Thursday, January 21, 2010

In Praise of the Plural Marriage!

Polygamy is the practice of men having multiple wives for whatever reasons a man comes up with. Polyandry is the practice of women having multiple husbands for whatever reasons a woman comes up with. The words polygamy and polyandry are just words. And words have definitions. The reasoning that folks add is usually where the problems start. But I will not take an emotional stance here. I will be scientific. Serenity Scientific Peace Earth for today.

Taoism (a science authored by Original people) teaches that men should not engage in multiple ejaculations because it weakens men physically. The same science teaches that women are not weakened by orgasm. Women can freely engage in all the sex acts she chooses to without dilution of her life energy (chi). This same, and other sciences will argue that women actually absorb the energy form the men we contact. What weakens women is menstruation. I was reading a plus lesson that states the multiple male ejaculations results in an ejaculate that progresses from thick and white to thin and clear as the man continues to release. I have witnessed that to be true. When you examine and draw up said information, it seems the way for men and women to best preserve their life forces is by men only having a small amount of sex and women only having a small amount of menstrual cycles.

But the fly in the ointment for the single man-woman monogamous couple based on this information is if a man should only have sex maybe just one time a week then the likelihood of a woman conceiving every time she is able to preserve her life force, is small. If the man has sex frequently with the woman, his chi will be decreased and the quality of the sperm will diminish which means the babies will be defective. Hmmmmm…..How can we remedy this? I know! If a woman takes on multiple husbands then her chances of regular conception will increase and everyone wins. Sounds logical to me.

If you look at this honestly, polyandry is the only way to stay healthy. Polygamy is actually a ‘kiss of death’. Men with multiple wives will have to engage in multiple sex acts to keep the wives conceiving. That is unhealthy for a man. If said men do not have sex with the wives they will menstruate and then their chi diminishes. That is unhealthy for a woman. Also it is dangerous for women to be the ones to work outside the home. I have heard men say repeated that a woman’s place is at home with the children catering to the men. I agree with that. But in the case of polygamy women would have to work outside the home to support the collective because one man would have a hard time solely supporting multiple families. And the women run the risk of being assaulted by other men. So the truth is that polygamy just does not work.

Let’s get down to the logistics… A women would have multiple, yet consistent sexual partners. I’d say five would be a nice round number. Five = Power. This way a man could have sex with the woman one time per week and the woman could rest two (Wisdom = woman) days a week. Five days of Power, Two days to recuperate. 5+2=7. Nice…..

Folks always say that a child needs a man’s consistent influence in the house for the babies to come out right. If I had sex every day my chances of conceiving when I was fertile would be greatly increased. Also with 5 different contributions, stands to reason if any of the men had some kind of defect it would be over powered by a stronger contribution. And the man’s ego would be preserved because the deficient man would never know and his DNA would not be passed on. Men claim that they can do and are better at anything a woman can do so the housework would be shared by the men and they would be the providers and they have their boys/homies/ whatever right there to do al that male bonding.

Another positive with polyandry that is a negative with polygamy is that the family units will not get so big and be out of control. Many women, who are involved in polygamist plural marriages, have to go on assistance. That would never happen with 5 grown men in a household. If 5 of those men hold down 1 full time job, and one man stays home to assist the woman, that’s 5 paychecks coming in the house. Ask you’re self if it’s more advantageous to Build a nation of a great number of untrained people or a nation with smaller number but more competent people. When has having a multitude of children that one cannot afford benefited anyone? Do not site Jon and Kate, the Duggars or the Octomom. They have reality shows.

This is not a case of women ruling over men. Emphatically NO! With 5 men to 1 woman in a household how could that 1 lone woman rule over all those big men who are physically and some men claim intellectually superior to women? This would really help in China were birth restrictions and selective breeding have the population of men:women at 49:1.

Now in order for this to work, all parties involved would have to be fiercely and wholeheartedly devoted and loyal to the arrangement. 11:14 y’all. This would prevent disease and infection from entering said Universe. That would spoil the babies. And you do realize I am concerned about the Nation Building.

Now men… Do not go all emotional on me and scream “Now Cipher.” I need you to be rational so that you can cee the logic. As long as you men stay cool with your brother husbands and don’t let emotions come into play by getting jealous of each other; this can be a beautiful thing. Or look at it like this… Within our Nation, there is but one Earth. The only place that we know in the Solar system where life exists. God created Earth to be his ‘home circumference.’ Many Gods find a home on Earth. But there is still but one Earth. And the Earth is the home to Islam.

So finally… after years months and days, I must admit… I finally advocate multiple marriages. But only in the form of polyandry. It’s the only way that makes sense for all parties involved.



Datan0de said...

I have no problem whatsoever with polyandry (as my wife's boyfriend will attest), but to frame this as "scientific" in any way betrays a deep misunderstanding of what science is and how it works. This is about as un-scientific an essay as I've ever read.

Make whatever claims you like, but don't cast a shadow of insincerity upon it by trying to claim that it's something which is clearly isn't.

Serenity Love Sincere Peace Earth said...

And men claim to be un affected by emotions.... Daton0de, its rude to say that I'm wrong and not give your reasoning.

Datan0de said...

I don't claim to be unaffected by emotions, and I didn't say that you're wrong. I said that you're not being scientific.

Thanks for the gender stereotyping, though. For what it's worth, my wife (who is a working scientist) and girlfriend both agree with my statement.

Anonymous said...

Wow, nothing remotely scientific about that article and gender stereotyping on top of that.

Not only are your claims completely unscientific, but several have been actively contradicted by actual science (like the fact that more male orgasms produces a HIGHER chance of impregnation).

As with Datan0de, I have no problem with anyone desiring or promoting polyandry, or even using Toaism as the reason, but I do have a problem with throwing in the word "scientific" to gain some credibility when there is not even the slightest resemblance to the scientific method in this post.

Anyone with even a passing familiarity with science would know that, not only is it not rude to criticize someone's claims, but it is the expected response to any claim using the label "scientific". The burden of proof also rests on the claimant.

It is, however, an ad homenim attack and a non sequitor, to accuse Datan0de of being emotional and rude in his response. Neither has any bearing on the validity of his point, which is that there is no science in this essay anywhere.

Talisien said...

One of the two word mistakes I feel a strong need to correct. Polygamy is having multiple spouses. Polgyny is having multiple wives. Both polygyny and polyandry are forms of polygamy.

usupreme said...

Check out what I wrote on the topic.

Bill Hartwell said...

This was quite delightful. When I read it, I was sure I had run into an undiscovered piece of Jonathan Swift's prose.

Precise said...

you funny............ ;-)

Sandy said...

I for one agree with the article...With that being said I need to find 4 or 5 husbands.