Getting Married · Chapter
The Male Revolt Against Polygyny explained
This chapter examines the dynamics of polygyny and polyandry, arguing that women tolerate polygyny when it allows access to high-quality men, while men oppose it due to the resulting scarcity of mates.
What happens
This chapter examines the dynamics of polygyny and polyandry, arguing that women tolerate polygyny when it allows access to high-quality men, while men oppose it due to the resulting scarcity of mates. It suggests that monogamy is preferred when both sexes have access to sufficiently high-quality partners, and that opposition to polygyny comes from mediocrities rather than the best individuals.
Themes in this chapter
Economic Dependence of Women
The chapter frames women's acceptance of polygyny as an economic calculation, substituting 'Income' for 'Man' to illustrate the dependent woman's perspective.
Population and Social Consequences
The chapter discusses the quality of offspring and the idea of eliminating 'inferiors' to make monogamy universally desirable, touching on eugenic themes.
Key passages
“Experience shows that women do not object to polygyny when it is customary: on the contrary, they are its most ardent supporters.”
Women actually support polygyny when it is a social norm.
This introduces the central paradox of the chapter.
“Substitute the word Income for the word Man, and you will have the question as it presents itself economically to the dependent woman.”
A woman's choice in marriage is like an economic decision about income.
Highlights the economic dependence of women.
“It is the comparatively weedy weakling, left mateless by polygyny, who objects.”
The men who are left without partners are the ones who oppose polygyny.
Explains the male revolt as self-interest.
“If we could get rid of our inferiors and screw up our average quality until mediocrity ceased to be a reproach, thus making every man reasonably eligible as a father and every woman reasonably desirable as a mother, polygyny and polyandry would immediately fall into sincere disrepute.”
If everyone were of high quality, monogamy would naturally be preferred over sharing partners.
Reveals the eugenic undertone of the argument.