Quote Originally Posted by Punish_her View Post
it's coercion no matter how you look at it. if my friend wants to get married to a girl i hate and i tell him "if you marry her, im not gonna see you again" that is coercion in your book.
It is attempted coercion on your part, certainly. If I were your friend, though, I'd be more than happy to tell you to kiss off!

the amish and mormons have every right to turn their back on someone who leaves them.
But the women don't necessarily WANT to leave them! They simply want the right to choose for themselves! The fact that the religion REQUIRES them to submit to their fathers, or brothers, or husbands, is where the problem lies. And remember, they wouldn't just be leaving their church. In many, if not most, cases, they would be exiled from their own families as well.

women would much rather share men than men share women because of the evopsych behind each of the sexes. If 10 women share one wealthy man, they can each father his child and he can (resources willing) provide for them. 10 men sharing one woman is the opposite. she will only father a child with one of them, then nine men are supporting another man's genetic legacy without having one of their own.
Unless she has one child for each husband. With so many providers, she certainly wouldn't need to work outside the home. She could be a veritable baby factory if she wished. Or perhaps she just wants to be able to fuck all night without worrying about having a limp dick interfere with her fun. The point is, SHE gets to decide. And men, generally, don't like that.

women who are more tolerant of the idea of sharing men will not be weeded out of the genetic battleground to the same extent a man who shares his women will be.
If humans ONLY mated for procreation that might be true. But with modern medicine, a man could insure that any children would be his, but still share her if he wished.

Monogamy is more benficial to men because 9 of wives the one wealthy man could have had are being displaced to 9 other men who were before without a mate.Every man down the ladder gets something he wouldn't before, while every woman must trade down after the small pool of dersirebale men are taken.
The only benefit of monogamy for men is the lower cost of maintaining a household. If he can afford it, polygamy would be more beneficial for any individual male. And in the genetics game, it is the Alpha male who's seed tends to dominate. He doesn't want the others to propagate at all, so it's in his interest to deprive them of wives. And, to a certain extent, women tend to be attracted to Alpha males, as they would be considered genetically superior, whose children would be likely to survive into adulthood, in order to continue the genetic line. Of course, modern morality, not to mention modern psychology, has changed us all. For the better, I should hope. After all, we aren't strictly animals anymore.