Men are scarce hence men want want 2 help out in reducing chronic spinsters
Its even there in the bible that a time will come when 7 women will meet one man just 2 answer that they are married and will take care of them selves

Why are women not able to go for "second husbands"? Because a man won't bring himself so low. We rock!

Men are scarce hence men want want 2 help out in reducing chronic spinsters

That argument is rooted in fantasy, because there are more men than women in every country (including Nigeria).

worldismy:

this is africa and we must behave like one, polygamy is allowed if u can afford it anyway it is not a new thing

Is this supposed to pass for an argument nowadays. I guess you consider women to be property of their fathers and marriage to be a simple property transaction.

dakmanzero:

@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.

Superior articulation my foot (sorry babyosisi, I just had to use it ). It's only because English isn't my mother tongue that I have to retort to the most elaborate grammatical constructs possible. I just mask my lack of fluency in big grammar

@ Darkmanzero, I find your post refreshing. It is nice to see a balanced point of view devoid of prejudice, instead of the usual one sided gibberish from polygamy opponents.

men that go for second wives are men who are interested in many problems because i dont see any reason why a man shld marry another wife afteral, he is the one who fall in love with the first wife how on earth shld him fall out of love again.

Suffice it that it is not every one that finds himself in it that wishes it. One Hausa adage say only a man that is dead can not be recreated (literally)

My prayer is: May we not find ourselves in any situation that will necessitate it. [s]_{Amin e po}[/s]

a man may go for a second wife becos he gets bored, the only problem i have is why can't women marry more men? i get bored too, i don't think there is one specific person for each of us, i find myself getting attracted to many ppl so why not?

The attitude of some women, is highly terrible, If a woman plays her part well, her husband wount go out for the second wife,

I Agree with the fact that some men could be very irresponsible,  But as a woman, there are lots of things a woman could do to Correct her husbands lapses,

dakmanzero:

@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.

My point was that culture is dynamic,humans always seek to replace the  accustomed norms with better value
even in those cultures were breasts were exposed,they have since changed.
That's why we are humans.
Now that breasts are sexual objects,we choose to cover them up (some of us anyway) Our men now wear pants and not leaves.

Legitimising mistresses should not even come into play when the question of why the man needed the mistresses in the first place is still unanswered.
Marriage in my opinion is about a grown man and woman pledging to love and care for one another and raise children that proceed from the union not a one man planting his seeds in any and everywoman calling them his wives.


If these men are sincere,like Seun said,they ought to tell the first wife from the giddy up that Ngozika and Memuna are in line further down the road.
Many women today that stay in these ill-fated "unions" are devoid of choices,most have no means of their own livelihoods or scared of societal  booings.

Isn't it amazing,it's always the men that seem to promote and understand polygamy and call it our culture.
The women and children are the worse for it and their opinions ought to be sought.
There is something in it for that polygamous male,there is nothing,absolutely nothing in it for a woman.

software:

The attitude of some women, is highly terrible, If a woman plays her part well, her husband wount go out for the second wife, ,

You can't possibly be serious
blame it on the woman.

He cheats,even impregnates someone, it's the wife's fault,
she bears only females,it's her fault,she's incapable of having male children
he is impotent  or sterile and she can't conceive,it's again her fault.
He fails woefully at every venture,it's her fault,that bad luck woman he married.
He loves her dearly,she tied him with juju.
The children turn out bad,she was a terrible mother.
Then when the kids are good,they are just like their father
He drinks,she drove him to it,that useless woman.

The man dies,it's the wife that killed him.
abeg!
why can't men take responsibility?

I find it absolutely amusing and at the same time disgusting when I hear grown up adults blame their actions on others. How can a grown up married man sit around expecting his wife to keep him in check? Is that a husband or some boy that needs to be "mothered" in order to do what's right for his family? Do you think the woman married you because she wanted someone to be mothering If that's the case she might as well do away with you completely and face the kids -- they'll be more than enough for her to practice her mothering skills on, and much less of a hassle . Of what use is a way-ward husband that needs to be monitored in order to do what's right? Is that a husband Further more, is that the kind of person that'll be a father to her kids? God forbid!! I personally won't hang around a man like that for 2 seconds!!!

I'm shocked at women who put up with that crap -- it's just a sign of very low self esteem. Culture and society have absolutely nothing to do with it. Afterall no one can force any woman to stay with any man whom she chooses not to stay with. I honestly don't understand any woman who'll want a man that irresponsible, or who'll want to continue staying with a man that chooses to go out and bring destruction and misery upon his family and then have the effontery to blame his actions on her, saying that she's responsible for his behavior. Is that the type of husband that a wife is supposed to be submitting to? Someone who expects her to tell him what's right from wrong or who holds her responsible for his actions What the heck is that? That's like asking her to submit to her toddler!! That's absolute nonsense. By the way, I don't believe that any man should stand by and tolerate an attitude like that from his woman either. Life is filled with choices, you don't have to go down a destructive path with anyone.

