Skip to content

ExpatSingapore

Home Message Board Contact Us Search

ExpatSingapore Message Board 25 May 2012, 20:32:15 pm *
Username: Password: (or Register)
 
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: The Wisdom of Polygamy  (Read 1484 times)
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« on: 16 February 2002, 12:08:00 pm »

This is an email sent to me to explain why polygamy is not justifible but also moral.
Look forward to your feedback

Islamic Clerics Explain the Rationale
Nearly every year, Egyptian television broadcasts special series for the month of Ramadan, which enjoy particularly high ratings. Frequently, these annual series make media waves in the Arab world. During Ramadan 2000, for example, the character of the Coptic woman married to a Muslim in one series sparked a heated debate on Christian-Muslim relations. More recently, the polygamist Hajj Mutawali, in a series for Ramadan 2001, engendered a storm about polygamy in the Islamic world.
Polygamy is an issue that makes headlines in the Arab media every few years.  Clerics and religious-leaning journalists hasten to state their various arguments regarding it. The most popular of these is theological: The Koran permits polygamy. However, since some Muslim countries, for example Tunisia, have found a way to prohibit polygamy, many clerics feel a need to buttress the theological argument with more practical rationalizations.
Following is a review of the main arguments in favor of polygamy, as presented in the Arab media in recent years.
Legalized Polygamy Is Better Than Mass Adultery in the West One common argument is that in practice, polygamy exists in all societies, and legalized polygamy is better than mass adultery. On his Al-Jazeera television religious program, Sheikh Yussef Al-Qaradhawi, a leading religious authority in Sunni Islam, said: “There is no society without polygamy. Westerners who condemn and reject polygamy are doing it themselves. The difference between their polygamy and our polygamy is that theirs is immoral and inhuman. The man [in the West]... sleeps with more than one woman, and if [the second woman] gets pregnant, he denies responsibility for the child and does not support the woman financially. It is nothing more than lust...”(1)
Sheikh Taysir Al-Tamimi, acting head of the Palestinian Authority’s Shari’a Judicial System, also emphasized this view: “...As everyone knows, in non-Islamic societies that prohibit polygamy there are many lovers and mistresses alongside the wife. I say to those who demand equality and whine about women’s rights that by permitting polygamy, Islam protects the woman’s humanity and emotions, and secures her right to marry and gain honor and esteem, instead of becoming a professional paramour lacking in rights whose children are thrown onto the garbage heap.”(2)
Polygamy and Sexual Appetite
Polygamy’s advocates, such as Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi, claim that men’s “raging sexual appetite” is uncontrollable and might lead them into adultery - as happens in the West - while women’s sexual appetites are not equal to those of men.  In addition, women have menstrual periods “which in some cases last 10 days or more” and during which their husbands cannot have sexual relations with them. Therefore, it has been determined that a man might have a hard time being satisfied with one woman, and that it is better to rescue him from the sin of adultery by allowing polygamy.
As Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi continued, “In societies prohibiting polygamy... there are many men whose wives have little desire... while their husbands have raging sexual appetites. What can they do? Some men’s wives have lengthy menstrual periods, lasting 10 days or more, and so the husbands decide to take an additional wife...”
“Statistics and scientific studies have proven that the man’s sexual energy is more vigorous. This is a fact… All women arouse a man, but not all men arouse a woman. Even among animals, the females need sex less than the males.  This is the case with cows, buffalo, or she-goats; they desire the stallion, ram, or bull only when they want to become pregnant. Afterwards, their desire passes. In contrast, the stallion or ram is [always] willing. This is nature, and woman is this way too...”(3)
In an article, lawyer ‘Isa Abu Libda explained that polygamy solves the problem of men with a strong sexual urge “who cannot restrain themselves when their wives are menstruating or have just given birth, and therefore it is better that they take another wife than secretly visit prostitutes.” He also offered two unique pro-polygamy arguments: One, if the husband travels frequently to distant lands, sometimes even staying “a few months,” it is best that he take another wife rather than visit prostitutes. Two, if a man’s brother dies, under polygamy he can wed his widowed sister-in-law, thus saving her and his nephews and nieces from “disintegration and perdition.”(4)
“Some husbands with [great] sexual prowess need women regularly,” wrote the chairman of the Nablus Shari’a Judicial System Sheikh Hamed Al-Bitawi.  “During the 40 days of [the wife’s] hiatus after giving birth, or during menstruation, these men cannot restrain themselves, and they have a right to take another wife.”(5)
The clerics arguing thus claim they are not concerned only about the men; women too may fall victim to a “raging sexual appetite.”  Jerusalem Supreme Sufi Council head Sheikh Muhammad Sa’id Al-Jamal Al-Rifa’i explained, “Perhaps some men cannot be satisfied with one woman. In these cases, if the door to taking another wife is closed to them, they will wear out their only wife [with unceasing sexual relations] or will cast their eyes upon other women... Accordingly, there is a need to allow men with such a nature to find a way of satisfying their powerful physical hunger by means of [women] permitted in marriage by Allah.”(6)
