The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
World War P for Polygamy Gears Up
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Speaking up for polyamory

From Patch last Spring:

Arlington Recognizes Polyamorous Domestic Partnerships

Town Meeting passed Arlington’s first domestic partnership bylaw, which includes relationships of “two or more” people.

Alex Newman,
Patch Staff
Apr 30, 2021 at 1:21 pm ET

ARLINGTON, MA — A domestic partnership bylaw adopted by Town Meeting recognizes polyamorous partnerships.

This is the Arlington, Massachusetts suburb northwest of Boston, not the more famous ones in Virginia or Texas. It borders Cambridge, Lexington, and Belmont. It’s a white and Asian town with a median family income in six figures.

The bylaw was passed in Session 2 and originally did not include language concerning polyamorous relationships. An amendment was introduced by Precinct 3 Town Meeting member Amos Meeks, who said he has two longtime domestic partners.

Dr. Amos Meeks, newly minted Harvard Applied Physics Ph.D. and chief science officer of a start-up, looks like he’s descended from a long line of characters in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter.

The amendment, which allows domestic partnerships of “two or more” people, was adopted by a vote of 192-37. …

This is one of those New England Town Meetings memorialized by Norman Rockwell in “Freedom of Speech.” So, legalizing polygamy reflects the Will of The People (at least The People in Arlington, MA.)

It will next be sent to Attorney General Maura Healey, who determines if the bylaw conflicts with state law.

Rev. Arthur Dimmesdale and congregant

Maura T. Healey is the attorney general of the state of Massachusetts and is the leading fundraiser among potential candidates for the next gubernatorial election.

From the Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly this year:

AG upholds town’s recognition of ‘polyamorous’ relationships
By: Pat Murphy January 6, 2022

Attorney General Maura T. Healey’s office has issued its stamp of approval on an Arlington bylaw redefining domestic partnerships to include relationships consisting of more than two people.

In 19th Century America, polygamy was seen as incompatible with membership in the United States: Utah was not admitted as a state until 1890 after the Mormon church had banned polygamy.

But that’s totally different because 19th Century Mormon polygamy was heterosexist and thus bad, while 21st Century Massachusetts polyamory is nonbinary and thus good.

Tech guys sharing a woman, nonbinarily of course, will be a good start for World War P, but the real boost is likely to come when African Climate Change Refugees start massively streaming in.

Is the government going to break up families?

Love is love.

We already have had one President who was the product of a polygamous marriage (although it’s unclear if his father mentioned to his mother that he was already married back home in Kenya).

And, look, polygamous countries are marginalized.

It’s as if polygamy holds back a society. But we know that can’t be true because polygamous countries tend to be black and/or Muslim and it’s racist and Islamophobic to say they tend to be backward. And if you can’t say it, you’d better not think it — you might blurt it out and ruin your life.

 
Hide 228 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. More KY Jelly for that slippery slope.

    • LOL: AnotherDad, Abe
    • Replies: @jimbo
    , @AnotherDad
    , @Reg Cæsar
  2. Brutusale says:

    Maura Healey is not going to put her finger in the dyke of this idiocy!

    • Replies: @Richard B
  3. It makes sense that if 3 or 4 people are living together as a family, then if there is an outbreak of fighting, that it should be defined as domestic violence, and penalized as such.

    Any medical professional who is arrested for domestic violence gets their license suspended while the case is under investigation.

    This by-law in Arlington, Mass will keep people on their best behavior. It should probably be introduced in Arlington which is part of Jacksonville, Florida too, and in all Arlingtons anywhere.

    • Replies: @Anthony Aaron
  4. polyamorous partnerships

    Greek has three words for love, but none of them are good enough for these people, so they go to Latin. Yet Latin has its own prefixes, e.g., multi-, so why not use one of them? Does multiamorous sound skeevy rather than pseudoacademic? Is polyphile too close to those other -philes?

    If these relationships are consanguinous to boot, would they be polyphiladelphic?

    Why do we say multiethnic rather than polyethnic?

    As any market researcher could tell you, names for what you’re selling are not trivial.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
  5. The knockout blow will be when someone points out that lots of immigrants have or would like multiple wives. We can then start accommodating them by arranging multiple apartments in public housing for the various wives and broods, like they have in France. Good for exponentially ramping up chain migration, too.

    A few polyamorous nerds is one thing, but there are far more polygamous Mohammedan undocumented future Americans living in various shitholes around the world that we must consider.

  6. Thea says:

    Was it Roissy who said we will have polygyny soon. Anyhow, Schopenhauer and ugly women approve!

    Can’t wait to watch the sparks fly between the wokesters and the Mormons.

    • Thanks: Je Suis Omar Mateen
  7. World War P for Polygamy Gears Up

    Well it’s got a long way to go to catch up with World War P for Pedophilia.

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    , @mc23
  8. Richard B says:
    @Brutusale

    Maura Healey is not going to put her finger in the dyke of this idiocy!

    She’d much rather have her voting partners stuff her ballot box.

  9. “Tech guys sharing a woman”

    It takes two Tech guys to make one normal guy so that seems about right.

    • LOL: BB753, John Johnson
    • Replies: @John Johnson
  10. @Almost Missouri

    Well it’s got a long way to go to catch up with World War P for Pedophilia.

    I used to think the same of WW “T”, which is just a few years old and yet has already laid waste to vast swathes of our culture. Insanity moves very swiftly these days.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    , @Mr. Anon
  11. Mike Tre says:

    Can’t wait for a Somali municipal worker to get his 3 wives and 11 children enrolled in state funded medical insurance.

  12. I cannot think of a single outlandish, degenerate thing that Church ladies warned about in the 1990s – earning them opprobrium as hysterics at the time – but which I have not lived to see since come to pass.

    • Agree: Daniel H
  13. TGGP says: • Website

    Do you actually know whether Meeks is sharing a woman with another guy, or did dog bite man and is his the usual case of polygyny rather than polyandry?

  14. Maura T. Healey is the attorney general of the state of Massachusetts and is the leading fundraiser among potential candidates for the next gubernatorial election.

    I say:

    Marriage between one man and one woman is to raise children and to secure some measure of loyalty between the man and the woman.

    Some nasty wag says regular guys benefit from one woman and one man marriage because otherwise these tall and handsome and money guys would get all the USS PY. The USS PY served brilliantly in the Spanish American War.

    New England is an open air lunatic asylum for politicians like that Maura T. Healey.

    The people of New England — especially the New Englanders of some or all English ancestry — are the most wonderful people you could imagine — well, most of them.

    New Hampshire has wonderful people and terrible politicians, but that seems to be the case everywhere in this country.

    The New Hampshire Republican Party is controlled by repulsive and despicable politicians and they all conspire to put the Republican Party Chumocracy ahead of the best interests of New Hampshire and the USA.

    A nasty Republican Party Chumocracy stooge boy whore named Kevin Smith is getting set to slither into the New Hampshire Republican Party US senatorial primary and this Kevin Smith guy is a nasty politician whore.

    Republican Party Chumocracy stooge Kevin Smith was a big booster of the Rubio/Obama Mass Immigration Surge — Illegal Alien Amnesty bill( S 744).

    That Rubio/Obama immigration bill(S 744) would have doubled or tripled legal immigration and it would have given amnesty to upwards of 30 million illegal alien invaders. John Boehner, who was US House Speaker at the time, made sure that the Rubio/Obama immigration bill(S 744) never saw the light of day in the US House. Boehner knew that immigration bill would have started a bloody civil war in the GOP if he brought it up for a vote.

    • Replies: @SFG
  15. Dr. Amos Meeks, newly minted Harvard Applied Physics Ph.D. and chief science officer of a start-up, looks like he’s descended from a long line of characters in The Scarlet Letter.

    He looks like Brent Spiner’s yearbook picture. And, to be honest, that’s probably about what he was going for.

  16. CCZ says:

    Well, full “marriage equality” (no equity yet) will require World War “I”!!!!

    https://nypost.com/2021/04/17/consensual-incest-should-be-decriminalized-advocates-say/

    https://nypost.com/2021/04/10/new-york-parent-seeks-ok-to-marry-their-own-adult-child/

    A New Yorker who wants to marry their own adult offspring is suing to overturn laws barring the incestuous practice, calling it a matter of “individual autonomy.”

    “Through the enduring bond of marriage, two persons, whatever relationship they might otherwise have with one another, can find a greater level of expression, intimacy and spirituality,” the parent argues in the Manhattan federal court claim filed April 2021.

    The parent wants to walk down the aisle in New York City, and is asking a judge to declare the laws unconstitutional and unenforceable in their case, which the lawsuit dubs “PAACNP” for “Parent and Adult Child Non-Procreationable” couples.

    • LOL: ScarletNumber
  17. Wilkey says:

    Since the vast majority of people in serious polyamorous relationships will be Muslim, I propose that from now on the federal government direct all Muslim refugee resettlement only to those cities which legally recognize polyamorous relationships.

    Arlington, Massachusetts…there are about 100,000 Afghan refugees we’d like to send your way. Let’s get some low income housing built in Arlington post haste.

    • Replies: @Alfa158
  18. One of my main rationalizations for reading Steve so regularly is his calling the whole WW T phenomenom way ahead of the curve. At the time i thought he was going too far due to tiny numbers and general repulsiveness . I was so wrong ! Being able to nail something like that beforehand shows a deep understanding of our time. I have learned since that anything abhorrent to conservative types is probably already heading our way good and hard,no matter how crazy or satanic.

