- Libyan prime minister ousted by parliament
- Men’s Wearhouse to buy Jos A Bank for $1.8B
- Boston bomb squad destroys unattended pressure cooker: report
- Colorado rakes in $2 million from January’s marijuana sales
- House Democrats trying to force unemployment insurance vote
- Sen. Claire McCaskill to tackle sex assault at college next
- Judge’s order preserves NSA surveillance records
- Refurbished Pollock masterpiece goes on display
- Mad dash for Nome: Dallas Seavey wins his second Iditarod dog race
- ‘Burger King baby’ now seeks birth mom on Facebook
WETZSTEIN: Making a case for monogamy
A Canadian court is assembling an unprecedented set of testimonies and legal briefs about the pros and cons of polygamy. The goal is to answer the question of whether Canada’s anti-polygamy law is constitutional.
One legal paper offers a fascinating analysis of monogamy and its powerful, positive effect on cultures, in contrast to polygamy.
Historically, polygamous cultures have vastly outnumbered monogamous ones, and yet monogamy is associated with “the most successful and competitive” of civilizations, both ancient and modern, wrote professor Joseph Henrich, who holds the Canada Research Chair in culture, cognition and coevolution at the University of British Columbia.
It may be that as “ancient societies began to impose monogamy,” they “consequently began to prosper and spread, because of the group-beneficial effects of monogamy,” he explained.
Moreover, he added, “monogamous marriage” appears to be “one of the foundations of Western civilization, and may explain why democratic ideals and notions of human rights first emerged as a Western phenomenon.”
In making his case to B.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Bauman, Mr. Henrich compared “highly polygynous” countries with “monogamous” North America/Western Europe countries. (Polygyny, where one man is permitted to marry many women, is often interchangeable with polygamy.)
Mr. Henrich found that polygamy was associated with lower incomes and higher death rates for children. And these differences were stark:
• The 1985 per capita gross domestic product for polygynous countries was $975. In contrast, in monogamous countries, the per capita GDP was $11,950.
• In 1980, polygynous countries had 12.2 percent infant mortality rates and 19.4 percent child mortality rates. Monogamous countries had rates of 1.2 percent and 1.4 percent, respectively.
Why the differences?
A major argument against polygamy is that husbands often cannot adequately support their many wives and children (especially if the men spend time pursuing more wives). Moreover, as fathers, they are often simply overwhelmed and incapable of caring for dozens of children.
One 2008 study of African polygynous households found that fathers “may not even know all of their children’s names,” Mr. Henrich wrote.
Monogamous husbands, on the other hand, have only one family in which to invest their time, attention and wealth, and these investments typically pay off with healthier children and more assets.
Another benefit of monogamy is that it is linked to the emergence of political democracy and equitable treatment of the sexes. This is because monogamy:
• Applies to both “king and peasant” — each can have only one wife (at a time). This creates a basic equality among men.
• Ultimately ends men’s competition with each other for wives. This, in turn, “decreases the tendency for males to tightly control their wives and daughters” and may even lead to “more egalitarianism in the household.”
• Encourages men, who know they have a good chance to marry in their lifetimes, to “redirect” their energies in socially productive ways, resulting in lower crime rates and other positive social outcomes.
Monogamy seems to end up “dissipating the pool of unmarried males that were previously harnessed by rulers in wars of aggression,” Mr. Henrich wrote.
Of course, even in monogamous cultures, people — especially high-status males — engage in extramarital affairs and “serial monogamy.”
But when practiced faithfully, monogamy seems to benefit humanity far more than any kind of “big love.”
• Cheryl Wetzstein can be reached at email@example.com.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Cheryl Wetzstein covers family and social issues as a national reporter for The Washington Times. She has been a reporter for three decades, working in New York City and Washington, D.C. Since joining The Washington Times in 1985, she has been a features writer, environmental and consumer affairs reporter, and assistant business editor.
Beginning in 1994, Mrs. Wetzstein worked exclusively ...
- Stricter standards force abortion clinics to close; pro-lifers cheer shrinking numbers
- Public accommodations provision in Md. transgender rights bill draws outcry
- German home-school family can stay in U.S. indefinitely
- U.S. Supreme Court declines German home-school case
- Medical facility 'buffer-zone' law in court
Latest Blog Entries
- Gay therapy ban author seeks Calif. House seat
- Transgender 'bathroom law' gets 5,000 more signatures
- Pro-life, stem-cell bill signed into law by Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback
- N. Dakota lawmakers approve tough abortion bill
- Pope Benedict XVI's successor should allow priests to get a new title: Husband, poll finds
TWT Video Picks
By David Keene
Conference showed that the values Reagan cherished still endure
- FCC targets black conservative in TV station fight
- Hillary Clinton campaign received funds from Jeffrey Thompson
- Kim Jong-un calls for execution of 33 Christians
- House Democrats trying to force unemployment insurance vote
- Intelligence chairwoman accuses CIA of intimidation, snooping on Congress
- PRUDEN: Missing airliner, stolen passports fuel wild speculation
- Sharyl Attkisson resigns from CBS after months of talks
- Senate Democrats, Republicans spar over restoring unemployment benefits
- Made in China: Materials on U.S. F-16 jets, B-1 bombers
- CARNES: Kissinger's flawed and offensive analysis of Ukraine
Pope Francis meets his 'mini-me'
Celebrity deaths in 2014
Winter storm hits states — again