Why Would A Man Go For A Second Wife?

In this age and time our generatios should not even be mentioning 2 wives/wifes whichever is the right spelling. That's polygamy (God forbid) one wife one problem 2 wifes 10 problems.

it's really pathetic because when they die ,they just leave mess all over the place.it's sheer greed and selfishness

@BIKINI (

yes is possible to love all of them because my grandfather had fourth wife too,he use to love all of them.

for once i agree with Seun 

A man will only consider taking a second wife when his wife gives him room too.It is a womans responsibility to secure her husband and family as a whole,when a woman stops giving a man what he wants he tends to look outside.Please Women try and understand your man,give him all the necessary attention be it Sex,food and all that other stuff.As the saying goes "A man is only as faithful as his Options".Give him no options!

LMAO    i can't believe u just said that 

but why do people put the blame on the woman? talking about its her responsility to take care of her man, family blah blah. last time i checked, give a man all the love and care in this whole world, he will still screw around on you if he wants to. 

don't worry Seun i will.

@Rlst84sale
kai that's what yall believe muslim girls don't believe that.

grandma already promise me fourth beauty wifes from different tribe.

na so we see am o. some lucky bastids.
if only it was flipped the other way round. as in the woman is allowed to marry as many husbands as she can. that would have been the life o! sample one today, and the other tomorrow. oooohhweeeee! men, una too dey enjoy for this life.

males value a mate that appears fertile and physically capable of bearing chldren

translation: Men go for fine young babes with big boobs and buttocks


females value mates that provide security, shelter and protection for herself and her young

translation: Women go for dudes that have pay, or otherwise show dominance over others- or in the right instance, physical prowess/charisma



from the above you can see that a woman that has given birth enough times for her body to advertise it openly (ie sisi don become mama) will not be desired by males, while even an 80-year old paraplegic with enough money to buy the world can still lay claim to anna nicole smith.


The default resolution to this is: A man will continue to recieve attention from young women even after his prime, as long as he is rich/influential/otherwise desirable, while a woman will likely not.

This means a man with a lack of self control will be under mounting pressure to violate the terms of his marriage (ie screw around). There are three solutions to this:

(a) legitimise the acquisition of a kept woman/mistress. Also called polygamy
(b) divorce the first wife and acquire a new one
(c) Understand that your sacrifice of fidelity (and it IS a sacrifice) is a much better option than imposing the sacrifice of shared paternity upon your children, born and unborn


Africans and muslims prefer

(a). Perhaps because the happiness of the children and the wife are secondary to that of the man in said cultures. In fact, since male children can later on 'make up' for this sacrifice by marrying many themselves, I'd say it is due to the deck being stacked against women in these cultures by default.

I personally consider women as equals, hence I frown upon this option. However, the issue of women's rights/standing is a cultural one, and as such is not open to debate- if you are a strong traditionalist african then you have every right to consider a woman as your property. However you are on your own if *she* does not.


The west prefers

(b). Unfortunately this option is in my opinion, worse than (a) because it is simply a repeat of that option but with the man able to divest himself of responsibility for the children- thus complicating their problem. Arguably it mitigates conflict by ensuring the women are not placed in direct contact with each other, and in principle it allows the woman to re-marry. If the wife is young and/or childless, this may actually be the desired option.  In cases where the husband retains custody of the children, they may suffer even more.


I prefer

(c). This is by far the  most difficult for the man, but the truth is this: will you perform an act that causes pain to others simply to deflect a lesser pain from yourself? It is a moral question that is made even easier to answer when you consider that those in question are the people you are supposed to love completely and unconditionally.

If you are not willing to jeopardise their happiness then you should remain with their mother and endure whatever trials and suffering she chooses to inflict upon you. Its too bad but thats what you signed up for when you got married. Dont want it, don't marry. Its better than raising children that will hate you.

it seems in life we all like to hide the truth from ourselves, we like to decieve ourselves. DECEPTION is what we all like to hear.  ALL MEN ARE POLIGAMUS IN MIND BE HIM A PASTOR OR MALLAM. before u crusify me read your holly books. all the  real men in your bible the  friend of God, the wise, and manny others are poligamus. poligamus is not really the problem because we have some beautiful poligamus families.

DESPITE WE HAVE MEN THAT HAVE MORE THAN ONE WIFE  LOOK AROUND You AND SEE GIRLS/women OF MARRIAGE AGE WITHOUT HUSBANDS ABI SEUN You GO IMPORT HUSBAND FOR THEM?. GO TO ANY CHURCH WHEN THE PASTOR CALL ON WOMEN THAT ARE LOOKING FOR HUSBAND TO COME OUT FOR PRAYERS, COUNT THEM B4 You CONDEM POLIGAMY

that is just 1 stupid idea dey just lookin 4 trouble n if a man try that wit me(hope not because my husband is going to b stasify) im going to make sure i get all of his property (d best bit) its for my kids if we ve babies

Seun and dakmanzero gave some of the most valid responses in my opinion.
Any woman that would allow herself to be a first wife in the midst of several wives is a fool and any  adult woman willing to marry an already married man is even a bigger fool.

If women had respect for themselves,polygamy would be history.
The operative word is woman (there are little girl brides still existent in our soceity and I do not fault these girls).

Some men would look for any "legitimate reason" to sleep with multiple women,calling it marriage makes it sound right,it ain't!!
If a man really loved his wife,there would be no need for a second bedmate.

Dakmanzero, as usual, you captured the problem pretty well and put the issue/responsibility exactly where it is supposed to be put. Although there are actually more options (such as screwing on the side), those are indeed the main ones.
I do feel though that you slightly mischaracterised option (b)
1. Divorce is just as much - if not more - initiated by the woman
2. When divorcing, the man usually does not have the option to divest himself from responsibility for the children:
* He is legally bound to financially provide for them and for his ex-wife if she is without a source of income
* He usually still has a - if sometimes more limited - stake in the education of the children (there's also the option of shared custody)
Moreover, in many cases, precisely because it is assumed by society that the man is the guilty party in marital conflicts, the man very regularly gets the raw end of the deal:
* no longer access to his children (when an ex-wife, who has custody, does not allow the ex-husband visiting right, it is very rarely prosecuted, en if prosecuted, the decision is rarely enforced)

@babyosisi

walking around barebreasted was not part of the culture in all parts of Africa, and in the parts where it was ok to leave your boobs exposed, breasts were not considered a sexual object. I'm sure that In the year 2199 if we socialise ourselves in that direction, ears could be the next sexual object (that need to be covered). I believe that Men's sexual orientation is as much a product of nurture as nature.

polygamy is different from keeping mistresses. It is the act of legitimizing mistresses so they and their children are protected by law. The children of your mistresses cannot lay the same claim to your property as can the children of your wives. Marriage is all a question of ensuring that your sexual relations are condoned by the state, and the woman you impregnate + her children are bound to you by law and tradition. Without marriage, few men would hang around to raise a child properly/pass on his belongings, and civilisation would not progress.



@nferyn

It is remarkable how I never find it easy to disagree with anything that you post. Understand that I am present in many of the threads that you participate in, but keep my mouth shut , because you usually end up saying exactly what I was thinking, but with much superior articulation.

In any case you are right, option (b) is more complex than my simplified explanation, but I believe I went into sufficient detail to put my point across- The western way of doing things is merely an alternative approach to working around the same unsolved problem.