  19. It’s a feature of New England culture.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneida_Community

    The Oneida Community was a perfectionist religious communal society founded by John Humphrey Noyes and his followers in 1848 near Oneida, New York. The community believed that Jesus had already returned in AD 70, making it possible for them to bring about Jesus’s millennial kingdom themselves, and be free of sin and perfect in this world, not just in Heaven (a belief called perfectionism). The Oneida Community practiced communalism (in the sense of communal property and possessions), complex marriage, male sexual continence, and mutual criticism.

    The community’s original 87 members grew to 172 by February 1850, 208 by 1852, and 306 by 1878. There were smaller Noyesian communities in Wallingford, Connecticut; Newark, New Jersey; Putney and Cambridge, Vermont. The branches were closed in 1854 except for the Wallingford branch, which operated until the 1878 tornado devastated it.

    The Oneida Community dissolved in 1881, converting itself to a joint-stock company. This eventually became the silverware company Oneida Limited.

    https://thoughtcatalog.com/daniel-hayes/2015/05/free-love/

    Believing that people should be able to have sex with whomever they wanted, the group engaged in a kind of ‘complex marriage’ whereby social cohesion and procreation were the goals in that order. They also believed that it “takes a village” to raise a child and the entire community was expected to contribute to this goal. As might be expected, this made a lot of the members miserable since they were often separated from their children and since Noyes got to pick who was allowed to have sex with who.

    Oh, and they also had sex with children.

    Noyes himself apparently decided he should be the one having sex with 12 and 13 year olds in the community but “sex tutoring” in general was common with older women “teaching” adolescent boys and older men “teaching” adolescent girls.

    At that same site there are further American examples of the utter failure of polyamorous marriage.

    Adhering to “polyfidelity,” the creation of “intentional communities” and implementing a rotating sleeping schedule, the Kerista religion was founded in the late 1950s in NYC and codified in the 1970s in San Francisco on the principles of monetary and familial equality.

    Group marriage and shared parenting were the mainstays of Kerista. Groups of four to fifteen people typically engaged in a group marriage and did not have sex with others outside this group, thus the term ‘polyfidelity.’ They also had a fixed sleep schedule where every member of this fidelity group would rotate beds every day. This was required. However, this didn’t mean that people didn’t leave groups for other groups. They did. Groups would break apart and reform all the time….

    However, the polyfidelity arrangements didn’t keep people from fighting or being unhappy and some members report that they weren’t any more happy in these arrangements than they had been in monogamous relationships. The group also maintained a list of eighty four rules for how members of the groups could interact with one another including a rule against cursing and a rule that basically means that no one is allowed to feel humiliated.

    If you broke the rules then you had to all come together and have a big discussion of what rules had been broken and by whom. Sounds super chill and not at all more stressful than just working things out with a significant other.

    Anyone who has been responsible for caring for children and raising them to adulthood (especially in our highly mobile and prosperous although insecure society) would quickly realize the drastic instability of such arrangements.

    • Replies: @James J O'Meara
  20. Jack D says:

    but the real boost is likely to come when African Climate Change Refugees start massively streaming in. Is the government going to break up families?

    It’s already quite common in places such as the section of the Bronx where the fire recently occurred for an African Muslim man to buy a two or 3 flat type house and install 1 wife and her kids on each floor.

  21. Bernard says:

    This isn’t going to work out for the Left’s dismantling plan, too many Pokémon points at stake as women are often at a disadvantage in these arrangements. I see our polygamous future as one where multiple men marry multiple women. By throwing everyone into a large salad known as a “family “, direct responsibility is diluted to the point where it doesn’t really exist. As a consequence, government grows to fill the void.

    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
  22. Government and Hollywood have been breaking up families since the 1950s.

    Hollywood celebrities were making divorce fashionable with their serial monogamy. Changing partners like changing a summer wardrobe for a winter wardrobe.

    At the dinner table my nine year old self asked, “why do they keep getting married, if they keep failing at it?”

    The Great Society Project removed fathers from the homes of black families in the 1960s. Free ranging feral young black males were the result. Daughters were “see mama, be mama”, pregnant as soon as they achieved fertility to carry on the tradition.

    Hollywood then went full court press on glamorizing single parenthood centered on fictional white women who had it all, except a husband.

    Men were relegated to being sperm donors who wrote support checks.

    Polyamory has been in the wind for a while. Usenet assisted like minded individuals seeking multiple mates.

    Hollywood comes out with shows about polyamory. Process of normalizing more fringe behavior.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
  23. JimDandy says:

    But that’s totally different because 19th Century Mormon polygamy was heterosexist and thus bad, while 21st Century Massachusetts polyamory is nonbinary and thus good.

    What is contemporary Muslim polygamy, according to The New Thinking?

  24. songbird says:

    I know a lot of people who live in Arlington, but somehow missed this as I stopped reading the Boston papers years ago.

    What I find bizarre about it is that Arlington is a town, in the old New England sense, albeit quite a large one (46,000, bigger than some nearby cities) In theory, it is supposed to be a system of direct democracy, more responsive and streamlined than a city.

    Most of the people I know from there would not have voted for this. Somehow they must have gamed the system. Had a special election, where the issue was snuck-in and supported by die-hard radicals.

  25. Muggles says:

    Aside from possible zoning regulations, I don’t think what some small town or village says or permits about “partners” will have any legal effect.

    State laws govern marriage and related property rights.

    I am not aware of any clamoring for polygamy. Divorce attorneys may want it though. And engagement ring/wedding ring sellers.

    Three people in a marriage? What could go wrong…?

  26. truth be told, P is way less crazy than T anyway. If they want to further their nihilist efforts to tear down order, they are going to have to start looking at incest.

  27. Alfa158 says:
    @Wilkey

    Good idea, but legalizing polyamory won’t be enough for them. After the evacuation of Afghanistan one of the refugees getting off a transport in the US arrived with a brand new child-bride, and there could have been more who didn’t get publicized. Additionally, what if some of the refugees brought their dancing boys with them? Would those kids need to be regarded as family members?
    Arlington MA can’t take credit for being truly accepting of different cultures until they legalize pedophilia. After all, it’s just another World War P.

  28. Anonymous[276] • Disclaimer says:

    A search of Amos Meeks in Arlington, MA found this address:

    https://www.mylife.com/amos-meeks/e99697574145198

    The other person listed at that address was Charlie Farison. He’s Charlie’s LinkedIn page:

    https://www.linkedin.com/in/charliefarison

    Apparently they went to Olin College of Engineering in Needham, MA together (when Charlie was Mollie) They also apparently co-founded a tech start-up called Lilypad Scales.

  29. @Muggles

    I am not aware of any clamoring for polygamy.

    It will chiefly be used by Muslims. It is especially helpful for chain migration.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  30. Everybody’s kink is a great civil rights issue.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri, sayless
  31. Anon7 says:

    “Bless you, sir, at a time when I had seventy-two wives in this house, I groaned under the pressure of keeping thousands of dollars tied up in seventy-two bedsteads when the money ought to have been out at interest; and I just sold out the whole stock, sir, at a sacrifice, and built a bedstead seven feet long and ninety-six feet wide.”

    “But it was a failure, sir. I could not sleep. It appeared to me that the whole seventy-two women snored at once. The roar was deafening. And then the danger of it! That was what I was looking at. They would all draw in their breath at once, and you could actually see the walls of the house suck in—and then they would all exhale their breath at once, and you could see the walls swell out, and strain, and hear the rafters crack, and the shingles grind together.”

    “My friend, take an old man’s advice, and don’t encumber yourself with a large family—mind, I tell you, don’t do it. In a small family, and in a small family only, you will find that comfort and that peace of mind which are the best at last of the blessings this world is able to afford us, and for the lack of which no accumulation of wealth, and no acquisition of fame, power, and greatness can ever compensate us.”

    “Take my word for it, ten or eleven wives is all you need—never go over it.”

    (Polygamy among the Mormons in Utah from Roughing It, Mark Twain, 1872)

  32. epebble says:

    In the Course of human events, Polygamous marriages have been much more common than (now legal) Homosexual marriages. I think till about a century or so back, polygamy was not illegal in most places around the world. So, this is not really groundbreaking. Just a return to old (some may say ancient) traditions.

    • Agree: Bumpkin
  33. I was sure the Kids were going to be next then your dog.
    I guess watching Diaper Joe has made pedophilia less marketable for now.
    You should still lock up Fido.

    • Thanks: Je Suis Omar Mateen
  34. Just in time for the Friends of Joe who rushed the Kabul Airport to get on the Gravy Train (I mean plane) Express.

  35. Bernard says:
    @Jack D

    It’s already quite common in places such as the section of the Bronx where the fire recently occurred for an African Muslim man to buy a two or 3 flat type house and install 1 wife and her kids on each floor.

    The term wife in this regard has no legal meaning. As long as a marriage license is never issued, there are no laws being broken. If one assumes that all of the “families” are cared for by the husband (ok, that might be a leap) , it is superior to what we often see in among our own native born, a man fathering children by multiple women, none of whom he claims as his wife.

    • Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose
  36. Imagine divorce court and equitable division of assets.

  37. nebulafox says:

    Yeah, sure. With rotting social institutions, logistics lines, political system, economy, why not make the single most destabilizing practice you can have in any society legal?

    Recipe for truly happy times.

  38. • Thanks: James N. Kennett
    • Replies: @Altai
  39. @Mike Tre

    3 wives and 11 children enrolled

    @\$19,000 per public school kid*yr, you’re talking real money.

    Zoning laws often restrict the number of non-organic family members allowed to reside in a household. The [overlapping] school district doesn’t want to be swamped with kids (without the corresponding increase in local property tax revenues). So if the libertines hope to change the regs, their path of least resistance is to make the variance only applicable to childless throuples.

  40. This is the Arlington, Massachusetts suburb northwest of Boston, not the more famous ones in Virginia or Texas. It borders Cambridge, Lexington, and Belmont.

