From: "idleeric" <stdumbo@mich.com>
Subject: ASSC-AFTSD: Monogamy
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 12:16:11 -0500

Prof. Pinker -->

>>Hmm. I think I want to see your citation regarding most human cultures
>>sanction polygany (polygamy?).

Prof. Flynn ->

>>Harumph. Obviously you didn't bother to read the letter to Science from an
>>ASU anthropologist that I posted to the GOS last week. (Sorry, I don't
>>still have it on line or I'd repost it.) Anyway, the author said (in
>>response to an article about the lack of monogamy in the animal kingdom)
>>that of 1100+ human cultures archived in a database at Yale, about 70%
>>sanctioned some form of polygyny. BTW, "ploygyny" (sorry about the original
>>misspelling) refers to the condition of a male having more than one wife or
>>female partner at one time. "Polygamy" is not gender-specific, referring to
>>the practice of having more than one mate or spouse at one time. I did mean
>>"polygyny" in my original comments.
>>
>>The letter was in the Nov 6 issue of Science.

Prof. Pinker -->

>You mean the quote that went:
>
>"Monogamy is rare not only in nature, but among humans. Of 1154 societies
>in the Human Relations Area Files (a large database originally compiled at
>Yale University), more than 1000 (93%) recognize some degree of sanctioned
>polygyny (that is, at least ocacsionally, males can mate with more than
>one female), and polygyny is the preferred choice in 70% of them (ref).
>
>?
>
>Hmmm. Interesting stat, but I don't buy it. I'd like to know their
>definition of a society that "recognizes polygyny." Does Western society
>count as a "society that recognizes polygyny" because certain Mormans
>practice it, and they're part of our society? Do the 93% of cultures that
>recognize it account for only a small fraction of population, while the
>7% that don't account for a huge fraction? (I.e., those 154
>non-recognizing societies include Jews, non-Mormon Christians, Buddhists
>and Muslims.... er, or do Muslims still sanction polygyny?) Does a small
>sect of 20 polygamists in Montana count as a society? Well, you get my
>point.
>
>I wonder if I can access the Yale data on the web?

Prof. Wright -->

this is a half-full/empty proposition ... i'll cc: this to my guru/expert, 
cuz i'm sure i'm wrong ....

in primate "cultures" & in many "lower" species, the Victor (Alpha-prick,
the Leader of the Pack ... vrrrrummm...vrrrummm) gets the Spoils (aka the
Harem) .... the outcasts, 98 pound weakling Chimps, get sand kicked in their
faces .... the Mate-pair is an  phenomenon that suits females somewhat
better than males, but offers "middling" males a lifetime opportunity to
carry on the Progeny thru Dint of Effort w/ One Roll of the GeneDice ... so
yeah, monogamy does have an EvPsych basis, but the Bull Republicans'd rather
fool around ... serially, Cheating ... whatever ... Brigham Young & the Old
Testiment Patriarchs would Understand ....

I'm of the Hugh Hefner- Huey Long "Every Man a King in his Mansion" School
.... Having as many Naked females as can't be hand-led  swarming around is
more than an adolescent fantasy .... it's the American Dream!!!!!!

If it's sound psychology, good ... if it isn't, then i'll confess: I'm a
Subversive Deviant Commie Perv