A real man, and husband, is one who takes the initiative to do what's right and sets the example for his wife and children. He's a leader and care-taker and caters to the needs of his family in every aspect. His family's needs and well being come before his own. That's the kind of MAN a woman wants, and any woman settling for less is just short-changing herself.

PS: by the way, this applies to the men too, with regard to their women. Marriage is for matured people with plenty of sense upstairs, not people who run around doing mindless things and blaming their actions on others.

my dad who is a chronic monogamist is of the opinion that one woman is enough to kill a man. (he says it loud enough so my mum can hear just to look for her trouble!) why would any man want two?

babyosisi:

My point was that culture is dynamic,humans always seek to replace the  accustomed norms with better value
even in those cultures were breasts were exposed,they have since changed.
That's why we are humans.
Now that breasts are sexual objects,we choose to cover them up (some of us anyway) Our men now wear pants and not leaves.

Legitimising mistresses should not even come into play when the question of why the man needed the mistresses in the first place is still unanswered.
Marriage in my opinion is about a grown man and woman pledging to love and care for one another and raise children that proceed from the union not a one man planting his seeds in any and everywoman calling them his wives.


If these men are sincere,like Seun said,they ought to tell the first wife from the giddy up that Ngozika and Memuna are in line further down the road.
Many women today that stay in these ill-fated "unions" are devoid of choices,most have no means of their own livelihoods or scared of societal  booings.

Isn't it amazing,it's always the men that seem to promote and understand polygamy and call it our culture.
The women and children are the worse for it and their opinions ought to be sought.
There is something in it for that polygamous male,there is nothing,absolutely nothing in it for a woman.

@babyosisi

Note: I'd like to humbly request that you please read the entire post and please dont jump to any conclusions halfway. Thanks.

Taking the points one by one

1) Not neccesarily better value, just different. I assume your analogy is based on the idea that customs such as polygamy should be classed alongside the customs of primitive/savage cultures. While I am not in support of polygamy, I don't neccesarily think that you can sincerely do this without explicitly proving that we have a superior alternative in the modern world. While I have a personal preference for option (c), it would be uncivilised for me to discredit options (a) and (b) simply due to my personal preference.

As a woman, you obviously are in strong disagreement with the primary supporting assumption of (a) , which is that women are considered to be property. I am also in disagreement, but have to admit, not being the person considered as 'property' puts me in a position to be a little more objective.

Nonetheless you have to understand that to any culture that does not recognise the equality of women, polygamy as a solution seems to be so obvious it is almost stupid not to consider it. Rather that attempting to discredit polygamy itself, you should attack the root assumption and discredit the idea that women are somehow inferior.



2) Legitimising mistresses is the root of both options (a) and (b). Let me repeat that my persona stance is neither of them. However, understand that marriage is the root of civilisation, and for the reasons I outlined in my first post, the problem of impregnating women that are NOT your wife is a real one, and needs to be addressed by any civilisation if it is to progress.

Civilisations thrive or die purely on their own merit, they are not graded by any external yardstick. It just so happens that the civilisations that have survived today chose options a, b, and c as solutions to this problem. Whether we like it or not, polygamy and the western method have proven themselves valid solutions to the problem, however distasteful they may be

It is important however to note that the issue of suffering being inflicted on members of the family, while not addressed, did not prove in itself to be sufficient to destroy said cultures. This is what I mean by 'valid', I am not somehow vindicating the choices. It is akin to saying that the sharia law of cutting off the hands of thieves has been succesful in curbing the rate of petty theft in affected areas, while simultaneously agreeing that such a practice is inhuman and barbaric- by MY STANDARDS. To some people, killing a chicken for food is inhuman and barbaric. (Not to me. ) To others, crippling a thief is common sense. Its all just a matter of perspective.




3) If the men are sincere like seun said, they would choose option (c), and so they do not factor into this discussion at all. Obviously to choose option (a) you must consider a woman your property (am I sincere to my laptop? ) and to consider option (b) you must have already prioritised your happiness above not just hers but your childrens'.


4) Yes, it will be men that promote option (a). Thats because not many women would openly claim to be a man's property, and those that ca accept that, will not go and shout it from the nearest mountain.

Thanks for reading through. Please please do not post a response that makes it seem as if u didn't

It is against the will of God .Marriage is for ever.so no party is the cause for such to happen.

babyosisi:

You can't possibly be serious
blame it on the woman.