    Steve, Arlington also borders Somerville which was first in 2020:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/stereotypes-of-criminals-in-san-francisco-vs-russia/#comment-4006821 (#17)

    OT: “Polyamorous relationships” given legal standing in Somerville, MA. Polygamy to follow?

    Somerville recognizes polyamorous relationships in new domestic partnership ordinance

    https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/07/01/metro/somerville-recognizes-polyamorous-relationships-new-domestic-partnership-ordinance/

    • Replies: @Coemgen
  41. OT, but, given that she might have been grazed by the bug going around, perhaps relevant to the zeitgeist:

    https://wtop.com/music/2022/01/60s-icon-ronnie-spector-who-sang-be-my-baby-dies-at-78/

    Spector seems to have had a yen for MOT’s, and spent the rest of her life with another after fleeing Phil Spector:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6439433/Ronnie-Spector-reveals-Phil-Spector-surprised-twins-without-asking.html

    Parenthetically, she might have had a shot at becoming Mrs. Lennon. Imagine the possibilities. My guess is that she would have provided better vocals than Yoko.

  42. @Reg Cæsar

    Polygamy is a husband with multiple wives. So that’s a pretty straightforward relationship — you’ve got “husband-wife” plus “sister-wife.” But how are they going to define a legitimate “polyamorous” collective.

    Does everyone in the poly-relationship have to be “amorous” with everyone else in the love collective? Probably not. (Sister-wives are only amorous with the polygamous husband).

    So what defines the parameters of the group relationship? Does a standard love triangle count? Does any love polygon qualify? How about a love dodecahedron?

    What are the obligations of each poly-relationship member to the others? Can you divorce a member who cheats on the love dodecahedron by sneaking around with a love octagon on the side? Enquiring minds (and perverts) want to know.

  43. I don’t know if this is anymore toxic than the current de facto polygamy in millennial and Gen Z. Women get into these orbiting relationships around a high status or charismatic guy and stay in these quasi harems for years, then panic and try to get something official as they age. Often they are too emotionally entangled to make a clean break of it and the new relationship fails, usually because the new guy can’t match the charisma or other benefits of the original guy. If there was a de jure framework to allow some type of status to these women they might find the dating world to be a bit less of an elephants graveyard than they currently do.

    I think it has to be pushed by them though, since the high value guys are able to bail out of the arrangements at will and suffer far less emotional fallout, if any, and no argument can be made from the low status guys position that wouldn’t come off as hopelessly pathetic.

    Even aside from immigration and everything else, this is a natural phenomenon as the country becomes a wilder, more dangerous and fundamentally barbaric place. Stuffing alpha males into sexual captivity with minimal collateral damage was one of the big unsung accomplishments of…. someone, I don’t know really which group to credit for it.

    While I feel empathy for the girls who fall into these very natural traps, I think the bigger societal threat is that a lot of exceptional men are not contributing to society as fully as they would have in the past because now they have the opportunity to return to baseline desires and monopolize women sexually through force of personality or looks instead of accomplishments or something vaguely productive to society as a whole. Will probably make the gene pool more attractive over time though. So there is that. Which is nice.

    • Agree: Hermes
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  44. ‘Tech guys sharing a woman, nonbinarily of course, will be a good start for World War P, but the real boost is likely to come when African Climate Change Refugees start massively streaming in. Is the government going to break up families?’

    As a side note, something similar already is a problem in Turkey.

    Turkey long since made polygamy illegal. Since, as in many Muslim countries, it was rare anyway, I imagine the change was accepted without too much fuss.

    The problem came when it became fashionable for Gulf billionaires to build villas in Turkey. Well, Turkey was all for that. Come — blow a few million, fine with us.

    But they want to bring all their wives — as their wives. Well, legally, you see, there’s this problem. You can enter Turkey, and be accompanied by an spouse. Not four of them.

  45. It’s kind of amusing to consider the advocate’s apparent position.

    Hmm…reasonably good-looking, obviously academically successful, socially ept enough to speak up in a local government meeting and get his way…

    Well, sure I’m entitled to more than one wife. I deserve at least three. It’d be good for the gene pool…

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @mmack
  46. jimbo says:
    @Half Canadian

    Don’t you know that’s, like, a fallacy?

    C’mon, man!

  47. Barnard says:

    If they allow these people benefits, I am surprised businesses would be on board with it. The last thing most businesses want to do anymore is provide health insurance for dependents of employees. Seems like a pretty easy scam to run and get uninsured people covered with a business subsidy. If that starts happening in significant numbers coverage for families with a sole breadwinner will start getting even worse.

  48. mc23 says:

    Another nail in the coffin of traditional families. i always thought Steve’s theory of” Affordable Family Formation” was on the money.

    The Republican party started out primarily as a moral party based on combating the evils of slavery and polygamy terming them the “twin relics of barbarism” in 1854.

    Now anyone objecting to this will be labeled a domestic terrorist and the Supreme Court will invent a new right not found before in Western Civilization.

    When does World War P for Paedopedia kick in? I don’t want to blink.

  49. @Colin Wright

    I’d bet that rather than have two wives, he has half a wife.

  50. @Bernard

    He left out the part where the state (American taxpayers) pay for EBT cards for each wife, along with other assorted subsidies. It’s not coincidence that the African immigrants have such a resemblance to the Americans and their baby mamas.

    • Agree: Hangnail Hans
  51. Coemgen says:
    @Steve Sailer

    I’d bet that rather than have two wives, he has half a wife.

    Would that be front half, back half, top half, bottom half, or, is it a timeshare?

    • Replies: @Alfa158
  52. Altai says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    https://www.elnacional.cat/en/politics/villarejo-accuses-cni-17-a-attacks-scare-catalonia_693776_102.html

    Who knows if any of this holds any water. But I do like how the implication is that things got out of hand because they worked with an imam to produce the ‘recruits’ and set things up. Basically reminding how minorities will always prefer empires and frustrating the self-determination of their hosts as was seen in the Quebec and Scottish referendums where recent immigrants in addition to people from the dominant ethnic group the nations sought independence from voted as a bloc against their host’s self-determination.

    That part gets left out of countries’ independence day celebrations, all the immigrants who scream bloody murder when it’s ever implied they aren’t 100% just as Finnish/Irish/Dutch as anyone else would have voted or even fought or undermined efforts for national independence.

    And really, why is it surprising? Their mass presence is itself an act of violation of their hosts’ self-determination and the logic of their nations’ existence as the expression of a certain people.

    Although ironically the Catalonia government had the notion to have higher rates of immigration in the hopes to teach the new immigrants Catalan to tip the balance even further against Spanish Castellan speakers but I suspect they don’t actually vote the way they intended anyway.

    • Thanks: James N. Kennett
  53. @Steve Sailer

    Indubitably. There is also quite a bit of overlap with antifa, fringe festivals, society for creative anachronism, hideous punctures in the face, ears and soft bits, that sort of thing. Dork City.

  54. mc23 says:
    @Almost Missouri

    At one time I would have been with you. Now I would say” Denial isn’t just a river in Egypt.”

  55. @Jack D

    All the more reason to do what is necessary to keep the mice out, Jack. You can hear them upstairs… floor by floor…

  56. SafeNow says:

    The “single-family zoning” obstacle is often not an obstacle. A “family” is not defined by blood or marital connection, or by the number of people living in the home. Rather, it is a matter of sharing the same vibe. Thus, 10 gardeners, with their 10 trucks, can share a rental in a neighborhood of million-dollar homes. They all have the gardener vibe. (\$million homes, except across the street, which is erstwhile-million) That’s S. California where I live. I do not know the prevalence of the same-vibe rule elsewhere. But I read about a fun case in New England where a judge refused to allow a rental to college athletes consisting of both hockey players and baseball players. His reasoning was that hockey players and baseball players are different, and don’t have the same vibe.

    • Replies: @Gerrymander'd
  57. Dr. X says:

    In 19th Century America, polygamy was seen as incompatible with membership in the United States

    It still is, if you’re a fundamentalist Mormon. Didn’t the government throw Warren Jeffs in prison for this not long ago?

    • Replies: @Charlotte
    , @guest007
  58. Tim says:

    Well, Steve called WW T about 8 years ago, and he was dead on. So, he’s had a good track record.

  59. mc23 says:
    @Altai

    Great thinkers, from Aristotle to Aquinas, across a span of almost 2000 years have observed that three generations are needed for immigrants to fully assimilate with their new country. Before that there are ties of family that can sway or influence loyalities and sympathies.

    I think that’s a universal truism. I see it in family and friends.

    For one dramatic example think of the Fenian Brotherhood, Irish immigrants who fought by the tens of thousands in the American Civil War and a few years later tried to invade Canada from the USA to help further Irish independance.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  60. @Half Canadian

    Did you like living–at least part of your life–in the West?

    I’m sure plenty of folks are sick of my saying it, but “separate nations”.

    There are I’d gather probably near 100m or so Americans who’d like to live in something resembling America, with the traditional norms of Western Civilization. (And quite probably tens of millions more who’d opt for it given the alternative.)

    Let’s politely but firmly insist we do the split–America and Rainbow.

    We simply need to make our voices heard.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  61. George says:

    How does polyamory affect zoning laws? If the law is no more than 3 unrelated adults allowed in the zoning code how would a dude and his 5 wives(?) and their children be considered.

    How are health, pension, and other benefits handled?

    Did recognizing gay marriage result in huge pension and health employee cost increases?

  62. @Altai

    Basically reminding how minorities will always prefer empires and frustrating the self-determination of their hosts …

    Excellent comment Altai.

