They'd get a lot further with their poly pushing if it was ever not the same "woman with 3-4 boys" setup. But then, if they saw a guy with multiple girls they would call it an evil harem of enslaving women and hound them like they do the Mormons. Despite that setup being not only more natural, but much more historically supported.
Especially as it has an actual logical purpose. Nearly all those "womanly roles" are time consuming or difficult when tackled all at once in bustling families, which is why having wives to move around that and give breaks or more suited roles to would create far more effective households. Not a problem with our 0-1 baby culture, but if you want a big family it becomes quite troublesome.
Whereas the polyandry setup is always just about sex or shirking duties completely. No logic, actual hedonism and laziness.
You're correct that polygyny works better, but it has problems of its own. The main one is that it creates a lot of leftover men who have no stake in society and wouldn't piss on the beneficiaries of the system if they were on fire. That's really not good for building/maintaining a civilization. Monogamy is the norm because it works. Our society is collapsing largely because we're reverting to polygyny in practice if not in theory. You can't maintain a society if you punish the people who keep it running.
Right, in terms of greater society it fell away for a reason. However on individual levels it has far more going for it beyond just sex like polyandry does. You can actually sell its benefits to both genders without having to overcome biological instincts, as women's jealousy is far less of a dominant force.
Point being not that it is a goal to work towards, but that it is a better step out of monogamy if that was their goal. And that in avoiding it entirely, betrays their actual goals.
They'd get a lot further with their poly pushing if it was ever not the same "woman with 3-4 boys" setup. But then, if they saw a guy with multiple girls they would call it an evil harem of enslaving women and hound them like they do the Mormons. Despite that setup being not only more natural, but much more historically supported.
Especially as it has an actual logical purpose. Nearly all those "womanly roles" are time consuming or difficult when tackled all at once in bustling families, which is why having wives to move around that and give breaks or more suited roles to would create far more effective households. Not a problem with our 0-1 baby culture, but if you want a big family it becomes quite troublesome.
Whereas the polyandry setup is always just about sex or shirking duties completely. No logic, actual hedonism and laziness.
You're correct that polygyny works better, but it has problems of its own. The main one is that it creates a lot of leftover men who have no stake in society and wouldn't piss on the beneficiaries of the system if they were on fire. That's really not good for building/maintaining a civilization. Monogamy is the norm because it works. Our society is collapsing largely because we're reverting to polygyny in practice if not in theory. You can't maintain a society if you punish the people who keep it running.
Right, in terms of greater society it fell away for a reason. However on individual levels it has far more going for it beyond just sex like polyandry does. You can actually sell its benefits to both genders without having to overcome biological instincts, as women's jealousy is far less of a dominant force.
Point being not that it is a goal to work towards, but that it is a better step out of monogamy if that was their goal. And that in avoiding it entirely, betrays their actual goals.
There’s also the fact that women can’t get along. Why someone would want more than one wife if beyond me.