He cheats,even impregnates someone, it's the wife's fault,
she bears only females,it's her fault,she's incapable of having male children
he is impotent  or sterile and she can't conceive,it's again her fault.
He fails woefully at every venture,it's her fault,that bad luck woman he married.
He loves her dearly,she tied him with juju.
The children turn out bad,she was a terrible mother.
Then when the kids are good,they are just like their father
He drinks,she drove him to it,that useless woman.

The man dies,it's the wife that killed him.
abeg!
why can't men take responsibility?

if u read my post well, i said, some men are just naturally irresponsible, But despite that a woman can go an extra lenght to Correct his lapses,

E.g, a Woman who prays and fast for her husband, God is definately gonna answer,

I only hope u understand wat i am saying.


Am also very sure, that a man wount get another wife, if the marriage was based on God's Will.

very funny. a woman who fasts and prays for her husband. can't it be both ways again? why does the woman always have to be the one to suffer because of the hsband's actions? whatever happend to a marriage being 50-50?

soulpatrol:

very funny. a woman who fasts and prays for her husband. can't it be both ways again? why does the woman always have to be the one to suffer because of the hsband's actions? whatever happend to a marriage being 50-50?

My dear, i dont think marriage is all about 50-50,
I will want to assume, that when the man is Acting irresponsible, the woman needs to stand in the gap for him, Pray and interceed for him, if a woman or a man thinks marriage is about 50-50 then they dont know what they are into,

Thats why they say marriage is a Big Commitment, Big institution

so, you mean to say that a woman has to be the one to pick up after the man when he starts acting irresponsible? ok, why should he even be given the space to act that way? and why can't he have enough sense to know right from wrong? this is man and wife, not man and his mother. and i'm sick of tired of some men thinking that the woman should always be the one doing all the praying and whatnot. what happens when its the other way round? no be to take a second wife? quit giving excuses for the actions of men, its time to step up and act repsonsible. in correction about marriage being 50-50, scratch that, it should be in fact 100-100, that way you give it your all, and it certainly has to come from both sides, not one doing more than the other. and i'll break it down for you.

lets say you are a team of 2 people working on a project, and you are both expected to contribute equally to be fair, how would you feel if you were putting all your time and effort into it, and your partner put only 40%? is that fair? are you going to be happy picking up your partner's slack even if you could? i don't think so. at one point, you're bound to get into an altercation. so when you both put in equally, then everyone will be happy, and you know you're getting the best out of it.

i hope you understand my little explanation. marriage is team work, not individual. simple as a pimple

My sister, i agree with u, It should be a joint work,

But the truth is, alot of things happen, I am really talking from the real spiritual aspect of it now, we all have weak points, Beleove me or not, satan is out to scatter Successfull marriages e.t.c so If the man is Finally tracked down and his wife decides to see it as a 50-50 or 100-100 thing then she would be the one to bear the pain.

I beleive, Something wort doing is wort doing well. If my wife tells me, Weding is 50-50 i will conclude that she is the proud type of person,

The kind of love portrayed by Jesus, should be exhibited in marriages. If not 100% perfect, it should be around 70%
its not the kind of fair weathers love all over the place,

Like a lady once told me, she said when there is money, love grows

once one obo is sour - a man will necessarily go for a fresher one.

i must tell u dis dat 2 a large extent it is the woman dat causes it if it is not a natural cause such as non child bearing or only one sex.if u know eatin one soup gets monotonous and boring then d soup can b served in a variety of ways and the presentation often matas.imagine a lady used to dres sweetly but morally b4 but on marriage relegates dat 2 the background what do u expect? i believe once in a while when with ur husband u do naughty things dat keep reminding him of u .u need 2 b smart & romantic with ur husband & i & tell if u dont giv birth he may neva use ur not givin birth against u

software:

My dear, i don't think marriage is all about 50-50,
I will want to assume, that when the man is Acting irresponsible, the woman needs to stand in the gap for him, Pray and interceed for him, if a woman or a man thinks marriage is about 50-50 then they don't know what they are into,

Thats why they say marriage is a Big Commitment, Big institution

Oh yes and I agree. When the woman is acting irresponsible, the man needs to stand in the gap for her, pray and intercede for her too. When both partners are that way, there'll be no question of either one looking outside the marriage relationship to satisfy unmet needs. The issue of taking a second wife or husband would not arise.

Truth be told, our society and culture has changed a lot. Back then when men would marry many wives and treat them like property, etc those were the days when it was believed that only the man could work outside of the home. And of course when someone feels like they're the source of your livelihood (for instance when they're the one providing for you financially), there's always the very real possibility of abuse, especially as most people associate money with power. In a situation like that, it'll take a man of really strong character not to resort to abuse (like cheating on her, etc). These days however, most women are very well educated, work outside of the home and can earn their own livelihood.

