I often hear people say that the purpose of polygamy was to produce more children.

No, Catholic women have traditionally produced at least as many children as Mormons and they are certainly not polygamists.

A woman is fertile for only a few days in the middle of each month. Monogamous marriage means the husband is likely to be available for impregnation.

However, a polygamous husband might be off with another wife during the time when some of his wives might be most desirous of a sexual encounter and more likely to become pregnant.

So some of these fertile times would more likely be wasted in polygamous situations.

A few alpha males would father all of the children and many males would never have an opportunity to marry or father children.

True. As it turns out, polygamy is a failure, even used as the tool that Mormons write so much about. It not only produces the same amount or even fewer offspring, but also makes it so that some men get no wives at all. I suppose right at this point in the argument, someone could use that to justify polyandry.

That's a fact. It's something I learned here on RfM.

After all, there's only so many kids any woman (monogamous or polygamous) can have in her lifetime, no matter who provides the sperm.

Studies show that a woman in polygamy averages one LESS child than a woman in monogamy in the same community with the same values.

Polygamy doesn't build population, it builds empires for the alpha males.

Heresy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Studies show that a woman in polygamy averages one
> LESS child than a woman in monogamy in the same
> community with the same values.

I would be interested to see those studies. It is my understanding that the ethnograpic records shows the opposite to be true.

Thanks, there is some useful information in there.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2014 05:25PM by rt.

The BoM and D&C both teach that the ONLY reason for the practice is to raise up seed. So, is god stupid or does god have nothing to do with those books?

I read an article on FAIR that acknowledged that the ONLY reason for the practice is that god commanded it...it notes that there weren't more women than men, had nothing to do with taking care of widows, didn't produce more children, etc... Brigham Young had something like 55 kids by 29 or so wives of child-bearing age. Those 20-something wives might have had 150 children between them if they had their own husbands.

I always thought TBMS spun it by saying that RIGHTEOUS men (aka higher ups and prophets) get more children.
So, prophets, who are obviously going to be more righteous and cane raise kids better *cough*bs* get more wives and babies and that would make the other, "lesser," men strive to become more righteous.

What LDS and FLDS polygamy did produce was a lot of "extra" boys who were viewed as competition for the older men and were therefore targeted as problems to be dealt with either by expulsion, or in the case of the early Mormon settlements, church sanctioned castration such as the man who was castrated in San Pete so that the bishop could take his fiancé for himself.

Polygamy serves one purpose: A way for a man to have access to more than one woman at a time and turn women to property. I think it is about power more than anything else.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/02/2014 11:45AM by blueorchid.

I see what y'all are saying.
My polygamous ancestor, however, had 8 wives and 73 kids, or roughly 9 each, (on average) so I guess some guys were more dedicated to the gospel than others?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/02/2014 11:51AM by jackedmormon.

Your relative kept other men from having even one wife or kids.

I know, I hope I didnt sound proud of him, because I'm not.

they could have expected to give birth at least 12 times and have more surviving children.

That's what the historical evidence shows, at least.

Yeah, polygamy only works for population growth if there are a shortage of men for the women to marry, but we all know on RFM that that wasn't the case for Mormonism, despite the myth that never dies about marrying widows, etc.

Fewer children per woman still could mean more children overall for the man, though. If a woman married to one man has three kids and the same woman married to a man with three other wives would have two, the man with four wives still has more kids by far than the man with one wife (8 vs 3).

Right, more kids for the "right" kind of man. Polygamy was about creating little empires for ruling-class priesthood holders.

"The first command was to "multiply" and the Prophet taught us that dominion and power in the Great Future would be commensurate with the number of "wives, children and friends: that we inherit here, and that our mission to the earth was to organize a nuclei of Heaven, to take with us, to the increase of which there would be no end."

It was a wife hoarding MLM.

Correct. I doubt lust was the ONLY motivation for polygamy. People are extremely naive to think so.

plain and simple.......

"Polygamy was pioneer pornography"


that is all!

No doubt that was why Heavenly Father discontinued the practice after this was discovered to be true.

See, just one more benefit of Modern Day Revelation...

Polygamy is more a matter of lust and control than love and procreation

That's true, it just creates empires for the alpha priesthood holders, while other males never get a chance to marry or have children of their own. With one wife, a man is more likely to be around when she's at her most fertile, so she could have more children than a sister wife whose husband might not get to her during those fertile days. The Duggar family and other fundamentalist Christians who are against birth control are examples of how monogamy can produce large families. Before reliable birth control became available and legal, women with 10 or more children were more common among monogamous non-Mormon couples.

Yep. As I noted on another thread, one of my most noteworthy ancestors had 65 children from 43 wives. Was it common for the average monogamous woman to only have 1.5 children in those days? That's low even by modern standards.

exactly. And thinking with a male-centric mindset obscures this fact.

All you have to do is turn it around and look at it from the woman's POV:

Who do you think would have more children, a woman with a full-time husband, or a woman with a part time husband?

As mentioned before here, it also leads to inbreeding in future generations and an increase in genetic defects and disease. Not a healthy practice at all. Look at the FLDS.

"The Excuses Mormons Give for Polygamy": http://skepticmormon.blogspot.com/2011/02/excuses-mormons-give-for-polygamy.html

"Were There More Women Than Men?": http://www.mormonthink.com/joseph-smith-polygamy.htm#more

"No Surplus of Women in Early Utah": http://www.i4m.com/think/polygamy/utah_census.htm

"Mormon Polygamy Not About Widows or Orphans": http://www.i4m.com/think/polygamy/polygamy_widows.htm

"Did Joseph Smith Have Sex with His Wives?": http://www.i4m.com/think/history/joseph_smith_sex.htm

"Joseph Smith and Sexual Polyandry": http://runtu.wordpress.com/2012/08/08/joseph-smith-and-sexual-polyandry/

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-02/iu-ph1022111.php

Study showing that number of kids dropped by about one per woman for each wife added to the family.

my mom had 8 children that lived, one that died as an infant and three miscarraiges, all to my dad. Monogomous, very Catholic family.

Great grandpa had 8 wives and 54 children the lived to adulthood. I forget how many died young.