SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the how-do-you-keep-multiple-wives-happy dept.
A study conducted by a team of researchers from the U.K., Tanzania and the U.S. has found an example of polygynous marriage that does not appear to be harmful to women or children. In their paper published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the researchers outline their study of people living in villages in Tanzania, and why they believe organizations such as the UN need to modify their stance on the practice to better take account of cultural practices.
Polygny is a term used to refer to marriage systems where males can have more than one wife, while polygamy refers to the actual practice of it. In this new study, the researchers looked into the question of whether a polygnynous marriage is in fact harmful to women or children as has been assumed by many in the international community. They looked at 3,500 households in villages in Tanzania, noting the occurrences of polygnynous marriage versus monogamous marriage and the standard of living for those women and children.
In looking at their data, they found that first wives—women who were the first to marry a man with several wives, tended to have better nutrition as did their children, than women in monogamous marriages and their children. Later wives and their children fared on average as well as monogamous wives and their children, but not as well as first wives. This, the team claims, shows that not all instances of polygynous marriage are harmful to women or children—it shows that in some cases, it can actually be a practice that women can use to better their lives and that of their children. It is a matter of wealth and the rules that govern a society—if women cannot own land or other resources, for example, or take a job, as was the case in the Tanzanian villages, they will likely do better in life if they are able to attract and marry a man with some degree of wealth, which in some cases may mean, a man with multiple wives.
How do the husbands fare?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 28 2015, @01:32PM
What a bad study. In reality only the richer men in that sort of societies can afford to have multiple wives. It sounds like those rich men continue to marry until their earning capacity is tapped. The first wives and their children get to take advantage of a time when the husband hasn't reached his maximum family expenditure yet and that's how they gain their improved nutrition.
It should be obvious to see that the first wives and their children would be still better off nutritionally if the rich husband hadn't later taken on the burden of yet more mouths to feed.
Also, this talk about nutrition fails to address issues of psychological health, which I think are pretty important too. I heard that there is an Arab saying, "I may be stupid, but not as stupid as a man who has two wives." It's because the two wives are constant rivals and therefore an unending source for family quarrels. 3+ wives apparently stick together better (against the husband?)
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday October 28 2015, @01:45PM
It's because the two wives are constant rivals and therefore an unending source for family quarrels. 3+ wives apparently stick together better (against the husband?)
Three people is spending all time alone wondering if the other two are ganging up on you. Four or more at least means every time two people are together or one is alone the whispering doesn't have to automatically start, or a 2 v 2 MAD scenario is possible. One of the Russian authors had a lot to say about this dynamic, Dostoyevski or maybe it was Pushkin, but its probably a cultural universal.
I remember seeing lots of complaining about this in anti-nuclear writing around the time the Chinese got the bomb and it being proposed that the world really needed to give France and England and Israel the bomb in order to stabilize and reduce the likelihood of conspiracy leading to something pre-emptive and unfortunate.
It fact its even more than culturally universal, three "thinkers" just isn't stable. One brain and two watches means you have no idea what time it "really" is.
(Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Wednesday October 28 2015, @01:51PM
Problem with "nutritionally" based criterion is that at certain point that extra nutrition does more harm than good.
So maybe the first and only wife would end up obese and die at 45. Although the man would probably get a second wife at that point.
The Arab saying seems spot on, thank you for that :)
(Score: 2) by M. Baranczak on Wednesday October 28 2015, @04:16PM
"I may be stupid, but not as stupid as a man who has two wives."
Now come you gentleman soldier,
Won't you marry me?
Oh no my dearest Polly
This thing can never be
For I've a wife already
And children I have three
Two wives are allowed in the army
But one's too many for me
- "The Gentleman Soldier", trad. [youtube.com]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Joe Desertrat on Wednesday October 28 2015, @05:44PM
Also, this talk about nutrition fails to address issues of psychological health, which I think are pretty important too. I heard that there is an Arab saying, "I may be stupid, but not as stupid as a man who has two wives." It's because the two wives are constant rivals and therefore an unending source for family quarrels. 3+ wives apparently stick together better (against the husband?)
Mark Twain had a humorous take on this in his book Roughing It, in which Brigham Young explained to a friend of Twain's the problems of having multiple wives: