Biblical Gender Roles

    Why would God make men with polygynous natures when they cannot act on them?

    biblicalgenderroles Avatar
    biblicalgenderroles

    “I’ve been thinking about this, and I have to wonder if God ever really intended for polygyny to be widespread or many men to have strongly polygynous designs. If He did, then one has to ask why he didn’t design us so that women conceive girls at least twice as often as boys. It seems unfair to make most men desire multiple wives and then not create enough women who could marry them.”

    The question above was submitted to me from one my readers. This really is a great question and it is one that often stumps those who embrace the fact the God does allow polygamy in the Bible and that men naturally have polygynous natures.

    Before I answer this question let’s first review the terms we are discussing.

    Understanding the Terms

    Polygamy refers to one man having several wives or one woman having several husbands. Polygamy is distinguished from polyamory in that polygamy is always a one to many relationship where polyamory is a group marriage with the possibility of multiple men and women all having sex with one another.

    Polygyny refers to the type of polygamy where a man has several wives and polyandry refers to polygamy where a wife has several husbands.

    The Bible only allows one type of polygamy and that is Polygyny. Polyandry and polyamory break the biblical model of marriage that women was made for man and that a woman can only have one husband at a time. If she were to attempt to marry a second husband she would be committing adultery against the first unless her first husband was dead or she was justly divorced from him(I Corinthians 7:39).

    From this point forward I will use polygamy and polygyny interchangeably as there is only one type of polygamy that is allowed by God.

    7 Biblical Facts about Polygamy

    FACT #1 – God rewarded Leah with another child for giving her husband another wife (Genesis 30:18).  Some try to say she just thought God rewarded her but the Scripture does not EVER record God condemning her for this so we take the Scriptures at face value that God did indeed reward her for giving her maid to her husband as another wife.

    FACT #2 – God expressly allows polygyny and set rules for its practice. (Exodus 21:10-11, Deuteronomy 21:15-17,Deuteronomy 25:5-7)

    FACT #3 – God while allowing polygyny warns against Kings “multiplying wives” meaning they were not to horde wives as Solomon would later do. – (Deuteronomy 17:17)

    FACT #4 – God tells tells David through his Prophet Nathan when he sinned and took another man’s wife(Bathsheba) that he had given David the wives of his master and would have given him more wives (II Samuel 12:8)

    FACT #5 – Jehoiada the high priest gets TWO wives for the young king Joash (II Chronicles 24:2-3)

    FACT #6 – God pictures himself as polygamist husband to Judah and Israel in (Ezekiel 23:1-5)

    FACT #7 – God divorces his first wife which was Israel as nation(Jeremiah 3:8) and in his seeking of his second wife(the church) seeks to make his first wife Israel jealous(Romans 10:19) and one day his first wife Israel as a nation will also be restored in the New Kingdom of God.

    Many great men of God including Abraham, Jacob, Gideon, David and Joash were polygamists and NOT once did God offer a word of condemnation to these men for their polygamy.

    Israel was still one of the most polygamist nations in the world during the time of the Roman Empire. At first Rome passed some laws exempting Israel from its monogamy policies but later it removed Israel’s exemption and it eventually forced monogamy only marriage on Israel.

    While women and men are roughly equal worldwide the distribution of genders by countries is not equal

    While worldwide they estimate there are slightly more men than women the population of men to women is not distributed equally by countries.  There are far more women in eastern European countries like Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania and Russia then there are men.  This is why women are trying to leave these countries in droves to seek men from other countries to be their husbands.

    The reason I stated this fact is just so people understand that while worldwide the male to female population may be roughly equal that does not mean in various local populations of countries, provinces or states that it is equal.

    3 Reasons God gave most men polygynous desires even if they may never be able to fully realize them

    So now we come to Alex’s question.  Why would God give most men polygynous desires to a greater or lesser degree when most men in the world will never be able to act on these desires?

    1. To help populate the world. In the beginning of creation it is very likely that we had more women than men as this would help the world population to grow faster as one man could impregnate several women at the same time.
    2. Because some men were too lazy, too stupid, too poor or slaves and could not have wives this would leave many women without husbands. Only men who had the brains or means to take care of a family could marry (and that is the way it should be now but unfortunately western society has chosen to subsidize monogamy).
    3. War and early death of men would leave many virgins and widows in its wake. Man’s polygynous nature would allow him to easily come in and make up for the imbalanced sex ratio and quickly rebuild the population.

    The last point about war killing off most of the eligible men is an interesting one. In fact one of the contributing factors to the rise of feminism after World War I was that fact that millions of women in Europe and America could not find men because of the millions of men who will killed in the war.  This same problem happened again after World War II. There were millions of young women that were never able to marry after both wars and many widows left to continue on their own with no male support.

    God prescribed a way for women to be protected and provided for by men especially during times of war, famine and disease when men are being killed off. His answer was polygamy.  That my friend is one of the big reasons God gave men polygynous desires.  In fact if we practiced Levirate marriage as found in the Old Testament(Deuteronomy 25:5-10)  if a man’s brother was killed in war or some other way he would marry his brother’s wife to care for her and raise up an heir for his brother’s estate.  And no there was no prohibition of if he was married he could not do this – if did not do it – it would be a shame to him.

    So yes during times of relative peace as the world has seen for several decades where we are not losing men by the millions we seem to question God’s wisdom.  But I can tell you if another world war broke out and millions of men were being killed over several years the truth of what I am telling you would be very real.

    But let’s leave war and disease taking out all the men and talk about why polygamy is needed even in times of peace like we have today.

    Even if there was an exact ratio of 1/1 males and females there is a great possibility that many men will not want to marry.  In fact a lot of women talk about this today- “Where are all the guys that want to marry?” That is a different topic for another post.  But I can tell you for a fact when I was going through my divorce they told us that divorced men had a far easier chance of getting married and often got married faster than the  divorced or widowed women.  It is just harder for divorced or widowed women to get married again especially if they have children for a variety of reasons.

    Now if polygamy were legal it would solve this problem by allowing wealthier men to come along and have multiple wives and be able to care for them and their children.

    So is it unfair that few men today can fully act on their polygynous natures in a Biblical way?

    I think in some ways it is unfair(unjust) and in other ways it is not. If a man is lazy and lacks ambition and lives in his mom’s basement at the age of 30 – no it is NOT unfair that he can’t act on his polygynous desires. In fact he should not able to act on his sexual desires even with one wife because he cannot provide for a wife and family.

    I think our ban on polygamy is unfair to a single mom whose husband was killed or abandoned her and she has to scrape by just to put food on the table and care for her children.  I am sure that if you gave many single moms who are in hard economic straights the choice to be a second, third or fourth wife to a wealthy man they would take that opportunity in second! But we don’t give them that choice.

    I think it is unfair to men who are very successful in their business endeavors who in centuries past would have been able to not only to fully realize their dreams in business but their reward for being successful would have been to be able to have multiple wives and more children.

    It is an utter waste to me that wonderful successful men are limited to only one wife when so many women out there struggle to make it alone on their own. Also it is a fact that most successful men whether they be in business or politics have very HIGH testosterone levels and very high sex drives.

    So basically you have a man who has the means to take care of multiple wives and their children and has the high sex drive to want multiple wives. Many women would love to be one of his wives but our society stops this and then we wonder why these very successful men often have affairs when in Biblical times they could have just had many wives.

    I am not defending men that go whoremongering – but our culture as well as our churches have set up men for failure with our attitudes toward male sexuality and specifically man’s polygynous nature.

    But wasn’t polygamy only allowed because of sin in the world

    Some Christians believe the only reason God allowed polygamy was because of the existence of sin in the world.  After all, we only have wars, famine, disease and other things that wipe out men and leave women with no support because of sin in the world.

    However, the first reason for man’s polygamous design was to populate the world. You would have a much slower world population growth if you had an even number of males to females born in the beginning of the world.  Also the fact that males were so prized in early civilization seems to be an indicator that in the early days of humanity males were more rare than females.

    God’s first command to Adam and Eve was to be fruitful and multiply – he wanted lots of babies being born.  Now some have asked why did he not give Adam many wives if that was his design and that is a good question. 

    But the original creation in the Garden of Eden also had these things as well:

    Sibling marriage was made necessary by the creation of only one man and one woman. Adam and Eve’s children had to marry each other(sibling marriage). Later God would outlaw this practice.  So we all would agree that sibling marriage was only a temporary part of God’s design in the beginning.

    God created Adam and Eve naked yet later in the Bible he commanded that clothing was to be worn. And the Bible never says clothing was only made necessary because of sin as we see in Revelation that the Saints and Angels are clothed in white robes.  If humans only needed to where clothing because of sin then we would all be naked in heaven and in the new world. So we see that Adam and Eve being naked in the beginning was also only a temporary part of God’s design as well.

    Instead we understand that God always intended to cloth Adam and Eve as clothing separates mankind from the rest of God’s creations.  Clothing is a sign of dignity and it sets humans apart.

    So the first reason apart from sin in the world that God made man polygynous in his nature was to help populate the world.

    But there is another reason apart from populating the world that I believe man was made with a polygynous nature.  Despite all the claims that “God only has only one bride” the fact is God has two brides. His divorced wife Israel and his new bride the Church.  The Bible tells us he took on his new bride the church to make his ex-wife Israel jealous(Romans 10:19). The fact is no matter how you cut it – we serve a polygamous God. It is a one to many relationship.  God has relationships multiple people, multiple nations and multiple churches.  Yet God expects all these groups to have only one God as wives are expected to have only one husband.

    Posted in: ,
    Posted in: , , , , , , , , ,

    58 responses to “Why would God make men with polygynous natures when they cannot act on them?”

    1. Alex Avatar
      Alex

      Thank you for taking the time to answer this question so thoroughly. You definitely did address a lot of my concerns and provide some good reasons for polygyny.

      Anyway, my comments:

      “To help populate the world. In the beginning of creation it is very likely that we had more women than men as this would help the world population to grow faster as one man could impregnate several women at the same time.”

      I’ve heard this theory before too that early human populations were more heavily female than male. Of course you still need to have enough males to introduce greater genetic diversity, but a higher female population does help.

      “Because some men were too lazy, too stupid, too poor or slaves and could not have wives this would leave many women without husbands. Only men who had the brains or means to take care of a family could marry (and that is the way it should be now but unfortunately western society has chosen to subsidize monogamy).”

      I see what you mean about laziness and stupidity, although I think that the desire to have a wife and family (as well as knowing that he would have a good chance of meeting a woman who would marry him) does motivate some men to work harder. Poverty too is a problem for anyone who wants to start a family, although I fear that polygyny without regulation could breed more materialism. While some women would still want to marry men who were hardworking and capable of supporting a family but not wealthy because of love, other women (especially if their families were pushing them to marry up) might go for being second or third wives to wealth men rather than becoming first wives of hardworking but less rich men. As for slaves, the Bible actually does describe slaves having wives, and this makes sense. After all, a man from biblical times might have married, started a family, and then fallen on such hard times that he was enslaved to pay off his debts. Other men might have been married but captured during wartimes with their families. Still other slaves received wives (also enslaved) from their masters. So I don’t think that God completely objected to slaves having wives, especially since He also regulated how the families of male slaves were to be treated.

      “War and early death of men would leave many virgins and widows in its wake. Man’s polygynous nature would allow him to easily come in make up for the imbalanced sex ratio and quickly rebuild the population.”

      I see what you mean about war, although from biblical times until the early twentieth century (and today in many places), childbirth killed many women young and definitely left large numbers of widowers. There are also some theories that women in certain past cultures were more likely to die during famine because they were expected to take less food for themselves and more likely to die during outbreaks of illness because they were expected to nurse sick relatives. So while I do agree that there were plenty of times throughout history where women vastly outnumbered men in specific locations (after wars especially), I’m not confident that this was always the case historically.

      Those reservations aside, you did answer my question about how polygyny might help in the modern world in your section on whether or not it was fair that few men today could act on those urges. Thanks.

    2. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      Polygyny would help the West now more than ever. Not trying to turn the topic to something else, but we can see the Middle East, which embraces polygyny, is overwhelming the West through sheer numbers alone, while the United States and Europe suffer from dwindling populations. Japan is even worse. Their old are dying off at a rate much faster than new births. They are a people we could see eventually die out. Polygyny in the West, though not the absolute solution, could bolster the population as families return to pumping out 15-20 kids through polygynous families. The West’s failure to stymie feminism has taken a huge toll on the population, as Western women push of having children either very late in life (resulting in fewer or weaker children) or not having children at all! I doubt it would happen in my lifetime, as I only have about 20-30 years left on this rock, unless something catastrophic happens.

    3. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      As soon as I was done typing that last comment I started to wonder: If polygyny made a return to the U.S. do you think it would return the honor of being a wife and mother back to society? I mean, with the return of large families could the mindset of women be pulled away from the care-free, independent, I-don’t-need-no-man modern woman and back to the proud to be a mom, I-know-how-to-take-care-of-my-man woman of years long past?

    4. AnnaMS Avatar
      AnnaMS

      Snapper, I wonder if polygyny would actually solve the very real problem you present. From what I can read, a lot of men are rejecting families along with women. The whole idea of MGTOW in the manosphere, or men seeking European women for sex rather than Americans d/t the idea that they are sexier (and having never been to Europe, I have no opinion on that), and men rejecting American women d/t their being feminists. So if you take an American man that has no real desire to mate with American women and tell him that he can now have 2+ instead of just one, how is that going to matter if he doesn’t want any to begin with? From blogs like RooshV or Return of Kings, it seems like a lot of American men don’t want to be saddled with one American woman, much less more than that.

      Now I think a lot of their problems with American women are exaggerated (I routinely see more thin women than they imply exist at all in America), but their fundamental concerns are real to them, and have some validity, and won’t seem to be solved by polygyny.

      Now I am NOT trying to say that this is a male-only problem. Not at all! I agree that feminism definitely contributes to this issue and I have personally seen women delay having children and then have run into problems with conceiving or carrying a full-term pregnancy. I routinely encourage my similar-age coworkers to consider having their children now rather than prioritizing their career now. Unfortunately, I have made little to no progress in this area.

    5. biblicalgenderroles Avatar
      biblicalgenderroles

      @AnnaMS,

      “Snapper, I wonder if polygyny would actually solve the very real problem you present. From what I can read, a lot of men are rejecting families along with women. The whole idea of MGTOW in the manosphere, or men seeking European women for sex rather than Americans d/t the idea that they are sexier (and having never been to Europe, I have no opinion on that), and men rejecting American women d/t their being feminists. So if you take an American man that has no real desire to mate with American women and tell him that he can now have 2+ instead of just one, how is that going to matter if he doesn’t want any to begin with?”

      Your comment actually makes a great argument FOR polygamy. Since so many men ARE in fact not opting for marriage whether it is for selfish reasons(because they just want to sleep around) or because they don’t like how feminist women are in our culture or because they don’t think they could support a family this is where polygamy WOULD solve the problem.

      We are not telling men who don’t want to marry for all the reasons I mentioned to marry more women. We are saying that men who DO want to marry and have the capability of supporting many wives should be allowed to do so.

    6. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      this causes a lot of things to make sense.

      one of those things – i’ve wondered how my husband could take my children and me in and it not be a burden to him – emotionally or otherwise. for me, it’s huge. for him, it’s natural.

      —–

      Snapper – only 20-30 more years? you don’t plan to live long 🙂

    7. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      BGR – you’ve mentioned that you know Christian families who do practice polygyny. what does that look like and how does it work for them?

    8. biblicalgenderroles Avatar
      biblicalgenderroles

      @AnnaMS,

      “From blogs like RooshV or Return of Kings, it seems like a lot of American men don’t want to be saddled with one American woman, much less more than that.”

      While I certainly do not agree with everything in the manosphere or with everything the red pill guys teach there “some” truth in their grievances with the American women. What that means though for conservative Bible believing Christian men is that they need to truly do some treasure hunting looking for the gems that are out there. I would suggest that a man be saving his money and living frugally in case he can’t find an American woman that does not believe in feminism and wants to embrace the traditional help meet role. Then at some point he could go to Eastern Europe to countries like Latvia, Estonia, Lithuana find a Christian woman that rejects feminism and marry her and bring her back with him.

      There may be other countries as well where feminism is not as prevalent where men could look.

      Really this is much larger issue than polygyny. I believe we need to encourage western culture to bring back Biblical polygamy and godly Christian men need to search for godly wives who want to bare lots of children. Of course men need to make sure they can support the wives/children they plan on having even with a simple lifestyle.

      In essence conservative Bible believing Christians who believe that women should be keepers at home and bear lots of children could breed feminism out of existence if men chose only to marry women who embraced the traditional homemaker help meet role that they believe is right. Of course this truly requires fathers to be very involved with their daughters helping them to understand what feminist ideals are incompatible with God’s design for men and women – otherwise they could possibly be producing new feminist women from non-feminist homes.

    9. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      @AnnaMS

      “From blogs like RooshV or Return of Kings, it seems like a lot of American men don’t want to be saddled with one American woman, much less more than that.”

      I think you are half right in this. A lot of manosphere blogs indicate that men don want to be SADDLED with one American woman, but many of these men have no problem juggling a harem of women, so long as they can cut one loose when she gets to be too much trouble. I think American men want American women, just not in a long term relationship (such as marriage) in their current form. There might be more thin women out there than they imply exist, but a thin woman does not a good wife make. The disease of feminism can turn even the most beautiful face into that of an ogre. She’s cute until she opens her mouth! A man will put up with that for a short time, but to tether yourself to it with marriage is a fools move.

      Due to a man’s polygynous nature, if American women returned to femininity I think plenty of men wouldn’t mind having a couple of wives, if only because of the sexual advantages. Of course, society would have to bring back shame for women who cheat on their husbands or slut around, and that is not likely to happen any time soon either.

      Well, I am 40 now, so that gives me to about 60-70. I guess I could live longer, but it seems like the more I read the news the more I pray, “Lord, take me home!”. To quote the great Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth of Planet Express: “I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.”.

    10. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      I just saw this morning that Utah has maintained it’s ban on polygamy, specifically citing the ‘Sister Wives’ series. At one time I would have celebrated, but now not so much, though I think this particular TV show is full of scripted drama and doesn’t show this type of relationship in a very good light. Of course, it could be a situation where the combination of polygamy and feminism are in full display, as none of the wives in the show seem happy for very long, and the husband doesn’t display much leadership. I’m going off of what I have seen in the past, which is only 2-3 episodes.

    11. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      Snapper –
      “Well, I am 40 now, so that gives me to about 60-70. I guess I could live longer, but it seems like the more I read the news the more I pray, “Lord, take me home!”. To quote the great Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth of Planet Express: “I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.”.”

      i totally, totally get that. i’ve decided i want to live as long as my girls need me, and i know that’s a good long time from now. i guess when we reach a certain age we need to find a reason to want to stay in this world. for me, it’s for my girls. my parents didn’t want me and wouldn’t care much if i lived or died – they’ve had nothing to do with me since i was little. and the harsh, physically painful truth … i still need them. i don’t want my girls to experience the same pain i have and do. i want to be there, here, for them for as long as possible, esp now that their dad is gone.

    12. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      Snapper –
      “Due to a man’s polygynous nature, if American women returned to femininity I think plenty of men wouldn’t mind having a couple of wives, if only because of the sexual advantages.”

      define ‘femininity’ as you see it.

    13. Alex Avatar
      Alex

      @Snapper,

      Mathematically, I don’t think that polygyny in America could ever be really widespread becuase the majority of men (probably 70-80%) would still either be monogamously married or single. Some of this would be by choice, and some of it would be because there wouldn’t be enough single women. I also do think that this system would also make men hoping to marry more competitive. They’d have to be if women who might have previously married them in spite of their laziness or lack of success could instead choose to marry a rich man who already had a wife.

    14. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      Ha ha! Simple! Act like women! Modern American women love to act like men! They are rough, foul and combative. Women curse like sailors for no reason other than to curse! They drink copious amounts of alcohol for no reason other than to get drunk! They are promiscuous and irritating! They are covered in tattoos of skulls and demons and wear unflattering men’s clothing. They lack love. They lack empathy for anything other than the pain of the sisterhood. They desire money, power, status – all things men desire, rather than love, children, a husband and a home.

      Feminine – defined as NOT ACTING LIKE A MAN.

    15. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      I would love to some day have grandchildren. Also, I see the way my own dad takes care of us, his children, his grandchildren and even his brothers and sisters, and it makes me desire to be like him. His mother died while he was still young and, for a long time, his father (my grandpa) was a woman-chasing drunk (though I have fond memories of him and miss him dearly). Despite all of this he gave his life to Christ, married my mother (I was one year old at their wedding) worked hard to become an electrician, worked many, many hours and now owns his own business (which is where I am employed). If I can be half the man he is now I would be very happy. I am almost afraid that it is far too late in my life to cultivate the good habits he has built for himself, but I still strive to emulate him as much as I can in most regards. Lord willing, I will be as successful as he is with regards to family, if not business.

    16. biblicalgenderroles Avatar
      biblicalgenderroles

      Ame,

      The polygamists I know I met online in forums before starting this blog and I have had more contact me since I started writing on polygamy on this blog. Surprisingly these are not mormons – many of them are actually baptists. Some Baptists follow the old beliefs of the Anabaptists from Europe who embraced polygamy during the Reformation.

      In the cases I know of it involves Christian men taking divorced women as additional wives. As we know sometimes women are innocent parties in divorce. So these Christian men will take these women on as secret spiritual wives and the women remain in their separate home with their children. The man simply comes over a couple times a week and sleeps there and he is always available to her in the case of an emergency. In many cases these women take give power of durable power of attorney and medical power of attorney to their “spiritual husbands” in case they need medical decisions made and for other legal reasons.

      In some situations the man’s first and legal wife acts as the “head wife” and she determines based on her discussions with the other wife(s) where he goes for the evening. Other men take a more active role and simply decide on as needed basis where they will go while some keep a strict schedule of where they sleep each night. Each of the wives will get a date night probably once a month or so. The most wives I know of anyone having is 3 – so they have their first wife(legal wife) and 2 spiritual wives.

    17. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      This is why I said that society would need to bring back shame for divorce and adultery. Without those barriers in place it would be a madhouse, with women who felt they were in a bad marriage situation leaving their husbands for ‘greener pastures’. This goes back to the whole manosphere concept of hypergamy. If that cant be kept in check, polygamy would solve nothing, but would instead create massive problems. Instead of women competing for the affections of men, men would have to scramble to maintain their current wives in a feeble attempt at keeping them happy 24/7, which is what we have now. Christian men everywhere are taught that they need to serve their wives and do everything they can to keep them happy. Their wives happiness is used as a measurement for their godliness, and an unhappy wife requires unending repentance to God and total submission to ones wife. A total reversal of the God established roles.

      I think both sexes would need to be ‘more competitive’ if polygyny were re-established in the U.S. Men would need to be more competitive to obtain a wife, and women would need to be more competitive to maintain her husbands favor amongst his wives. Failure on a mans part would mean no wife, no sex, no children. Failure on a woman’s part would mean no affection, no perks and no children.

    18. biblicalgenderroles Avatar
      biblicalgenderroles

      Alex,

      “Mathematically, I don’t think that polygyny in America could ever be really widespread becuase the majority of men (probably 70-80%) would still either be monogamously married or single”

      I don’t disagree with you that mathematically polygamy will ever be “widespread” nor was it “widespread” historically if you look at the number of men who were actually able to act on it. In times of normal population ratio of 1/1 male female then polgyny would probably only be practiced by 20 percent of men at best. But in times after wars where few men were left it is possible the number of polygamist men would rise by shear necessity.

      But the point is the percentage of men who are able to actually actively live the polygamist lifestyle as God ordains it is not really relevant. There are many things were only a small percentage of the population can participate due to either talent, intelligence or financial ability. Just because maybe only 20 percent of the population of men could fully realize their polygynous capacity and desires does not mean the other 80 percent of men must completely suppress and rid themselves of their polygynous desires. They may only be able to exercise these polygynous desires in their imaginations and that is ok. That was the point of this post.

    19. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      that is … wow. to have a father like that. wow. i … i cannot even imagine. what an incredible gift.

      my girls have both indicated they really don’t want to have children or get married … not feminist, just … pain. their childhoods have held so much pain. and, this will make me cry, but they’ve seen how hard and painful it’s been for me, and they’ve become very protective of me.

      idk what God has for them, and i certainly know that what we think at 16 and 18 changes. i don’t think i’ll be disappointed if i don’t have grandchildren. this life is just so full of pain … and sometimes it physically hurts me that i brought two children into such pain. i feel so selfish having done so.

    20. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      BGR – wow. this touches me deeply. how … beautiful.

      how sad they must do this secretly.

    21. Alex Avatar
      Alex

      @BGR,

      “But the point is the percentage of men who are able to actually actively live the polygamist lifestyle as God ordains it is not really relevant. There are many things were only a small percentage of the population can participate due to either talent, intelligence or financial ability. Just because maybe only 20 percent of the population of men could fully realize their polygynous capacity and desires does not mean the other 80 percent of men must completely suppress and rid themselves of their polygynous desires. They may only be able to exercise these polygynous desires in their imaginations and that is ok. That was the point of this post.”

      Sorry if I wasn’t clear. I actually do agree with you. You’ve shown me some benefits of polygyny that I hadn’t considered before. I was responding to Snapper and saying that I didn’t think that polygyny would necessarily convince more men to get married because they might realize that there was no guarantee that they would have more than one wife. Not just because of demographics but also because women would have to have a reason to enter into such a marriage. I should add that I don’t think that women who’d agree to that arrangement would do it only for money. While I’m sure that they’d want to be certain that their husband was able to provide for them and for any other wives, it may also be that they’d simply prefer to marry a man who demonstrated good character and was attractive, especially if they also got along with his other wife, than to marry a man who would only be married to him but didn’t have as many good qualities.

    22. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      If we truly believe that God, our Father has a plan for each of our lives then you needn’t feel selfish. If children are a blessing then you have been blessed and your daughters are part of His plan. We think about the pain in this world and we like to think that things are so bad ‘now’, but the world has been in this pain since the original sin. Any mother or father could easily have said the same thing at ANY TIME IN HISTORY. Our consolation, however, is that God is sovereign and in control. Our lives are not worthless, and each of us will have an affect on someone else in this world, for ill or for good! Let us work hard to ensure that we are agents of God and agents of good with wise choices and biblical wisdom.

    23. Alex Avatar
      Alex

      Should say “married to her,” not “married to him.”

    24. biblicalgenderroles Avatar
      biblicalgenderroles

      @SnapperTrx,

      “This is why I said that society would need to bring back shame for divorce and adultery. Without those barriers in place it would be a madhouse, with women who felt they were in a bad marriage situation leaving their husbands for ‘greener pastures’…

      I think both sexes would need to be ‘more competitive’ if polygyny were re-established in the U.S. Men would need to be more competitive to obtain a wife, and women would need to be more competitive to maintain her husbands favor amongst his wives. Failure on a mans part would mean no wife, no sex, no children. Failure on a woman’s part would mean no affection, no perks and no children.”

      This is a great synopsis of what would need to occur. We definitely would have to tighten up laws and our cultural shame toward easier divorce.

      Also you raise a great point about men competing for wives and women competing for their husband’s affection, perks and children. It is not to say that a man could deny any of his wives sexually as Exodus 21:10-11 makes very clear. But lets face it if a woman is frigid or a battle ax she probably is not going to get sex with her husband as often as the wives that are kinder and seeking to please their husband in bed.

      We definitely have “competition” today but I think it really is a corrupted form of competition. Men do compete for women today but not as they should compete for them. Men used to compete for women based on their character and ability to provide and the competition was to win their FATHER’s approval and only to a lesser extent the woman’s approval. Today men compete for women almost completely apart from the father and it is primarily based on men worshiping women in the form of modern romance. In fact often times women will marry a man who can barely support them or whose character is questionable because of how he “makes them feel about themselves”. This is HOGWASH and not what God intended.

      Then this corrupted form of competition that men are must do to get a wife continues into the marriage where the man, instead of the wife continues to compete for his wife’s affection especially in the bedroom. Women don’t see themselves as having to compete for their husband’s affection but rather he must compete for hers. We have this completely backwards.

      Polygamy really shines a light on this issue and forces women to realize that God did not design marriage as a woman-centric institution but rather as a man-centric institution. The Bible is clear when it states “Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.” I Corinthians 11:9 and polygamy when practiced Biblically is shining example of this Biblical principle.

      Now I know some Christians will say “Isn’t marriage supposed to be a God-centric” institution and my answer would be yes. But we must realize that any home where the God of the Bible is at it’s center the focus of that home be it with the wives or the children will be on serving God by serving and following the husband and father of that home. In turn the husband and father demonstrates God’s love, provision, protection, grace and mercy to his wife and children but the man realizes that his home is only a PART of his mission in serving God while for his wife the home, her husband and her children ARE her mission in serving God.

      The man is also called to do his best to make an impact on the world outside his home in whatever calling God has given him. Whether that is to be the best engineer, scientist, inventor, athlete, politician, solider, construction worker, plumber or businessman he can be.

