Social revolution in the wrong direction
Mar. 18th, 2004 08:20 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elfs"If we give gays the right to marry, what's next, polygamy?" A common refrain here in the U.S. from those who are opposed to both. Interestingly, the United Nations was recently asked by several member countries such as Belgium and the Netherlands to extend employment benefits to same-sex partners recognized by those countries.
Naturally, this has prompted an explosion. Both Islamic and Vatican-inspired states have objected strenuously. But you'll never hear the polygamy refrain coming from these people.
The U.N. already recognizes polygamy.
[EDIT: It's the Washington Post, not the New York Times.]
Naturally, this has prompted an explosion. Both Islamic and Vatican-inspired states have objected strenuously. But you'll never hear the polygamy refrain coming from these people.
The U.N. already recognizes polygamy.
[EDIT: It's the Washington Post, not the New York Times.]
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-03-19 07:52 am (UTC)I believe your analysis to make a number of incorrect assumptions, and thus I disagree with your conclusions. Primary amongst them being some sort of rational-analysis-of-evolutionary-advantage thing that I don't believe people actually do, or at least that I've never seen anyone actually do.
Personally, I believe the prevalence of polygyny in polygamous history has nothing to do with the forces of which you speak, and has everything to do with male power. In the communities in which there is no particular stigma against poly, my experience is that polyandry is just as common as polygyny.