If a man is going to be successfully married to a woman that can stand solidly on her own two feet financially and hold her own in most any aspect of life, he's going have to redefine his usefulness to that marriage relationship beyond one of just being a financial provider. She doesn't need your money to survive, so what else do you have to offer? She'll only stay with you if you can meet those of her needs that she NEEDS you to meet (otherwise what's the point?). Such needs as companionship, security (and contrary to what most people are apt to conclude, this to a woman DOES NOT MEAN MONEY), commitment, being a reliable and credible husband and father, spiritual leadership, etc. A man who'll use any excuse to run off and misbehave just because he puts money on the table won't last long with a woman like that. Of course, if you look very closely at marriages in which there is abuse on the part of one party, the "abusee" is most often overly dependent on the abuser in one form or the other (financially or otherwise).

If it were possible for some some women to have

second husbands they will have done so but alas

it is not possible for them. Many women have boyfriends

or man friends as the case may be outside their matrimonial homes.

So it is not just the men who do these things. Some women are

Assholes too

dakmanzero:



@babyosisi

Note: I'd like to humbly request that you please read the entire post and please don't jump to any conclusions halfway. Thanks.

Taking the points one by one

1) Not neccesarily better value, just different. I assume your analogy is based on the idea that customs such as polygamy should be classed alongside the customs of primitive/savage cultures. While I am not in support of polygamy, I don't neccesarily think that you can sincerely do this without explicitly proving that we have a superior alternative in the modern world. While I have a personal preference for option (c), it would be uncivilised for me to discredit options (a) and (b) simply due to my personal preference.

As a woman, you obviously are in strong disagreement with the primary supporting assumption of (a) , which is that women are considered to be property. I am also in disagreement, but have to admit, not being the person considered as 'property' puts me in a position to be a little more objective.

Nonetheless you have to understand that to any culture that does not recognise the equality of women, polygamy as a solution seems to be so obvious it is almost stupid not to consider it. Rather that attempting to discredit polygamy itself, you should attack the root assumption and discredit the idea that women are somehow inferior.



2) Legitimising mistresses is the root of both options (a) and (b). Let me repeat that my persona stance is neither of them. However, understand that marriage is the root of civilisation, and for the reasons I outlined in my first post, the problem of impregnating women that are NOT your wife is a real one, and needs to be addressed by any civilisation if it is to progress.

Civilisations thrive or die purely on their own merit, they are not graded by any external yardstick. It just so happens that the civilisations that have survived today chose options a, b, and c as solutions to this problem. Whether we like it or not, polygamy and the western method have proven themselves valid solutions to the problem, however distasteful they may be

It is important however to note that the issue of suffering being inflicted on members of the family, while not addressed, did not prove in itself to be sufficient to destroy said cultures. This is what I mean by 'valid', I am not somehow vindicating the choices. It is akin to saying that the sharia law of cutting off the hands of thieves has been succesful in curbing the rate of petty theft in affected areas, while simultaneously agreeing that such a practice is inhuman and barbaric- by MY STANDARDS. To some people, killing a chicken for food is inhuman and barbaric. (Not to me. ) To others, crippling a thief is common sense. Its all just a matter of perspective.




3) If the men are sincere like seun said, they would choose option (c), and so they do not factor into this discussion at all. Obviously to choose option (a) you must consider a woman your property (am I sincere to my laptop? ) and to consider option (b) you must have already prioritised your happiness above not just hers but your childrens'.


4) Yes, it will be men that promote option (a). Thats because not many women would openly claim to be a man's property, and those that ca accept that, will not go and shout it from the nearest mountain.

Thanks for reading through. Please please do not post a response that makes it seem as if u didn't

Personally,I'm not a great fan of rhetorics and verbosity, gives me headache but sure makes great reading though.

@windywendy

I feel u.

Simply hire a cook, an agayin woman or a chef
and if u cant afford it?
you are not ready yet for marriage!
Life is give n take

Most men take advantage of the fact that its their religon that accepts that.

Any man that marries more than one wife and said it was for religious reasons is a bloody liar!
It is for his selfish reasons and not because he is fulfilling a religious obligation.
No religion that I know of commands men to marry more than one wife,even Islam that allows maximum of 4 did not anywhere make it compulsory.

Many 'so called Christians' marry more than one,what is then their reason?
Bottomline  men marry multiple wives for lack of self control.

If he needs people to till his farm,let him hire hands
If his wife cannot conceive,he ought to try other means including invitro or adoption,he may even be the sterile partner.
There a lot of men with low sperm count running around blaming their  poor wives for lack of an offspring,the second wives come in and since they know the reason they are there,that is to bear children,they wouldn't mind visiting baba Iyabo down the street,no be pikin they want?
whose pikin is not the issue,"smart woman"

gimme a hi5, babyosisi. you don talk am finish.

@babyosisi.

Women agree to become second wives.

No man would ever agree to be a second husband.

I would have thought the question would be:

Why do some women choose to be second wives?