    25. AnnaMS Avatar
      AnnaMS

      BGR,

      I see what you’re saying about the willing American men marrying more than one woman so that all American woman have a husband. But I’m not sure how practical this is. For various reasons (feminism, Ame’s daughters, etc.) a lot of American women are rejecting marriage as well. And you went on to say that men should only marry feminine women who are willing to be primarily a wife and mother. The number of such women is very underwhelming (and I do not live in a particularly liberal area). So if polygamy were to be made legal in America tomorrow, would there actually be that many more American women being married? I get that divorced women might have another shot at marriage (although I know some divorced women including my sister who would not want to be in that role), but from the manosphere blogs I’ve read, and from what you’ve said yourself on this blog, for whatever reason, divorced women are not at the top of the sexual food chain. So I’m not sure if making a bunch of divorced women available is a really great marketing idea for polygamy.

      It is often said that sex is more about sexual intimacy for men and emotional intimacy for women and i think that is primarily true. If men enjoy sexual intimacy with more than one women, I wonder how much that messes up the emotional intimacy that sex provides for a woman. While having no personal experience (as nobody on this blog really does), I cannot imagine the sweet things my husband says to me before and after sex meaning the same thing if I knew he would go on to say the same things to somebody else. And that’s just one example of emotional intimacy.

      There is of course also the issue of whether or not women want to take on the role of wife #1, 2, 14, etc. I can only speak for myself and the women I know (which does cover a broad range, but certainly not all women), but I cannot think of one who would agree to that arrangement in a manner that the man would also agree to. Sure some women would jump at the opportunity to be Brad Pitt’s second wife, but I’m guessing Brad Pitt would not agree to marry most of those women if any. And I’m guessing the reasons for that marriage would not be conducive for a lasting and strong marriage. Like you said, there are some people who are happy with that arrangement (although if I’m understanding you correctly, you’re only hearing from the husband), but from what I can tell, the idea would not become very popular.

    26. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      @AnnaMS

      I know your question was directed to BGR, but with regards to the last paragraph I would like to point out that the manosphere shows, very clearly, that when the right ‘alpha’ type male is around many women are more than willing to share him. Maybe not ‘share him’ so much as ‘be part of his harem’. From the lowly poor to the incredibly rich, if the man is right many a woman has turned a blind eye or outright accepted the fact that he is a player. I also have serious doubts that the majority of women would readily admit that they would WANT to be in a polygamous relationship, but might if given the opportunity with the right kind of man (ie: alpha, good looking, rich, powerful).

    27. jeff Avatar
      jeff

      Churchianity is all about female self esteem. I don’t think shaming will go over well, although women and girls are good at shaming boys and men and that’s ok. It is also ok for the pastor to shame husbands and fathers… on fathers day or any other day… in front of their wives and children.

    28. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      Yes, that’s why I said it likely wouldn’t happen in my lifetime. The most we can do is teach our daughters how to act properly under our authority, and instruct them on how they should act under their husbands authority, all while fending off counter-arguments from both the church and the culture. In the end, its in their own hands to do what is right, we just need to teach them what right is.

    29. jeff Avatar
      jeff

      I believe shaming is one of the best types of deterrence, and should be incorporated in churches and in society.

      Snapper,

      I agree, but with many wives usurping their husbands authority and not allowing them to teach what is necessary it is a mute point. Not to mention that older women are NOT teaching younger women, let alone their own daughters.

    30. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      This is true, but that doesn’t mean that we Christian husbands should just give up the ghost and let things go to pot. We are still accountable to God, and we need to make sure we are doing what we are called to do, even if it costs us our marriages. In the end I have to stand before the Creator and give an account, I would rather Him tell me I did well and lost it all on earth, but gained it all in heaven than vice versa.

    31. AnnaMS Avatar
      AnnaMS

      Snapper,
      I wonder how many of those women the manosphere mentions are not also seeing other men as well. The average women the guys there hook up with are not exactly your high quality wife-material woman (although your average manosphere guy like Roosh isn’t so swell either). And they will and have admitted as such. Also, the manosphere is chock full of articles about how to cheat on your SO and get away with it. Tips like deleting texts, never letting her have any access to your phone or computer, doing the laundry sheets regularly, and how to time different sexual encounters so a man appears ‘fresh’ each time, etc. I haven’t gotten the idea at all that they are just casually seeing other women without a care in the world and their main SO doesn’t have a problem. Perhaps she doesn’t have a clue, but that’s not the same thing. So I doubt their lives are anything even remotely like the polygamous life being described here.

      A high-quality wife, such as I hope to be and I’d like to think I am most of the time although God knows there is always room for improvement, will try to make her husband happy without needing to compete with a bunch of other women. I know personally, I’d bow out of such a scenario. Are there a ton of low-quality women that don’t seek to make their husband happy and make their marriage all about them instead? Of course. But as Dragonfly has said previously on a different post, she realized that a lot of the complaining that goes on in the manosphere is a result of a man (usually fairly low-quality himself) choosing a low-quality woman for a wife. I doubt that will ever end well. That’s also why, d/t the high number of low-quality men/women in America today, I doubt legalizing polygamy will result in an increased number of happy and successful marriages. No matter what recipe you try to use bad apples with, it will turn out rotten.

    32. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      AnnaMS,

      You are exactly right, these women ARE seeing other men, but that doesn’t change the fact that, for centuries, women have been more than happy to be in the harem of popular and powerful men. It is only recently that women have become so sexually liberated that they have become promiscuous en’ masse. Also, I never stated that any of the men of the manosphere were angels. Many of them are taking advantage of the current situation where loose women are the norm. Even so, these men are not really the examples I am referring to when I say ‘popular and powerful’. I am referring to the super rich and powerful like movie stars and politicians. These men I could see easily keeping multiple wives. Roosh, for all his sexual conquest, just doesn’t have the same influence as, say, George Clooney. He may have the moves to get a one night stand, but I’ll bet dollars to donuts Clooney could easily keep a harem of decent women without a complaint from any of them.

      Any person who has spent any time in the manosphere knows that women are, by nature, competitive when it comes to other women. You may be exception, and I’m sure there are many exceptions, but overall women compete with one another in all manner of realms. You make it sound like a bad thing, but it’s not. Competition drives invention, competition pushes us to be better than we were yesterday and competition can help keep us in check. That feeling a woman gets when another woman puts eyes on her husband without even trying to hide it, that’s jealousy AND competition. When the best friends buy a new house and we suddenly feel that twang of discontent, that’s also competition. And, as BGR said, in a polygynous marriage, when a woman knows that if she is snarky, rude and cold to her husband he can always snuggle up with wife #2 or #3, you bet it will only be a few times she does that before she learns her lesson – snarky, rude and cold only get you ignored, and NO woman in a relationship likes to be ignored. It becomes a competition, be it a kind one or not, I guess that depends on the ladies involved.

      Increased polygyny will not increase the number of happy and successful marriages, it takes a lot more than competition to do that, it takes men that are willing to lead when the don’t want to, and women willing to submit when they don’t want to. It takes everyone focusing on pleasing Christ over themselves and others. We could have happy and successful marriages WITHOUT polygamy or WITH polygamy if people just did that first. There will always be bad apples, no matter what marriage turns into, that doesn’t mean that the recipe is bad, it means we aren’t using the right ingredients.

    33. AnnaMS Avatar
      AnnaMS

      Snapper, yes back in the days, women were happy to be part of a harem like that of King David’s (or at least we assume, not sure there is any real proof to that extent). But times are just not that way anymore. Would George Clooney be able to get a bunch of women willing to be with him? Perhaps. Would they be the kind of women BGR describes as a Godly women on this blog? Hardly. If King David had chosen only one wife, I highly doubt she would have minded. I really think that, when choosing between monogamy and polygamy, women will choose monogamy 99% of the time. That wasn’t a choice they had back in the day but it is a choice now.

      I have no problem with competition and am actually by nature quite competitive. Me and my husband have both experienced jealousy at some point or another when we felt (accurately or otherwise) that another person was making a move on the other. But none of those were instances where we actually thought the other person would stray. But it still bothered us that someone else might be trying to wedge in between. I believe the popular phrase for this is ‘mate guarding’ and I am all about it (as long as it doesn’t become creepily possessive and weird which it doesn’t have to and in most instances does not). And while we have a good marriage, it is not perfect. My husband is sometimes rude to me and I am sometimes rude to him. That is what forgiveness and sanctification are for. He has gently pointed out areas where I have hurt him and I have done the same. We aren’t perfect and don’t claim to be. But we don’t need other people in the relationship to keep us on our toes. He doesn’t have the right to toss me aside when I am rude and I do not have the right to do the same to him. I want to be with a man who I truly want to be the best for. A man like my husband. Not with a man who will use other women to manipulate my behavior while treating me as cold as he chooses. Why I would give up what I have now for a marriage where I must constantly be my best out of fear of being reduced to a shriveling mess, begging for whatever scraps of affection might come my way, I have no idea. It does not sound appealing to me at all. I get why some men might like that and honestly, while I am quite happy with my husband, there is a part of me that wouldn’t mind watching 10 guys fall all over themselves to gain my favor.

      What a lot of men here don’t seem to understand is that my husband feels the exact same way. He does not want me to cooperate out of fear of losing him and he wants me to be confident in his love for me. He wants me to know that when I am rude to him, he will still be there for me and I want him to know that the reverse is also true. When did this stop being an integral part of a Godly marriage? I know that a lot of people on here have sucky marriages and I am definitely not trying to judge (God knows I married FAR better than I deserve), but at some point certain behaviors like this might just be part of the problem.

    34. Alex Avatar
      Alex

      @AnnaMS,

      I completely agree with what you’ve said here. I’m also not so sure that those women were happy to be part of harems. Many of them didn’t exactly get a say in the matter. I also do believe that most women would choose monogamy over polygamy, all else being equal. Now, they might love one man enough to enter into a polygamous relationship with him rather than trying to enter into a monogamous relationship with a man whom she loved less, but they’d likely prefer monogamy. In biblical times, too, it seems as though many women would have preferred monogamy, most of all because it would have meant that their children couldn’t have any competition.

      I also think that competition can be good, but I think that the best person for a wife to compete with is herself. After all, I can’t become another woman or acquire certain physical traits or talents that she might have. However, I can always strive to improve myself and what I have. I can always try to be better in the present than I’ve been in the past.

    35. Alex Avatar
      Alex

      I will throw another bone to polygyny though. It would keep men from being tempted to divorce an infertile wife. Not sure if that’s too common now, but it definitely used to be an issue.

    36. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      I have been in and out of my office the past couple of days and haven’t really had time to look over the last few comments.

      This will be my last comment on this post, as I feel the conversation is going nowhere. I don’t say this as a bad thing, and I will try to explain why I feel this is the case.

      I don’t think that, in this modern era of bountiful food, bountiful water and relative safety from the threat of imminent death that any of us, man or woman, can fully comprehend everything a polygynous marriage entails. Both AnnaMS and Alex have indicated that they don’t think the women in such marriages would have been happy, nor do they think that the women in such marriages would have been ‘Godly women’. I think that both of these assumptions are wrong:

      1. There is no reason to believe this women would not be happy. Nowadays marriage is considered and option for women. Technically women could go through life without ever getting married and live a happy life. Overall marriage is just something you may or may not do – it has lost it’s value in the modern era. In biblical times marriage was viewed as something much more valuable than it is today. For a woman to NOT be married was considered a bad thing, and for a woman to get married was cause for great celebration! To become one wife out of many wives to a rich and powerful man would have been considered a good thing! Food and water in the Middle East could be scarce and difficult to come by, but a rich and powerful man likely had land to grow food, which meant he would have had to have access to water as well. He might have hired men to keep properties and peoples safe from raiders or thieves. To have been selected as wife would have been considered an honor and, since it was a normal thing for a man to have multiple wives in those times, I doubt the women would have been unhappy with the exception of age differences. A very young girl being married off to a much older man would have generated some unhappiness to be sure, but barring that I can’t see how we would assume that this arrangement would have resulted in multiple, unhappy women. If the man were well off enough to have multiple wives and had a good demeanor (ie: not cruel) I would think that women would have no problem becoming one of his wives. The benefits would have been great.

      2. Because of the period of time we are talking about I don’t think these would could be considered ‘not godly women’. I mean, between the Israelites they would have been followers of Yaweh and held to a much stricter standard than women are today, so I don’t know what your getting at. As for other cultures I guess it would just depend on the way they did things, but if we are focusing on Godly polygamy then, yes, these would have been Godly, Israelite women.

      Overall I still feel that we just cannot grasp fully the concept of polygamy in our culture in our time. Things are just too easy for us. Women don’t have to rely on men the way they did in biblical times and the institution of marriage has been devalued to nearly nothing, even in the church. That is why I think this conversation is going nowhere. We can sit and talk about the pros and cons of a polygamous marriage all day long, but none of us can grasp the reality of it. I will never know what it would be like to have to tend to two or three wives, the financial burden, the emotional burden. My wife will never know what it would be like to have to be part of a harem of wives, nor could she fully comprehend the need for such a thing.

      Those are my last thoughts on the whole subject. Thanks, everyone, for all the input and interesting conversation.

    37. biblicalgenderroles Avatar
      biblicalgenderroles

      Snapper,

      Your Statement:

      “Overall I still feel that we just cannot grasp fully the concept of polygamy in our culture in our time. Things are just too easy for us. Women don’t have to rely on men the way they did in biblical times and the institution of marriage has been devalued to nearly nothing, even in the church. That is why I think this conversation is going nowhere. We can sit and talk about the pros and cons of a polygamous marriage all day long, but none of us can grasp the reality of it. I will never know what it would be like to have to tend to two or three wives, the financial burden, the emotional burden. My wife will never know what it would be like to have to be part of a harem of wives, nor could she fully comprehend the need for such a thing.

      Those are my last thoughts on the whole subject. Thanks, everyone, for all the input and interesting conversation.”

      Well I hope those are not truly your last thoughts on the subject because I have another post in the works entitled “What God’s acceptance of polygamous marriage teaches us about monogamous marriage”.

      I may change the title but that is my working title as I write that post. A lot of people email and ask me “Why all this talk about polygamous marriage when 99% of people today can’t do that for various reasons? Isn’t it just a theoretical exercise and a waste of time to talk about it even God allows it?”

      My answer to them and all my readers is NO – it is not a waste of time and my emphasis on Biblical polygamous marriage is very intentional. I believe that God’s allowance for and the existence of polygamous marriage in the Bible and even the rare existence of polygamous marriages today teaches us some VERY IMPORTANT principles about marriage that should be applied to monogamous Christian marriages.

      So stay tuned for that and I hope you will continue to comment on it. I actually believe it will be very beneficial for the 99% of us who are in monogamous marriages as opposed to polygamous marriages.

    38. SnapperTrx Avatar
      SnapperTrx

      Ha ha! I will certainly continue reading and responding to other posts, but I still feel that we modern peoples cannot understand the necessity of polygamous marriages simply because they don’t seem necessary in this age. That is certainly not to say that they should be rubbed out of existence, but some of the ladies in this conversation have shown, to me at least, that modern men and women cant fully comprehend the institution because to them it just doesn’t make sense. Why go through the hassle of having multiple wives? The goal of having a large family with many children is no longer a goal to modern man. Why go through the hassle of being one of many wives and having to share a husband? The goal of even having a husband is not a priority to modern woman, and neither is having children. Being married is no longer a woman’s primary goal. Having children is not longer a woman’s primary goal. A woman keeping her virginity, which you have indicated in your latest article used to be her MOST PRIZED POSESSION, is no longer a goal! All this has made the concept of a polygamous marriage a mere novelty, not a necessity in any sense of the word. We may still be able to glean knowledge on monogamous marriages by looking at polygamous marriages, but barring some huge catastrophe that plunges the world into apocalypse, I don’t see anyone in the West entertaining the idea of wide-spread, common polygamous marriages ever again.

    39. AnnaMS Avatar
      AnnaMS

      Snapper, I did want to make one clarification on the “Godly women” point you raised because I think I was very unclear. I am NOT saying that there were no Godly women who were in a polygamous marriage, nor do I think that being in a polygamous marriage automatically makes a woman unGodly. What I was trying to point out is that the women that you see going crazy over people like Brad Pitt or George Clooney (to the sense of actually marrying them…not just celebrity crushing) are not likely to be Godly women simply because what these men have to offer are not what Godly women should be looking for (I really know very little about George Clooney so this may not be true, but the point about Holywood men and women in general is more what i’m talking about). I would not be Brad Pitt’s only wife, much less his 2+ wife because even though there are some women who are attracted to fame and all that entails, I look for more important things in a man (not saying fame is inherently wrong of course).

      I think you have an excellent point about how we cannot fully understand what a polygamous marriage was like back in the day. But as you said, society and culture have changed a lot. Some for the better and some for the worse. So for the exact reasons you listed (and some more of course), I don’t think polygamy would be a good idea for our culture. What worked back in the day might not be feasible now.

    40. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      BGR – what i think i’m understanding –

      God gave men polygynous natures so that needs would be met, not simply their personal sexual needs, but the needs of society … women and children would be provided for … ‘go forth and multiply’ – there’d be lots of multiplying.

      while there are no longer those same needs in our society, men still have a polygynous natures. while some men’s polygynous natures are stronger than others, and some are content with one wife, others need more. and since polygyny is not realistically an option in our society, neither is sex with someone other than one’s spouse, appropriate porn in appropriate doses (doses that do not lead to improper behavior or addiction) is a healthy way to satisfy those needs.

      the basis for that kind of porn being acceptable and okay is found in the SOS … God obviously favors outside erotic influences to be brought into a marriage b/c the SOS is included in the bible. that the medium has changed (film) does not necessarily make it bad. however, not all written or film erotica is acceptable for Christians, so using wise discernment is necessary.

    41. Alex Avatar
      Alex

      @Snapper,

      I actually do believe that women can be happy in polygynous marriages, and I certainly don’t believe that those women are all ungodly. My point was more that I think that most women, all things being equal, would be happier in a monogamous marriage, but because things are rarely ever all equal, some women might be happier in a polygynous marriage to one man than in a monogamous one to another man. I was also making the point that becoming part of a harem was rarely voluntary in the past, so we can’t really look at that as an example of something that women were happy to choose. Of course, it does seem as though at least some of David’s wives chose him, but I wouldn’t call his arrangement a harem.

    42. biblicalgenderroles Avatar
      biblicalgenderroles

      @Ame,

      Your Question:

      “BGR – what i think i’m understanding –

      God gave men polygynous natures so that needs would be met, not simply their personal sexual needs, but the needs of society … women and children would be provided for … ‘go forth and multiply’ – there’d be lots of multiplying.

      while there are no longer those same needs in our society, men still have a polygynous natures. while some men’s polygynous natures are stronger than others, and some are content with one wife, others need more. and since polygyny is not realistically an option in our society, neither is sex with someone other than one’s spouse, appropriate porn in appropriate doses (doses that do not lead to improper behavior or addiction) is a healthy way to satisfy those needs.

      the basis for that kind of porn being acceptable and okay is found in the SOS … God obviously favors outside erotic influences to be brought into a marriage b/c the SOS is included in the bible. that the medium has changed (film) does not necessarily make it bad. however, not all written or film erotica is acceptable for Christians, so using wise discernment is necessary.”

      This is pretty close to my view but I would add these corrections:

      1. I do still believe polygamy is an option today for Christian men as I do not believe the Civil government or Church have any authority in marriage – it falls under the authority God has given to the family. So if a Christian father today consented to his daughter marrying into a polygamous relationship that would be valid in God’s eyes even though the second or third or whatever marriage it was would not be valid in US Government’s eyes. If the woman was divorced or widowed she could make this decision for herself. But obviously this is a very difficult option and 99.9 percent of men in America would not be able to practice this today.

      2. I also believe that even though polygamy may not be a option most men can exercise does not mean that the very existence of polygamy both in Biblical times and in the rare instances we have today does not teach us some valuable principles about marriage that can and should be applied to monogamous marriage. As I told Snapper I am working on a post to talk about that very subject principles we learn from polygamous marriage that every monogamous marriage should incorporate.

    43. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      BGR –
      “1. I do still believe polygamy is an option today for Christian men as I do not believe the Civil government or Church have any authority in marriage – it falls under the authority God has given to the family. So if a Christian father today consented to his daughter marrying into a polygamous relationship that would be valid in God’s eyes even though the second or third or whatever marriage it was would not be valid in US Government’s eyes. If the woman was divorced or widowed she could make this decision for herself. But obviously this is a very difficult option an 99.9 percent of men in America would not be able to practice this today.”

      which is why I used the word “realistically” … didn’t know quite how to word that. but I can agree with you here.
      ————————————————
      “I am working on a post to talk about that very subject principles we learn from polygamous marriage that every monogamous marriage should incorporate.”

      I am looking forward to reading it.

      ————————————————–

      so … I guess what i’m asking … did I get the progression and validation correct?

    44. biblicalgenderroles Avatar
      biblicalgenderroles

      Ame,

      Sorry I missed your key word “realistically”. Then we agree on that point.

      And yes you got the progression and validation correct.

    45. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      yay! doing a snoopy happy dance! I love when I figure things out in my brain 🙂

    46. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      BGR –

      in light of all this … i’d like to run something by you for your opinion.

      there is a local mom-and-pop bbq place we frequent that began with two couples about the ages of my husband and myself who are friends. we’ve enjoyed going in there and talking with them all. i think it was after my girls’ dad decided he didn’t want to see them anymore b/c he didn’t like their behavior that this event happened. i think it came up b/c my daughter, who often went in with me, was acting off. anyway, one of the men of the two couples was working and helped me carry out our family to-go order, and as it was an off time of day and he wasn’t busy, he and i got to talking in the parking lot. i am friendly and can be very talkative and engaging (though i’ve had to learn to adapt that with men over the years), and the convo got around to their dad and what it was doing to my girls and the topic of sex/porn addiction came up.

      i honestly cannot remember all of the conversation b/c it was probably 3-4 years ago, but there were a few parts i do remember.

      the first part i remember is him telling me i was ‘easy on the eyes’ … i think in relation to my ex’s addiction was not my fault.

      the second part i remember is him stating that a little porn in a marriage is fun and related it to his own marriage. he and his wife are both very attractive and always appear to get along fabulously together.

      as you can imagine, i kinda freaked out inside, though i’m sure he didn’t know it (thanks to years of conditioning by my parents and ex, i can be very good at not showing on the outside what’s going on on the inside).

      so, of course, the porn thing, in my mind, went crazy .. all of this is helping me put that into better perspective, and it probably fell into the ‘healthy’ category for a married couple.

      the ‘easy on the eyes’ thing was disconcerting … but, at least when i was younger and healthier, not uncommon.

      so i guess, what i’m trying to understand, and put into healthy perspective … is i’ve been attractive to men since at least high school. while this is nice in some ways, it has freaked me out in others to where i’m probably boarder-line paranoid in some public situations. my mind goes straight to “that man is going to abuse me and hurt me” … when, according to what you’ve written, this is probably not the case. i’m still a bit surprised that this good-looking alpha-male would say i’m still attractive at this point in my life where i’m not thin anymore by any means, and the last ten plus years have taken their toll on my body and health. i am one of those who has often dressed in ways to hide myself to try to keep men from ‘seeing’ me. i am much more confident dressing attractive when i’m with my husband in public – i feel safe and protected with him. when i’m alone, i am continuously conscious of what i look like, where i am, who’s around me, and how anyone might or might not be perceiving me. basically, i’m fearful. it scares me to be attractive to men, even though very few have abused me (there were 3 other instances of abuse by molestation in high school and college, so including my dad, that would be 4 for sexual abuse, 5 w/my ex for abuse). and while there are bad guys out there … i guess, perhaps, i don’t need to fear this so much? is any of this making any sense?

    47. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      “when i’m alone, i am continuously conscious of what i look like…’

      i should have stated … ‘when i’m along IN PUBLIC, i am …”

    48. biblicalgenderroles Avatar
      biblicalgenderroles

      @Ame,

      Your Statement:

      “i am continuously conscious of what i look like, where i am, who’s around me, and how anyone might or might not be perceiving me. basically, i’m fearful. it scares me to be attractive to men, even though very few have abused me (there were 3 other instances of abuse by molestation in high school and college, so including my dad, that would be 4 for sexual abuse, 5 w/my ex for abuse). and while there are bad guys out there … i guess, perhaps, i don’t need to fear this so much? is any of this making any sense?”

      I completely understand why you have the fears you do about being attractive to men. Any woman who had suffered sexual abuse and molestation the way you did would feel that way. My mother was sexually abused by her own grandfather and that totally messed her up for years into her marriage to my father before she was finally able to overcome her sexual repression and actually enjoy sex with my father. So I know first hand from stories my mother has shared with me and what she went through how you are feeling.

      But that is the key. You can’t live in the past. You have to realize not all men are like those men who abused you. Yes there are terrible men who molest and rape women. There are men who whistle at women and yell obscenities. And when I say I think women should not be afraid to dress attractively even in public I am not saying women should dress like prostitutes. But a woman should not feel afraid of publicly displaying her beauty either. Obviously there are times and places. You would not dress in a sexy evening dress to go to church but you certainly should for a night on the town with your husband and you should not fear that other men may notice you while you are out.

      This next part is where I get on husbands. I believe a woman should dress however her husband tells her too within reason(like not dressing like a prostitute to church). Some women’s husbands are extremely jealous and they make their wives be covered from head toe whenever they leave the house and dress like an old woman. Should a wife obey her husband in this – yes. He is her husband. But I get on husbands who do this to their wives – should not make you wife hide her beauty anymore than you would cover up a fine piece of art in your home whenever any guests came by so that only you could appreciate the beauty of it. Women unless they have had horrible things happen them like you have a natural built desire from God to display their beauty and feel attractive.

      So to answer you question – yes you should fear walking down a dark ally in a bad part of town as a woman no matter how you dressed. But in a normal public situation in a normal part of town you should not feel like you have to fear men everywhere you go. Most men are completely capable of enjoying the beauty of women around them without gawking and staring and making them feel uncomfortable. Are there creeps out there? Yes. But most men are not that way.

    49. Ame Avatar
      Ame

      BGR – thank you for taking the time to respond.

      so, you don’t think i’d have to worry about that guy at the bbq? objectively, i think he’s a ‘safe’ man. but i did freak out for a good while and made my husband pick up any food from there for a good year or two (which he was glad to do, not b/c he thought the man was unsafe, but b/c he knew i needed him to do that for me).

      this whole polygynous nature of men, their ability to appreciate beauty without having to ‘own’ it, their ability to fantasize without having to act upon it … is somehow comforting to me. i can intellectually tell myself that just b/c a man finds me attractive does not mean he’s going to do anything about it outside of his mind. i’ve never understood all this before, so i gratefully appreciate you explaining it all. i’m not sure if i’m explaining this well … but this is, in a sense, a big ‘break-through’ for me in understanding all this. huge. perhaps, in time, some of my knee-jerk fear will abate.

      i’m so sorry, so very sorry, for what you’re mother went through. the stories i’ve heard … break my heart. sounds like your dad was an incredible man.

      i dissociated from a lot of the sexual abuse from my dad. i don’t think it was just sexual abuse, i think he tried to strangle me. most of my memories are up in the corner of that room, but when i was going through therapy, i asked God to show me where He was during that time, and God gave me several visions over a period of time revealing different things to me. in one, which i asked for specifically, He let me see my dad’s face as he came toward me, but as he came toward me, his hands were reaching for my neck. then the vision was over (for which i am thankful). so one of the things that i cannot, can NOT do, and have NEVER been able to do, is anything touching my neck … which includes my husband touching or kissing my neck. i can.not.do.that. there are some other minor things, or at least minor for us, or minor for him. i am so grateful that, alone with my husband, minus a few things, i am okay and feel very, very safe. a lot of that has to do with God healing me, a lot has to do with being dissociated from a lot of it, and a lot has to do with my husband just being kind.

      though i hear what you’re saying, and i agree with you, idk if i’ll ever get over being hyper-aware of my presence in public. i don’t think i’ve passed that onto my girls – which is HUGE for me. logically i can believe you. emotionally, it already takes great control to do a lot of things in public by myself, including just going to the grocery store. i don’t let it hinder me, too much, but it is something i’m always dealing with. i am much more relaxed if anyone else is with me – anyone, including a child. my husband would be absolutely fine if i dressed less conservative in public, but he totally understands. and, i have no problem ‘dressing’ for my husband in private.

    50. Alex Avatar
      Alex

      @Ame,

      I don’t think that three’s anything wrong with feeling more comfortable dressing conservatively in public and reserving your best looks for your husband. I don’t think that you need to feel any guilt if men find you attractive, and I think that most who would find attractive dress less conservatively will still find you attractive dressed more conservatively. But I don’t see anything wrong if you prefer to dress in a way that would draw less attention. Some women prefer to not draw attention to themselves in public, especially if they’re married. It’s partly for internal comfort and partly out of loyalty to their husbands.

    Leave a comment

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.