Polygamy and Barrenness
Another argument often espoused is that polygamy solves the problem of men married to barren women. “What happens when a man marries a woman and finds out she can’t have children?” asked Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi. “Okay, he can wait patiently for a year, two, three, or 10, but then he yearns for children. A relative of mine, a wealthy man, took a wife whom he loved, and she loved him. He lived with her for 25 years and she never had children. Then this woman, because she was righteous, told him, ‘You must wed [another].’ He objected but she persisted, and she herself arranged an engagement for him to another woman. He consummated the marriage and she bore him sons and daughters...”(7)
Sheikh Muhammad Sa’id Al-Jamal said: “It may happen that a woman falls ill and cannot have sexual relations or do housework. If she is dear to her husband and he doesn’t want to divorce her... there is nothing to do but permit him to take a second wife.”(Cool
Demographics
Also in support of polygamy is the claim that there are simply more women than men. Without polygamy, many women would die old maids, never experiencing the joys of motherhood. Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi, for example, said, “Doubtless, these marriages meet a certain need of the woman, and satisfy a certain desire, primarily in light of the fact that there are many more women than men require.  In some countries, the number of women is greater than the number of men, especially after a war. Even in America, they say, there are 8.8 million more women than men. This is a known fact. The number of marriageable women is always greater than the number of men... What do we do with this surplus of women? We have three options: We deny women partnership and the emotions of motherhood all their lives... Or, we give [them] the freedom to do what [they] want, as the Westerners do - licentiousness and that kind of thing - and [they] are likely to get pregnant as a result of prostitution and bring bastards into the world.  Or, maybe, half a husband is better than none...”(9)
Personal Reasons for Polygamy
Still others insist there is no need to seek out
justification for polygamy. Qatari sheikh Walid bin Hadi set out the different rationales for polygamy - barrenness, demographic inequality, preventing adultery, and increasing the birth rate - but, he explained, in the final analysis every man has his own reasons: “The Prophet said: ‘Do not ask a husband why he beats his wife’... According to the same principle, ‘Do not ask a husband why he takes a second wife.’”(10)
Islam Restricts Polygamy
Often, polygamy’s advocates say that, contrary to popular opinion, Islam actually puts restrictions on polygamy, in that it permits a man to take only four wives. Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi explained: “We prohibit adultery, while [Westerners] permit it. That’s the difference. With us, polygamy is not absolute - that is, the door is not wide open. Before Islam, the door to polygamy was wide open in the various nations: the Arabs, the Romans - even in the Old Testament of the Holy Scriptures it is written that David had 300 women, of which 100 were wives and 200 were maidservants, and Solomon had 700 women, of which 300 were wives and 400 were maidservants. Namely, this was accepted.  When Islam came, it imposed a single limit and a single stipulation on polygamy: that there could be no more than four wives... When a man like Ghilan Al-Thaqafi, who had 10 wives, converted to Islam, the Prophet told him: ‘Choose for yourself four of them and separate from the rest’...  The stipulation is that [the polygamist] be convinced that he is treating [his wives] equally... There is also another stipulation to every marriage, and that is that [the man] be able to support and protect the woman. That is, if a man wants to wed, even to the first wife, he must be able to support her - not to mention a second wife. He also needs to be physically and sexually capable...”(11)
The Question of Equality
As mentioned, the religious stipulation for taking a second, third, or fourth wife is the husband’s ability to treat them all equally. This is also how Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi explains why polyandry is prohibited: “Some people say, why not allow women to be polygamous?... But we say to the man that he must treat the wives equally, and if he fears he cannot, he must be satisfied with one. How can a woman treat her husbands equally? How can she divide herself amongst them? For example, if all four want children, who gets to have the first one?”
“Additionally, a woman could become pregnant without knowing whether the father was Zeid or Amr [i.e. any of her husbands]. Okay, so today they say that there are laboratories and such things [that can determine paternity] but even if it is possible to know who the father is, how is it possible to say [to the husbands]: ‘You first, the second two years afterwards, and the third eight years after that?’ Is this equality? The woman cannot treat her husbands equally, but the man can treat his wives equally, if he is a man of faith, morality, and conscience...”(12)
... Supporters of polygamy frequently dismiss women’s rights’ supporters, saying that they (polygamy supporters) are defending the right of the second wife to marry. Thus, for example, Dr. Muhammad Al-Masir, a cleric from Egypt’s Al-Azhar University, said: “Some people claim that polygamy harms the rights and honor of women, although the second or third wife is also a woman!! Is the second wife of a different gender? Is she from another planet? Every woman has the right to live in the shadow of a husband who will defend her purity and honor... In the days of the Prophet, not even one woman remained without a husband - not a spinster, nor a widow, nor a divorceeI ask our women and daughters not to be egotistical...”(13)

Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
ExpatSingapore Message Board
« on: 16 February 2002, 12:08:00 pm »



 Logged
MeDo
Newbie
*
Posts: 41


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: 17 February 2002, 10:32:00 am »

"Polygamy is defined in many dictionaries as: " Any person (Male or female) may unconditionally marry unlimited number spouses at the same time."

This means that a male or female may marry unlimited number of males or females at the same time. In other cultures and faiths, a male may marry unlimited number of wives, at the same, for any reason, and unrestricted with any conditions. Such practices are totally prohibited in Islam.

What is allowed in Islam is that in a specified restricted circumstances, a Muslim male may marry other females provided that there are circumstances that needs this kind of arrangements and it is restricted with several clear conditions."

If you wnat to read the rest of this article look at this link from the US
http://www.orst.edu/groups/msa/pl1.html


Logged

MeDo
Muslim from Iraq
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: 17 February 2002, 11:19:00 am »

I just love the ridiculousness of this article, it is so funny but at the same time so sad.  It is extremely racist, misogynistic, and illogical. But as a fundamentalist Muslim male I guess it sounds pretty cool – wife doesn’t behave get second wife – wife doesn’t clean – get second wife – wife gets a huge ass get second wife….  Unbelievable stuff
Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: 17 February 2002, 14:34:00 pm »

Antoine - you are correct in suggesting that I raised it to mock it and the religious fundamentalism that would attempt to justify it.  

On a different note - the discussion on the little Malay girls wearing the tudung to school - I repeated the arguments I made to you to my fiancée and she slaughtered me.  I realised I was arguing from a xenophobic viewpoint – though I didn’t concede so at the time.  It took about an hour before I was willing to concede that point.

In the case of this thread – I just got sent the email and thought it sufficiently amusing to put on this page.  The arguments are poor and as I said before, racist, but still it is an interesting topic.  One of my employees has 2 wives – some friends in Indonesia as well have the two.  The moral basis that all of them argue is flawed and extremely misogynistic.  

Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: 17 February 2002, 20:15:00 pm »

You know I visit this board for fun - to see different opinions to talk with people on line.  I have met some people from the board and I like this online community lots.  It can provide a great amount of information and at different stages give me some insightful feedback.  It need not be only a vehicle of intellectual endeavour – indeed if it was so I don’t believe BM would have much to do with his days.  

As for conceding that I based a previous argument on shaky grounds – well I do this more out of respect for fiancée – she is the one who enlightened me.  

But seriously I see you as only chiming in with very serious topics – this forum is for everything and that post that I put on is as I said an attempt at a laugh at its ridiculousness.  

Cheers

Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: 22 February 2002, 17:31:00 pm »

Antoine – I haven’t had a chance to get back to this particular thread to now.  Interesting reply – you seem to not want to offend anyone in any way in any confrontation you have.  I am interested in two comments you make – firstly
I don’t consider myself particularly slow nor dim witted – I enjoy good conversation and my circle of friends are more the most part successful intelligent professional people who can debate on many different levels – “What do I choose to do that you found so unrewarding? – And you largely avoid those who still indulge in it – and can see it a mile before it arrives”???  I don’t really care too much but find your comment interesting.  You sound identical to my sister in law – nice person, cares lots about everyone, very socially conscious and boy is difficult holding a conversation with her. An hour or two and its time to move on by the conversation is generally so deep that most seek to avoid it.  

As to the second observation – I must say that this also resembles something my sister in law would say and personally I have trouble with this line of thought as enlightened and sensible a thought process that it may be.  I can understand someone suggesting that no culture is superior but frankly when certain cultures traditions and beliefs do not hold to the sanctity of human life – well I cannot help but to feel it backwards.

This original post is about polygamy and argues how it is better for males to take a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th wife rather than to engage in sinful behaviour.  Perhaps I am totally out of tune with where I should be but I find this reprehensible and the fact that people could argue this is, outright primitive.  It does nothing to advance the human condition, indeed if anything it hurts it.  

Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
NewKid
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 81


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: 22 March 2002, 16:11:00 pm »

Joseph,

Agree with you that the article is funny. I have a tough enough time looking after 1 wife :-)

Had read somewhere that an Arab prince has 3 wives. Every few days he takes a 4th wife (usually a young girl) in the evening, and divorces her next morning. A convenient way to have yr cake and eat it too.