    Basically what we see again and again is that normal people like nations–independence and self-determination. But minorities like empire–the more scrambled the better–and don’t like self-determination or republican government, because the majority having its way is not in their interest.

    And basically what’s happened in the West is coalitions of minorities, imperialists and big staters–dependents and comfy sinecure sitters–fortifying their coalition with more minorities and state dependents and destroying Western nations.

  63. This is one of those New England Town Meetings memorialized by Norman Rockwell in “Freedom of Speech.” So, legalizing polygamy reflects the Will of The People (at least The People in Arlington, MA.)

    We have the town meeting form of local government here in Connecticut, and it has worked very well for at least two centuries, thank you very much. If you have a problem with that, then I suggest you refer back to your hundreds of thousands of words of writing about what is really going wrong.

    There is nothing wrong with the town meeting. I participate in it here myself. Maybe you there in California can’t understand that. Have you ever participated in your local government in any such way? Here, it is common.

    There is an honorable truth to those Norman Rockwell paintings. He lived and painted in a town called Stockbridge, Massachusetts. I hiked through it on the Appalachian Trail.

    • Replies: @SafeNow
  64. @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    I think officially sanctioned, legalized prostitution hasn’t happened yet. When will that battle really start up?

    and yes, it will be mostly gay men that want it. Just like this fool in MA in his “domestic partnerships.” For all we know, one of those partners could be a cat.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  65. Anonymous[423] • Disclaimer says:

    OT: Ya know, even though the \$950 rule applies to shoplifting criminals, which is emboldening feral negroes and other trash to do what they do best, it’s still a great idea to detain the those caught for the police because chances are high that anyone of any culture feral enough to walk out of a store with an armload of expensive jackets likely has an outstanding warrant, so he/she will be locked up anyway.

    I just don’t understand why corporations aren’t leveling class action lawsuits against cities that initiated the ridiculous pro-shoplifting law. Isn’t a lawsuit far cheaper than shutting down a Walgreens?

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
  66. Ben Kurtz says:

    Mass. was at the bleeding edge of gay marriage 15+ years ago; social acceptance of freaky stuff tends to start up there.

    Past time to amputate the gangrenous limb.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
  67. SafeNow says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    A guy I know here in California (a lawyer) complained to the city manager about a problem on his street. The reply was “None of your business.” I am envious of your description of town meetings, Buzz. Thank you. Another Dad is right – – it really is two countries.

    • Thanks: Buzz Mohawk
  68. @GeologyAnonMk4

    While I feel empathy for the girls who fall into these very natural traps, I think the bigger societal threat is that a lot of exceptional men are not contributing to society as fully as they would have in the past because now they have the opportunity to return to baseline desires and monopolize women sexually through force of personality or looks instead of accomplishments or something vaguely productive to society as a whole.

    I don’t think that’s the core problem. I’m dubious how well “guys who do very well” correlates with “exceptional men” in terms of productive societal contribution. There’s some relationship as it involves health, symmetry, often some verbal facility. But was Thomas Edison hitting it? Orville and Wilbur? Ben Franklin–ok.

    I think the core problem here two-fold:
    1) Once women have “been around” especially with a man they really desired (“alpha”), even if they can later settle for another man, the chance of divorce is high. Basically this situation wrecks women for socially stable marriage/family relationships.

    2) A whole bunch of men are “left-behind”. And we aren’t sending them off to man sailing ships or die on the front lines. They’re just “around”. So you have a bunch of men who don’t have wives and families, and with the decline of religion don’t have any particular external moral steering. What will these men do? What’s to motivate them to do anything? What’s to stop them from just “going off”?

    Basically non-monogamy–whether the current sexual marketplace or outright polygamy–is a program for destroying the pro-social, civilization building characteristics of both men and women.

    • Agree: Hermes
    • Replies: @John Johnson
    , @kaganovitch
  69. mmack says:
    @Colin Wright

    “Well, sure I’m entitled to more than one wife. I deserve at least three. It’d be good for the gene pool”

    You know what the punishment for polygamy is?

    Multiple wives 🤣

    • Agree: Colin Wright
    • LOL: Mike Tre
  70. Ian Smith says:

    The joke in Alabama is “thank god for Mississippi.” In Arabia, it’s “thank Allah for sub-Saharan Africa.”

  71. @SunBakedSuburb

    Tech areas are a homely woman’s dream.

    Go to a bar in one of these areas and you will see homely women acting like royalty from all the attention. It’s unbelievable.

    I tell my tech friend to move to the country and take any job. He thinks I am kidding but what good is a high paying salary if you are chasing the same average looking Asian woman with 10 other guys?

    I suspect many women would like two husbands but would never admit to it. Women are wiser about not admitting to things that aren’t viable anyways. Not most women but a sizable minority.

    Can’t wait to eat popcorn and watch libs fight over this one. My guess is that typical liberal lesbians (lesbian by lack of options) will be first to line up and tell us why this is different than gay marriage. The man hating squad will be firmly against polygyny but then will have to explain to women seeking polyandry about how that isn’t a ‘right’ but gay marriage is.

  72. As says:

    Polygamy is legal in India, but for Muslims only.

  73. @Ghost of Bull Moose

    I agree with your post — except for the ‘will be’. I suspect the point at which precious immigrants started being admitted in extended polygamous family units has already passed, at least de facto.

    I wonder how many of those Gambians in the awful fire in NYC, for example, are actually in polygamous families.

  74. @AnotherDad

    I don’t think that’s the core problem. I’m dubious how well “guys who do very well” correlates with “exceptional men” in terms of productive societal contribution. There’s some relationship as it involves health, symmetry, often some verbal facility. But was Thomas Edison hitting it? Orville and Wilbur? Ben Franklin–ok.

    I do pretty well in both areas but I will be the first to tell you that women aren’t attracted to me for the right reasons. I am happily married but if I had to go pick up a woman tomorrow I wouldn’t bother with dragging out accolades. Sure they like to see that stuff for a long term relationship but it isn’t required.

    1) Once women have “been around” especially with a man they really desired (“alpha”), even if they can later settle for another man, the chance of divorce is high. Basically this situation wrecks women for socially stable marriage/family relationships.

    Are you saying once they get a taste of an alpha male it is harder to settle? I don’t think that is the main problem. Divorce is more likely to happen over money. There is also a correlation with people getting married too early. But I do think it can a problem for some couples if a woman sleeps around a lot before marriage. Definitely not the norm though as most women want a long term relationship.

    There is definitely a problem with women waiting for a man that doesn’t exist. More of a problem in urban areas though. Out here in rural America we have a lot of overweight women that would simply like a man that is drug free and employed. Looks or personality are definitely not a requirement.

    2) A whole bunch of men are “left-behind”.

    Definitely a problem and liberalism/modernism has nothing to offer other than blaming men. Our conservatives are twits and have nothing to offer either.

    I have single friends and I really don’t know what to do about them. To be honest I have no doubt it would be easier for me to add a wife if it were legal than help them. I already have the house and seal of approval from a woman. Only minor caveat is that I don’t think my wife would go along with it.

  75. anon[314] • Disclaimer says:

    On that note, Scott Alexander announced his marriage in his most recent post. I was somewhat touched, right up until the part in the comments section where he said, as an aside: oh by the way, my wife and I are both poly and we have an open relationship.

    https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/theres-a-time-for-everyone

    • Replies: @Hermes
  76. Alfa158 says:
    @Coemgen

    Any of them depending on the moment.

  77. Brutusale says:
    @Ben Kurtz

    We never voted for it. It was a gift from the courts.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodridge_v._Department_of_Public_Health

    The lesbian couple whose name is on the case endured TWO whole years of wedded bliss.

  78. @AnotherDad

    ‘Let’s politely but firmly insist we do the split–America and Rainbow.’

    ‘We simply need to make our voices heard.’

    We’re trying to do that in Oregon. So far, no joy.

    Portland and Eugene outvote everyone else.

    • Agree: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  79. @kaganovitch

    C’mon, man! Since 1960 we have rearranged our society to accommodate first blacks, then feminists, then poofters, and then trannies. How could polyamory make it worse? /sarc

    USA today told us that pedos are misunderstood so that is coming down the pike too: https://www.foxnews.com/media/usa-today-blasted-promoting-complicated-pedophilia-study

    • Replies: @teo toon
  80. @Mike Tre

    Already happening in the UK with Pakis.

  81. Hell on Earth multiplied!

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  82. @Altai

    Thanks, Altai — that is weird, but almost brilliant. It’s an artifact of a decadent age, that’s for sure.

  83. @Joe Stalin

    That is what I imagine with two wives.

    Most guys probably might imagine more sex partners but I imagine all the nagging the next morning.

    Not that my wife nags a lot but White women are multipliers.

    Two White women nagging over the same house project would be like facing a building committee.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  84. White nerd cult figures like Robert Heinlein and Robert Rimmer helped to romanticize polyamorous relationships in their novels a couple generations back. Also several prominent figures in the early 20th Century lived in de facto polygamous situations, like the psychoanalyst Carl Jung, the physicist Erwin Schroedinger and the psychologist William Moulton Marston (creator of Wonder Woman). Can’t exactly blame this trend in the culture on Jews, though of course Jews will hijack it for their own purposes.

  85. @Jonathan Mason

    Just keep it out of the Arlington National Cemetery … 

  86. Yeah, that’s all good and nice, but what is the actual state law on the books?

  87. @John Johnson

    There were two Nigerian full brothers who had a web page arguing against polygamy because they couldn’t stand growing up in a polygamous household with all the drama.

  88. nebulafox says:
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    1) You, ma’am, can give birth. I can’t.

    2) You are valued simply by virtue of existence, at the very least as long as you can. I never will be at any point in my life, ever: I will always have to bring something to have anything. But I also have time where you don’t, and have options for an interesting life without children beyond 40 in a way you don’t precisely because I don’t have your obvious ability to have a child and your innate drive to have one. (What? You think men make families for the hell of it absent anything else like you would?) You do no favors to your son, if you have one, by telling him otherwise on this.

    Difference between sexes in a nutshell. Think it’d be for the best if everybody accepted this and understood that people have their own crosses to bear, not better, not worse necessarily, just difference.

    Men and women should like each other. For God’s sake…

  89. @Half Canadian

    More KY Jelly for that slippery slope.

    So we can’t climb back up? We hit bottom years ago.

  90. SFG says:
    @Charles Pewitt

    Well, there’s a connection. As in Scandinavia, they’re super liberal because their baseline rate of dysfunction is low and therefore their defenses are down.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  91. @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    Yes, I remember when the 1990s gay activists were offended–so offended! horrified!–when all those knuckle-dragging hicks said acceptance of gay marriage would lead to polygamous marriage. It was almost a point-and-sputter response, so ridiculous was the idea that allowing loving homosexuals to practice their love would at all create any such degeneracy.

    Pedophilia is a harder sell, but we’re being groomed for it next. I don’t know where animal love will be on the ladder, but it could conceivably jump kiddie love, especially since we’re halfway there with the furries.

    I didn’t dream China and Russia would be the last lines of defense for civilization. The West is toast.

  92. SFG says:

    So, I knew a bunch of techie types back in the day (late 90s, early 2000s) and they were doing this stuff.

    It’s actually a fairly sensible solution for techies-they’re low T so they don’t get into fights and there are not enough women to go around. It gets more problematic with manlier guys-you may remember the case the media was trumpeting with the lady with four guys and one baby, and supposedly none of the guys cared whose it was. A few months later, the baby was found injured and it turned out to be the one of the four who didn’t look like a total dork.

    I agree with what the other commenters said above-most guys won’t stand for that sort of thing, and you will have a lot of unpaired men floating around like free radicals, causing uncontrolled reactions.

    Monogamy was a conspiracy by mediocre men to make sure every man got a woman. I think we will all miss it when it is gone.

  93. njguy73 says:
    @Steve Sailer

    No, I will not make a joke about being 3/5 of a wife.

    Not me. No way. Never.

    • LOL: Nicholas Stix
  94. syonredux says:

    Dr. Amos Meeks, newly minted Harvard Applied Physics Ph.D. and chief science officer of a start-up, looks like he’s descended from a long line of characters in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter.

    Amos Meeks is a perfect name for a weaselly baddie in a ’50s Western.

  95. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arlington%2C_Massachusetts

    “is a town in Middlesex County, Massachusetts, United States, six miles (10 km) northwest of Boston. The population was 46,308 at the 2020 census.

    … The legislative branch is a Representative Town Meeting, presided over by the Town Moderator, and is made up of 252 Town Meeting Members. Twelve Town Meeting Members are elected to staggered three year terms from each of the 21 precincts. [Yes, 252 = 12*21] Article LXXXIX Section 8 of the Massachusetts Constitution permits towns with a population greater than 12,000 to adopt a city form of government. The Town of Arlington meets the population requirement to become a city, but has not done so, in part because it would lose its ability to engage citizens in local government under the Representative Town Meeting form of government. Annual Town Meetings begin in April on the first Monday after Patriots’ Day, and are held two nights a week until all items on the town warrant are resolved, and generally last three to four weeks.”

    So a town of 46,308 has 252 legislators, which comes to 46,308/252 = 184 residents per legislator.

  96. Yawn. Polygamy sucks – as any man who’s tried it knows. It’s a bottomless time sink. King Solomon was vexed till his dying day by his 700 bishes.

  97. teo toon says:
    @Jim Don Bob

    I earnestly hope the Russians get here first.

  98. @Colin Wright

    ‘Let’s politely but firmly insist we do the split–America and Rainbow.’

    ‘We simply need to make our voices heard.’

    We’re trying to do that in Oregon. So far, no joy.

    Portland and Eugene outvote everyone else.

    This is the sort of practical step we actually need to see to make real headway.

    Oregon (like Washington) splits somewhat naturally–though i’m sure there are a few hundred thousand folks in the “wrong” place. If those counties to vote for independence that
    a) make the important point about who is oppressing whom
    b) gets the ball rolling

    This would be blocked by the Oregon tyrants. But once the votes there, a Republican Congress could grant them statehood. All it takes is a start and the great unravelling–and sanity restoration–could get rolling.

  99. @nebulafox

    I know men who don’t like women and women who don’t like men. They are incomplete and damaged people.

    • Agree: John Johnson
  100. @SFG

    I agree with what the other commenters said above-most guys won’t stand for that sort of thing, and you will have a lot of unpaired men floating around like free radicals, causing uncontrolled reactions.

    Polygamy is quite common and the market for it is obvious–some guy (ex. the King) is a big swinging dick and has lots of resources.

    It’s hard to see how there would be any market for polyandry–as an official “marriage” type thing. The only places i’ve heard of it existing are places with extreme resource scarcity and even then only when with genetic relatedness of the males. (I.e. two brothers can not divide their mediocre plot, but between then can support a wife.)

    Obviously, guys will bang almost anything. They’ll always be some guy willing to bang some other guy’s wife or girlfriend. But … that guy isn’t going to invest in that woman while she’s with someone else. And if some guy was so pathetic that he would consider that … is that a guy a woman wants?

    Men and women are simply not the same–not the same in what they bring to the table and ergo not the same in their sexual needs/wants nor what they require for a committed relationship.

  101. syonredux says:

    As Steve is taking a consequentialist angle on the polygamy question, let’s take a gander at Matty Yglesias’ stance on the eternal battle between consequentialism and deontology:

    He [Charles Mills] argues that philosophy as a field has been basically covering up the significance of Kant’s profound racism and that Rawls and the whole Rawlsian tradition are engaged in “white ignorance” and obfuscating many of the key issues in politics.

    Mills on Kant
    Kant’s ethical works that normally get assigned don’t say anything about race and are all about how people need to respect each other and treat each other as ends-in-themselves and not means. But he has other writings that are pioneering works in the then-new field of scientific racism that are normally just ignored.

    Not anymore, dear boy. From personal experience, I can tell you that every reference to Kant in today’s academia must be followed by some pro forma condemnations of his anti-Black ideas…

    Mills argues, convincingly in my view, that this makes a hash out of the actual intellectual history of the western world. The western states that operated under the influence of liberal political thought in the 19th and 20th centuries did so in some extremely racist ways.

    Vs the non-racist actions of states in the 15th and 16th centuries, where men were free and equal and ethno-racial bias was a foreign concept..

    Those practices of enslavement, indigenous genocide, and imperialism are often portrayed as contrary to the ideas of mainstream liberalism.

    Uh, Matt, hate to break this to you, but enslavement, indigenous genocide, and imperialism have been around for a very long time….I mean, you took philosophy at Harvard, so I’m pretty sure that you must have read about how the Greeks were rather keen on slavery, and how Aristotle believed that some men were “natural slaves”…And the Roman conquest of Gaul would definitely meet the standard WOKE definition of genocide…And Imperialism goes back to Ancient Mesopotamia…

    But the fact that one of the leading lights of said liberalism was also super-racist

    Love that recondite, Harvard-man vocabulary!

    puts this into doubt. Mills says we should read Kant’s ethics in light of his racism and see that he arguably really was saying that Black people and Native Americans were sub-humans who are excluded from the Kantian circle of mutual respect. There’s a tradition in American jurisprudence that reached its apogee in Dred Scott which says that we are living in a society of white people who have rights as per the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, but that Black people do not have rights that white people are bound to respect.

    A big part of Mills’ intellectual project is trying to urge people to take this racial contract vision of herrenvolk liberalism seriously

    Whoa, you can tell that Matty has been triggered. He’s using German

    [MORE]

    and not just see it as a sloppy error or casual bias. Kant’s contractarian is a game of insiders and outsiders in which he explicitly leaves non-human animals as outsiders whose interests we don’t have to care about. Liberal polities often acted as if non-white people are also outsiders whose interests we don’t have to care about — in Mills’ view, in part because this is what foundational figures in liberalism said.

    As opposed to how Blacks and Amerinds were treated back in the 16th and 17th centuries…

    And this is what Mills means by racial liberalism — liberalism for white people.

    Today, of course, we know that liberalism is for BIPOCS….

    To use an example that’s not in Mills’ book, after the Civil War, factions emerged in the Republican Party. The more moderate faction that opposed Ulysses Grant and wanted to throw African American rights under the bus for the sake of white reconciliation was called the Liberal Republicans. Because even the anti-slavery version of American politics was split between a faction that actually cared about Black rights and a faction whose primary interest in halting the spread of slavery was to preserve western lands for white settlement.

    Dunno, Matt. Some people squared the circle by both thinking that Black slavery was bad for both Whites and Blacks….

    There’s no hidden file drawer of Rawls doing racism.

    One can always hope….

    Mills’ point about Rawls is that it’s extraordinary to publish a book in 1972 on the subject of justice and have nothing to say about racial justice. Not everyone is attuned to every issue, but even the most clueless white person imaginable who was born in 1921 couldn’t possibly have missed Strom Thurmond’s third-party run in 1948,

    Which failed…

    the Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954,

    Which ruled against segregation..

    the murder of Emmett Till,

    Emmett Till! the single most important human who ever lived, rivaled in world-historical importance only by GEORGE FLOYD!

