it Sup Forums, we were the socialists all along.

>tfw the venezuelan girl will never sit on my face and rub my dick with her breasts