Before anyone goes ballistic - sorry I don't recall the source of this info.

Logged
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: 22 March 2002, 19:59:00 pm »

Interesting response antoine - consistent and predictable but nonetheless interesting and fun to read.

Where have you been I havent noticed your posting for sometime.

Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: 22 March 2002, 20:42:00 pm »

Oh and I can imagine my sister in law would utter a similar load of ****e
Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: 26 March 2002, 12:09:00 pm »

Indeed I was born with luck on my side
Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
nosy
Newbie
*
Posts: 37


View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: 26 March 2002, 13:37:00 pm »

I can see why it may have been considered remotely acceptable a few hundred years ago when women could not afford to be without a husband. However, it is clear that if this is practiced today, it is men who are taking advantage of the situation. It is clearly not appropriate any longer. the women who put up with it are obviously too scared of losing their husbands or for him to be unfaithful. It reminds me of an episode of Ally McBeal. The first wife was going along with the idea of the husband getting a second wife all along. Deep down she could not stand the idea but to keep the husband, she seemed to accept the fact.

IMHO, it is not healthy and rude and disrespectful to the first wife.

Logged
Burbage
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 501


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: 26 March 2002, 14:48:00 pm »

Right. Here's the biological perspective.

Mammals are in a very unusual position in the animal kingdom. With a few exceptions from other classes and phyla, they are the only animals which gestate their young. This means that the female, due to gestation and nurturing offspring, is taken out of the mating game for considerable periods. This has several very interesting implications.

Firstly, since gestation and nurturing are very highly energy expensive it is advantageous to the species that all females reproduce (in order to ensure the maximum fecundity of the population). However, evolution by natural selection suggests that all animals should be competitive (survival is determined by breeding success). If all females are breeding, are they therefore not competing and not evolving?

No, they are evolving, since half the genome of every female comes from a male. It is the males which make up for the lack of competitiveness exhibited by the females. Males, in almost all mammalian societies, compete in order to win the right to fertilise a group of females. Since there is an almost equal number of males and females this results in a large percentage of males which never breed at all. The "bad" genes are lost from the population, and all the females breed. Evolution and fecundity are both served.

Biologically, success is measured as whether you reproduce. In these mammalian societies all females reproduce so they are much more successful than many of the males which don't reproduce at all. The males which win the competition for breeding rights can be considered very successful, since the number of offspring in the next generation carrying their genes, is high, compared to any of the females.

This all comes at a huge cost for the dominant male of course. He spends the vast majority of his time not having sex, but running around trying to make sure none of the sub-dominant males interfere with the females that he is breeding with. Since these sub-dominant males spend all their time trying to illicitly have sex with any female they come across (hence there is a certain biological basis for rape) the dominant male has his work cut out.

So this mammalian polygamy is very advantageous for males who can compete successfully. It's advantageous to females since they all breed. It's disadvantageous to most males, since they never breed at all.

This system, by the way, is particularly true of the primates. I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions.

Logged
NewKid
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 81


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: 28 March 2002, 15:27:00 pm »

Amusing that there is no response to Burbage's post.

Who's going to take on the challenge of translating mammalian behavour into homo sapien behaviour for us    

Logged
LotusMan

Posts: 10


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: 08 April 2002, 15:14:00 pm »

All I know is that the thought of having 4 sets of in-laws would negate any of the benefits of having 4 wives.

LM

Logged
Dr Opinion
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1418


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: 20 April 2002, 12:22:00 pm »

Good on you, Burbage, I wondered if anyone would bite the "evolutionary psychology" bullet.  

A couple of points. Humans have much more complex brains than primates and are able to focus their energies in such a way as to operate in a manner that is not entirely predicated by their ancient biology. For example, a woman might chose a career over child bearing, grit her teeth, get on with it, and look away when she sees cute babies around. A man may chose monogamy over whatever alternatives there are, and grit his teeth and get on with it, and look away when the cute new girl at the office tries to catch his eye, attracted to his wealth and stability and the fact that he's demonstrated himself to be a great husband and dad. Humans have choices.

That said, Islamic-style polygamy, as practiced by many cultures around the world, is simply another way of dealing with the realities of our ancient biology. Biology dictates that Women will always be attracted to sucessful, established, powerful mates, and Men will always be attracted to young ladies with good bone structure and lots of childbearing years ahead. And frankly, the typical Islamic polygamous family is probably a far better place for raising kids than some of the fractured, adulturous, divorce ridden messes our culture has the temerity to call "families" in the West....

Can't we all just get along?  

Logged
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines