I keep coming across the the following presented as fact, with no citations. Is it true? Is it misogyny to believe it? It is standard "red pill" belief. Would women generally rather share a highly desirable man with other women than have a less desirable man all to themselves? If true, then it would leave many men without mates. Those men, the theory goes, would then become violent in their desperation. So, enforced monogamy such as marriage and laws against polygamy are needed. I don't know what to think of this, and I don't fully accept it. I have met some mighty jealous women who I can't imagine sharing a man.
Any woman who has been the "other woman" has already made that deal, but I have no idea how many women are willing to accept that type of situation.
Oh, this is a difficult question to answer. I think the truth is many women want both. They want to try to have the best of both worlds. That often doesn't turn out being very fair to the men. A woman might only date the highly desirable man, but then be angry and resentful when he isn't monogamous with her. Or have a man who is committed to her, but then keep another man on the side secretly, who isn't committed to her.
The theory is that men desire variety of many sexual partners whereas women want only the top most desirable man, even to the point of sharing him. That would work out for the women and that one man would be extremely happy, but sad day for the rest of the men. If the theory is true then enforced marriage, laws against bigamy, etc, make sense.
We can simplify this. We already have criminal laws on the books against assault, violence against person or property etc. Lets just enforce those and leave the speculative social engineering legislation based on what you admit to be a dicy premise for another day.
That's so ironic. The Progressive Left is ALL ABOUT social engineering. They just don't want that social engineering when it comes to sexual matters and recreational drug use ("having a good time").
The conservative right is all about personal liberty and freedom of choice, free from big brother govt, until it comes to those same sexual matters and medical privacy rights.
It depends on the woman if they're happily married in their mid-20s then no they probably don't want to share if they're 35 and they're still doing dating apps they don't really want to share but they'll share because there's no other option that they like. What's tiktok there are thousands of videos of women complaining about being ghosting on them and not being the man they want them to be and so forth this is because they pick dogs because they would rather share the dogs with other women than be content with someone who's average. I don't buy this thing that men aren't a little more than angry orangutans that become violent when they don't get their way if anything it seems like men are opting out of this because it's lose lose for them. Well it is a thing have you ever heard of a player who do you think they're playing. Just because a woman has to share doesn't mean she's not jealous she's quite jealous quite angry about it but she refuses to find contentment with anyone lesser than her standard then that's what she is forced to accept. It's called the punching above your weight class you don't do that very long.
It's a known fact that wealthy men have commonly had wives and concubines throughout history. The dirty little secret about slavery is that it's mainly about sex rather than labor, though it can work for stoop labor and other mindless forms which are mainly done by machines nowadays Recent studies trace something like a quarter of all people now living in East Asia to one person in the 13th century, theorized to be Genghis Khan.
I take your point, but I disagree about orangutans. I went to Sumatra last month and saw them, and they are good people.