    Seriously, Matty, Emmett Till is famous because lynching was pretty much a dead issue when he died. If he had been lynched back in 1905, no one would remember his name.

    the congressional fights over civil rights in 1957 and 1960, the subsequent and more successful fights in 1964 and 1965,

    Yeah, the losses in ’57 and ’60 look kinda unimportant compared to the big wins in ’64 and ’65…

    the George Wallace campaign in 1968,

    Another failure…

    and the assassinations and riots that also happened that year. This was a big deal in a kind of obvious way.

    Yeah, the assassination of RFK was totally about Black rights…

    And Mills shows that in subsequent works, Rawls would kind of occasionally concede that he’s skipping over something important. But then across a multi-decade career, he never gets around to addressing it. Instead, when he expands his vision to consider international relations in “The Law of Peoples,” things get worse as he’s sweeping aside the way that many modern states are post-colonial entities

    Like Korea…

    while many others are settler-states founded on expropriation.

    Like Israel…

    I think that in practice, if not in academic philosophy, consequentialism continues to be extremely important. The burgeoning effective altruist movement is grounded in consequentialism. Most of the leading thinkers in the animal welfare movement are grounded in consequentialism.

    If you eat a cow, you’ll eat a human….

    There is potentially fruitful work to be done in the vein of a racial justice critique of consequentialism,

    If a million people benefit from the extermination of 100 people…

    This is obviously a complicated subject, but I think the big frustration with affirmative action from a racial justice standpoint is that it just hasn’t proven to be a lever that actually accomplished very much. Thanks to affirmative action, my quarter-Cuban self from an affluent family in New York got to be a below-average student at Harvard rather than going to Cornell or the University of Chicago, but an admissions boost at the most selective colleges in America does not actually do anything to help the majority of Black or Hispanic people who are not attending selective colleges at all. And here, I do think a Rawlsian perspective at least raises a pertinent question — shouldn’t our efforts at justice be aimed at helping the most disadvantaged people?

    Gotta do the pivot here….I’ve established my anti-Rawlsian, punch-YT bona fides…Now I can sneak in some Big-Tent- Old -School-We’re-All-In-This-Together liberalism…

    But I would just say in the vein of reparations being underrated that at this point, what I think the reparations movement needs is a clearer political program. In my lifetime, I’ve seen two boomlets of interest in reparations — one sparked by Randall Robinson’s 2000 book “The Debt” and then a more recent one sparked by Ta-Nehisi Coates’ article “The Case for Reparations.” These are both good, intellectually influential works.

    Lukewarm. Matty. Shoulda said that they surpass both Kant and Plato in terms of wisdom…

    It’s not 1989 anymore and racial justice is a big topic for philanthropy — MacKenzie Scott Bezos alone gave over \$500 million to these causes last year. Funders should convene their own panel of experts and stakeholders to think in a comprehensive way about what they want to advocate for. In “From Here to Equality,” William Darity and Kirsten Mullin outline a program for \$11 trillion in cash payments from the federal government to the Black descendants of people held in bondage in the United States. Is that, all things considered, a smart thing to spend time and energy pushing for? Is there a smaller program that might be easier to achieve but that would still be worthwhile? I think the points about the pitfalls of ideal theory cut in both directions to an extent, and you don’t achieve racial justice by counting the angels on the head of a needle.

    Maybe we can pump the breaks a little?

    But he does at a couple of points stop to consider what kind of political vision would fulfill his ideas of an appropriately radical and de-racialized liberalism. He says that “the natural constituency is, of course, the population of color would be the obvious beneficiaries of the end or considerable diminution of white supremacy”

    The pain that BIPOCs suffer from being surrounded by YT’s evil is immense…

    He sketches two possible paths to this:

    A “centrist strategy” that offers the argument “that in a sense racism hurts everybody given the costs of racial exclusion.”

    A “left strategy” that aims “to disaggregate the white population and target in particular those whites who benefit less from white supremacy: the working class, the poor, the unemployed.”

    Later, Mills mentions Piketty’s work on inequality and offers the “hope that an increasing number of the white poor/white working class may begin to wake up to the reality that the prospects for their children and grandchildren under plutocratic capitalism — albeit white-supremacist plutocratic capitalism — are not that great either.”

    This seems very appealing to me.

    Big Tent, baby!

    But the people who I normally see citing Mills are people who I also normally see saying that my ideas are wrong and bad.

    A man alone…

    I don’t want to rehash points I’ve made a million times before (see here, here, here, and here for some non-paywalled flavors), but this sounds to me primarily like a program for race-neutral economic redistribution.

    Can’t we all just get along?

    Not necessarily dogmatic adherence to the idea that policy needs to be “race-blind” at all times and in all respects, but also not a politics centered on a push for an \$11 trillion reparations campaign. After all, while it’s true that “the population of color” would in some sense “be the obvious beneficiaries of the end … of white supremacy,” it’s not the case that Hispanics or Asians or other ethnic or cultural minority groups would benefit from Darity’s reparations program. Even if you are simply seeking non-white allies, you need an agenda with broader appeal.

    America ain’t a Black and White country anymore…..

    https://www.slowboring.com/p/charles-mills-black-wrong-white-rights

    *Of course, as we all know, it’s really the polygyny question….

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @New Dealer
  102. @SFG

    Monogamy was a conspiracy by mediocre men to make sure every man got a woman.

    No, not really. That whole sentiment is a piece of manospheric dreck born of the incel mindset. It has nothing to do with reality.

    Monogamy is all about property, specifically the transmission of inheritable wealth and honors to the legitimate heirs. It is a lofty ideal that has as its root the care of the young (that is, of the future).

    Derivatively, the monogamous marriage is also about the preservation of the social order. The idea of such a marriage is bound up with the notion that a man has a duty to beget heirs who will replace him and carry on his function, whether that be plowing a particular clod of earth or working a trade or administering a domain. The failure to do so leaves a hole that injures the social organism, which makes each marriage something that interests the entire community and which alone explains the dense tissue of preservative laws that surround it.

    Without this notion of property and the prerogative of inheritance and duty, the whole meaning of marriage falls apart. This is what we see in our own times, as the rise of individual liberty and liquid wealth has coincided with the collapse of marriage and privilege. We have lost the ideal of marriage because we have previously lost all reverence for things it was meant to preserve.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
  103. Dr. Meeks describes his applied-science project as:

    I am the Chief Scientific Officer at Irradiant Technologies, a small startup working to commercialize the Implosion Fabrication technique (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/362/6420/1281), which allows for complete three dimensional control of sub-wavelength, multi-material structures for photonic and other applications.

    This sounds like an imaginary technology from a science fiction story.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  104. @The Last Real Calvinist

    The people who I’m not thrilled to see are polyamorous are like the people who I’m not thrilled to see are nudists.

    • Agree: JimDandy
  105. @nebulafox

    Men and women should like each other. For God’s sake…

    Exactly … we’re supposed to be complementary. Better together than apart.

    One of the tragic successes of minoritarianism was minoritarian feminism selling a bunch of women on the “oppressed by men!” narrative.

    Now a lot of women carry this thing around, looking for slights and ready to whine about stuff that is either “baked in” or doesn’t even exist. (Tortured “pay gap” stats are a standard.) And then on top of this female careerism, the welfare state, modernity and now the internet, games, cell phones have men and women just drifting further apart with less perceived need for each other. Women no longer think they need men. And both men and women can easily spend more time in sex specific echo chambers.

    The people–including groups (religious, ethnic, etc.)–who do not go down this route will be the ones to populate the future.

  106. @syonredux

    ‘…Mills says we should read Kant’s ethics in light of his racism and see that he arguably really was saying that Black people and Native Americans were sub-humans who are excluded from the Kantian circle of mutual respect…’

    Whoa there, Bessie! I can’t go along with that with respect to Native Americans, not at all.

  107. @AnotherDad

    Basically non-monogamy–whether the current sexual marketplace or outright polygamy–is a program for destroying the pro-social, civilization building characteristics of both men and women.

    Spot on.

  108. @Mike Tre

    Can’t wait for a Somali municipal worker to get his 3 wives and 11 children enrolled in state funded medical insurance.

    No man can handle two Somaliwomen, let alone three. Not even the Thin White Duke.

    Iman + Ayaan + Ilhan = 🔥🔥🔥

  109. Mr. Anon says:
    @kaganovitch

    I used to think the same of WW “T”, which is just a few years old and yet has already laid waste to vast swathes of our culture. Insanity moves very swiftly these days.

    What Adam Smith said is true: “There is a great deal of ruin in a nation”.

    What he didn’t count on however is that there isn’t necessarily a limit on the rate at which that ruin is realized. You might call it a “ruin-power”.

  110. Rob says:

    Let’s say I have two wives. What’s the legal relationship between the two women? Are they married? Say wife one wants a divorce. Are wife 2’s assets on the table? What’s to stop me from transferring all my property to wife 2? The divorcing wife, is she entitled to half my assets? One third? For convenience, my wife one has one kid with me. Wife 2 and I have 2 kids. Both wives dir before I do. Does wife one’s one kid get half my money and wife 2’s get a quarter each? Does each kid get a 1/3? I guess if I leave a will, the will determines that. But if I die without one, what’s the default? Hell, wife 2 dies. Is wife one entitled to any of her stuff?

    So wife 1 divorces me, but wife 2 is awfully fond of 1’s kid. Does she get visitation rights?

    I got guess a lot of lawyers will eat well while the courts decide.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  111. Charlotte says:
    @Dr. X

    Jeffs “married” underage girls; that’s what landed him in prison. I’m not sure to what degree the law is enforced otherwise.

    Jon Krakauer wrote a book, Under the Banner of Heaven, that deals with Mormon polygamy both historical and modern. It’s rather interesting. My favorite bit was how God revealed to Joseph Smith that he should sleep with good-looking young things, and also he shouldn’t tell his wife about it. Apparently, God knew what he was talking about, because Mrs. Smith was not pleased when she found out.

    • LOL: YetAnotherAnon
  112. Cato says:

    This is a cause that Larry Elder should embrace. It would encourage paternal investment in offspring: women might choose to share the few high-income men who want children, rather than trying to catch one of the losers.

    To be clear, heterosexual monogamy, which was once the foundation of our civilization, seems the safest bet for a stable and advancing civilization. But not everyone can fit that mold. Polygyny in the ghetto could make the ghetto a much less deviant environment.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  113. syonredux says:
    @New Dealer

    This guy just reeks of White cis-het privilege. Let’s swap him for a glamorous BIPOC actress. For extra credit, have her LARP as some kind of lipstick Lesbian:

  114. @James N. Kennett

    Steve sometimes describes the Left’s political coalition as a circular firing squad that is only kept from self-destruction by perpetual focus on the normal white enemy, which is true, but there are synergies in the Left’s coalition.

    This is a great example where the permanent civil rights march of ever more absurd boutique identities by sterile obscurities such as Amos Meeks blazes a trail for the pool of infinite future Muslim immigration to follow. Were Muslim polygamists actually in power, they would probably stone Mr. Meeks and his polyphile crew to death, but in our late stage liberal democracy, the latter build the on-ramp for the former, and all congratulate themselves on sticking it to The Man.

    • Agree: James N. Kennett
    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
  115. @New Dealer

    Notice in the recast Four Freedoms (the four-panel image) that Euros are scarce and people over 50 are absent. The old have been disappeared.

  116. Anonymous[149] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    It’s already quite common in places such as the section of the Bronx where the fire recently occurred for an African Muslim man to buy a two or 3 flat type house and install 1 wife and her kids on each floor.

    Polygyny is eugenic.

  117. @Cato

    Polygyny in the ghetto could make the ghetto a much less deviant environment.

    They already have this but without the paternal investment, so it’s making things even worse, not better. They need to leave the gun, take the cannoli leave the polygyny, take the paternal investment.

    Well, polygyny with paternal investment could be better than what they have now, but that would be due to the paternal investment, which they don’t have, rather than due to the polygyny, which they already have.

  118. Anonymous[149] • Disclaimer says:
    @mc23

    Great thinkers, from Aristotle to Aquinas, across a span of almost 2000 years have observed that three generations are needed for immigrants to fully assimilate with their new country.

    Does that mean the fourth generation is assimilated, or the third?

  119. @syonredux

    Mills is a nobody in political theory.

    Yglesias is not fit to examine Kant’s stool (Immanuel beseeched visitors to examine and comment on the quality of his feces).

    Matt is a pseud. http://www.compulink.co.uk/~stevemann/pseuds.htm

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  120. @New Dealer

    Notice in the recast Four Freedoms (the four-panel image) that Euros are scarce and people over 50 are absent. The old have been disappeared.

    The original “Four Freedoms” speech was fraudulent to the core. Why would you expect anything different now? That’s like saying the SPLC “changed” since its founding. (Or the Democratic Party, for that matter.)

    Why Rockwell sucked up to that speech is a mystery. Perhaps he’d listened to the wrong neighbors– his Worcester County went GOP in 1932, then no more. Those immigrants’ kids could vote. And did.

  121. @SFG

    Well, there’s a connection. As in Scandinavia, they’re super liberal because their baseline rate of dysfunction is low and therefore their defenses are down.

    I think genes are the better explanation.

    Egalitarian genes are favored where co-operation is required. Areas with cold winters require a lot of co-operation.

    Those genes are then exploited by globalists/Marxists. The world becomes the in-group.

    • Replies: @SFG
  122. @New Dealer

    Yglesias is not fit to examine Kant’s stool (Immanuel beseeched visitors to examine and comment on the quality of his feces).

    Perhaps that’s why he never left his hometown, and died a virgin? Not the best way to impess the ladies.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  123. @AnotherDad

    The only places i’ve heard of it existing are places with extreme resource scarcity and even then only when with genetic relatedness of the males. (I.e. two brothers can not divide their mediocre plot, but between then can support a wife.)

    Yes it has occurred in Asia under those circumstances but history isn’t always a good guide for clowntown.

    Obviously, guys will bang almost anything. They’ll always be some guy willing to bang some other guy’s wife or girlfriend. But … that guy isn’t going to invest in that woman while she’s with someone else. And if some guy was so pathetic that he would consider that … is that a guy a woman wants?

    You are actually on to the scenario in which it could transpire.

    Two tech types are happy to have a girlfriend even if they are sharing since the area is stacked against men. Basically Redmond Washington. Could also happen in a military area.

    Some lame-o woman really doesn’t like either of them as a singular but will take both as a package. An otherwise mediocre woman that likes the attention from showing off that she has two men.

    The problems will occur when someone wants children. But in most cases that won’t be a factor since so many of these tech types buy into liberalism and think they shouldn’t have children anyways cause climate change/overpopulation.

  124. @Reg Cæsar

    The original “Four Freedoms” speech was fraudulent to the core.

    Agree.

    Why Rockwell sucked up to that speech is a mystery.

    Though he was a talented artist, he was politically naïve. He was simply led by the zeitgeist or his third wife.

    his Worcester County

    Do you mean Berkshire County? Per Wiki, Berkshire County went GOP as recently as 1984, but the Republicans were clearly a tough sell there after Coolidge. Can’t say if it was immigrants’ kids that changed the voting so much as decadent-stage New England Whiggism.

    Rockwell was born a New Yorker. He also lived in Vermont and briefly in California.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  125. @New Dealer

    That’s because everyone is unemployed or working off the books, so no one is paying Social Security or Medicare taxes and so the elderly all die off.

    Also, of course, it’s because they want to make the hell world they are cooking up appear youthful and glamorous rather than squalid and dysfunctional.

    It is telling that in order to make all these fraudulent images, they have to photoshop in all the disparate faces of the Coalition of the Fringes members. They are not naturally in one room together.

    • Agree: S. Anonyia
  126. syonredux says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    YT is always plotting behind closed doors…

  127. So basically marriage, a one-man/one-woman (now “two partner”) legal union for the orderly generational transfer of property and prevention of rampant bastardhood, has been supplanted by legalizing the very chaos it was created to prevent.

    Polygamy is another ((( planned rung ))) on the descending ladder of degeneracy, with legalized _______ at the very bottom.

  128. Anonymous[159] • Disclaimer says:

    Actually, Steve, no one can really doubt that polygamy was the norm that our species observed all through its long, long, multi millennia evolutionary history – right up to as recently as the beginning of the christian era – and doubtless, this is true for absolutely every ethnicity and culture that now exists – or did exist.
    So, really it’s nothing more than a recapitulation of our true nature, which has been unnaturally repressed by overbearing ‘moralistic’ forces, which in reality are political in origin.

    The innate tendency of human females is to choose to cohabit and copulate with men of wealth, power and fame – as Henry Kissinger famously said ‘power is the ultimate aphrodisiac’. Witness the sexual success of pop stars. In this context, the polygamous status of the pop star, billionaire, public intellectual, artist, athlete, potentate etc matters not a damn to the women who literally throw themselves at them.

    Conversely, even the humblest and low status of men innately desire as much sex as possible with as many women as possible, although this is thwarted.

    This is seen, literally, in every single one of the billions of cells in our bodies. Y chromosomes generally descend from a small packet of Kings and Conquerors of ancient times.
    Mtdna, is just an all round mixed bag.

  129. Ed says:
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Just read this in fact:

    Although Mr. Touray died in 2019 at age 81 of heart failure, about 50 members of the immediate and extended family were living in the building at the time of the fire, according to one of his sons, Suleyman Touray, and Mariama Touray, who is married to one of his nephews. Following the norms of his culture and religion, Mr. Touray had three Islamic-law wives who still lived in the apartment on the third floor. Two of his widows were placed in hotels; the third had been visiting Gambia at the time of the fire.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/12/nyregion/gambian-residents-bronx-apartment-fire.html?referringSource=articleShare

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  130. Most conservatives, and liberals for that matter, seem to be radically underestimating how much our new digital world is changing human behavior. Steve, for example, continually acts as if 19th century understanding of morality continues to have some kind of relevance to our 21st century world. Unfortunately, it does not, no more than the moral behavior of 14th century Aztecs or 3d century BC Babylonians. I don’t particularly like this new world but attacking this modern post-gender understanding of polyamory by comparing it to 19th century Utah or pre-digital African/Islamic countries is simply irrelevant. Maybe polyamory really does make sense in a fluid digital world where people seem to have a very tenuous hold on reality and personal relationships seem to be fluid.

    More relevant, and still unknown, will our digital civilization actually be able to survive in a world where pre-digital cultures continue to exist? I suspect not. Just as literate Rome and Song China were overrun by pre-literate nomadic tribes with a higher predisposition to violence, the digital West will inevitably succumb to waves of African immigration over the next decades. But if some decadents want to play at polyamory during the End Days it really won’t change much.

    • Agree: Forbes
  131. @Bernard

    Serial monogamy is generally a better set up for men than polygamy – unless you are stupid enough to end up with numerous alimony settlements. In the modern world polyamorous relationships seem to be mostly driven by women – it allows them to have both an attractive sexual partner and a reliable emotional partner, and most modern American men seem incapable of filling both roles.

    • Replies: @SFG
  132. @Almost Missouri

    Meeks is a “useful idiot” for Muslim and African immigration. Af least the original “fellow travellers” realised in some vague way that they were facilitating Bolshevism. Meeks and his like are blissfully unaware. They really are idiots.

  133. @Ed

    Following the norms of his culture and religion, Mr. Touray had three Islamic-law wives who still lived in the apartment on the third floor.

    Ah, so polygamy is already well and truly here, but the NYT is spinning it as “Islamic-law wives” so nothing to see here whitey! Are you Islamic? No? Then this doesn’t concern you. It’s an Islamic thing. You wouldn’t understand. Mr.—that’s “Mister” to you—Touray was just “following the norms of his culture and religion”! Didn’t you see that? We put those words in there for a reason!

    What? Are we Islamic at the NYT? No, we’re not, but we’re multicultural, which means we can pass judgment on anything. Unlike you, who’s just whitebread. No culture at all. Your opinion doesn’t count.

    • Replies: @Ed
  134. @Anonymous

    I see how the argument works on paper, but why in reality have the polygynous lands been so dysgenic while the monogamous lands have been so eugenic?

    • Replies: @SFG
  135. SFG says:
    @John Johnson

    True, but the Vikings were hardly SJWs.

    It’s nature plus nurture; it usually is.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  136. SFG says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    Truly horrible (from the Christian or civilizational point of view) piece of anecdotal data: a few years ago on OKCupid I used to run into women who had opened up the relationship because they weren’t getting the kink they craved.

  137. Gordo says:

    You mentioned this nine years ago:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/why-polygamy-will-eventually-be/#comments

    I remember commenting that the UK welfare state already accommodated Muslims in this regard.

  138. Coemgen says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Somerville, MA – former residence of Barack Hussein Obama:
    https://patch.com/massachusetts/somerville/barack-obama-once-called-somervilles-winter-hill-home

    That’s Winter Hill as in the “Winter Hill Gang” formerly led by the late James “Whitey” Bulger.

    Mike Capuano, who kept a seat warm in U.S. Congress until Ayanna Pressley could blow in Chicago, is from neighboring Spring Hill.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
  139. NickG says:

    Tech guys sharing a woman,

    Actually, this sort of gal is traditionally known as a bicycle….

  140. Lurker says:
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    I think those nerds picture themselves with a couple of hot women (or even just one!). But one outcome will be Donald Trump types with a collection of model wives instead of one after another.

    • Replies: @SFG
    , @guest007
  141. @stillCARealist

    I’m not sure it will be “mostly gay men that want it.” You and I know that by far the majority of prostitution comprises women providing sexual services to men.

    Why should that be outlawed by the state? (Please, I am playing devil’s advocate here.) It exists everywhere. You cannot eliminate it, so why not regulate it? When you legalize something (and that simply means removing old laws that used to make the thing illegal — it doesn’t mean condoning or promoting it) you open up opportunities for you, The People, to apply standards for public safety.

    Prostitution is legal in some places. Amsterdam. Nevada. Probably others I don’t know about. Health standards are enforced in those places. So far, the end of the world has not happened in any of those places.

    My view is that mostly women who work in the sex business would want it to be legal. It goes on anyway, in full view of “the authoritays.” (And yes, as I’ve said before, I’ve known women in the business. They were, for the most part, intelligent and in control of what they were doing.)

    Ask yourself: Why are sexual services illegal? Massage is legal. Chiropractic is legal. They are physical services. Why not this?

  142. SFG says:
    @Lurker

    It’s not just nerds. Lots of guys like to fantasize about being the guy with 100 wives, though in fact you’ll just be one of the 99 guys with no wife. (Preindustrial societies did not have the wealth to accumulate the levels of inequality we do…can you imagine how many wives Leonardo DiCaprio in his prime could accumulate?)

    In all my life I only got one guy to realize this, and he was an ex-nerd.

    I do think polyandry would take off some of the strain at the low end, but it will never work as well-the women will always be looking to marry up, and the dudes will fight each other.

  143. nebulafox says:
    @John Johnson

    I don’t agree. Speaking as someone who works in tech, the problem with this is that even among the most Aspergery, un-confident men, the amount of guys willing to accept “sharing” a woman-at least in the way that “polyamory” suggests-is extremely limited. I’m sure they exist, but they are a minority.

    No amount of cultural conditioning or nagging can erase fundamental biological imperatives, for either sex. For men, accepting an arrangement where you’ll end up taking care of a “co-husband’s” child is as repellent on a core, gut level as being paired with a penniless manchild who cries at the first difficulty is for women.

    The mundane reality from what I’ve seen is that most socially awkward tech guys have traditionally ended up married with traditional family arrangements in the end. They might be “late starters” more often, but they get there in the end. I think this is less likely to change for them given their financial status than for poorer men. Worst comes to worst, they can attract foreign brides. And TBH, tech guys are more likely to have been into redpill stuff than one might imagine.

  144. Anonymous[159] • Disclaimer says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Germany legally tolerates prostitution and state licensed brothels.

    Strangely, this is going against the grain of the classically pussy-whipped Scandinavian nations which are criminalizing prostitution – particularly the male customers – to an ever greater extent.
    If anything, the trend in Merkel’s Germany was to ‘liberalise’ prostitution to an even greater degree. Even more strangely, the once rabidly man/punter hating British far left seems to be tending to the ‘toleration’ model, which I am led to believe is the ‘trendy’ opinion in woke circles.

  145. SFG says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    So you’ve known women in that line of work? Some of us still remember the other use of the word. 😉

    Seriously, I had the sense it was mostly women who were the big opponents of decriminalization, for the obvious reason-competition! There was actually a split in the feminist movement back in the eighties on this issue and pornography as well, with some women just wanting to sleep around (this was the ‘sex-positive’ variety) and others wanting to totally restrict male sexuality (this was the ‘anti-porn’ variety).

    If you want a laugh, punch the names of a few leaders in each camp into Google Images. Lesbians like Gayle Rubin aside, it’s not too hard to figure out why, say, Susie Bright and Andrea Dworkin wound up on the sides they did.

    New Zealand has legal prostitution, but It’s Kinda hard to traffic people there for obvious reasons. It’s legal in Germany, but I think they did have problems with trafficking (I could make some mean joke about German women but I won’t).

  146. Brutusale says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Monogamy is all about property, specifically the transmission of inheritable wealth and honors to the legitimate heirs. It is a lofty ideal that has as its root the care of the young (that is, of the future).

    This is why Heinlein thought that line marriage was best. Preservation of capital and uninterrupted care of the children.

    • Replies: @SFG
  147. First of all, I think the wars to Legalize incest and pediphelia are in close competition with the war to legalize polygamous and polyamorous relationships for the next World War. Look in Vice, Vox, Slate and those other liberal magazines and you’ll come across all the opinions piece saying arguing that love is love and therefore incest and man-boy love/ man-child love should be Decriminalized, or at very least DEstigmatized. The idea of consenting children in the latter seems to be no issue, which is interesting because these same people are also the same people crying ‘me too’ and ‘believe all women’. I guess it’s a who whom kind of thing?

    Second, I don’t think people have made the argument that polygamist countries are marginalized. At least not in the liberal web zones. They say that polygamy is more of an enlightened way of being. Kind of like how nudism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was painted as a return to nature or a practical outlet for humanism.

    You’ll also see a lot of these polyamorous people are involved with yoga or meditation groups. So it is an exotic non western influence that is at play here, just that influence is the Indian subcontinent. Have you seen wild wild country on Netflix? I’d highly recommend it. I think free love gurus like Osho are more mainstream now than they were in the 70s or 80s thanks to YouTube and the internet. Similarly, the nudists of 100 years ago were sun worshipers and members of other fringe religious groups, which seem to be uniquely American.

    • Troll: guest007
    • Replies: @Anon
    , @James J O'Meara
  148. SFG says:
    @Brutusale

    I tend not to take science fiction writers too seriously on human relations. It’s not their strong point.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  149. Finally, a way for the Third World to get rid of surplus unmarried daughters.

    The scam is simple: marry them to an American passport holder – there’s no limit. The new ‘wife’ then claims the ‘marriage’ broke down, and she throws herself at the mercy of the welfare services. She then receives a welfare subsidized apartment and EBT, while pumping out anchor babies.

  150. @SFG

    Susie Bright and Andrea Dworkin

    Indeed there you have it.

    I could make some mean joke about German women but I won’t

    German women make good dominatrixes.

    • Replies: @SFG
  151. @Anonymous

    Every once in a while one is reminded that 85 is only the average, not the floor.

  152. guest007 says:
    @Lurker

    Look up the term “Lost Boys” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_boys_(Mormon_fundamentalism)

    The way that polygamy usually works is first by older men marrying younger women while running off a lot of the younger men is various fashions.

  153. guest007 says:
    @Dr. X

    Warren Jeffs also committed fraud, cheated on his taxes, an embezzled from the goverment. Remember, it was Texas that knew enough to not let him get a foothold in a sparsely populated county in Texas.

  154. @SFG

    Whaddaya mean, robot women and galactic federations aren’t good analogies to life on Earth?

  155. @Buzz Mohawk

    Most homo men have been to a prostitute, either explicitly or implicitly. Very few normal men do this. Also, elite homo men are at the forefront of every agenda to push perversion.

    As to why prostitution should remain illegal, and have those laws enforced, you can clearly see. Drugs, trafficking, abuse, disease, abortion, manipulation, blackmail, filth. Plus, it’s terrible for a society trying to encourage families and children.

    The only person I’ve known who engaged in actual paid prostitution was a guy who had scary drug debts. I’ve known women who were quite promiscuous, and they were seriously messed up on drugs and alcohol. There were very dark times for these people.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  156. @epebble

    Traditional polygamy and modern polyamory are very different things.

  157. @AnotherDad

    Polyandry was not long ago widely practiced in south Asia and Tibet. Usually, a wife would be shared by a group of brothers. This fraternization of the practice probably made it more workable by mitigating sexual jealousy between co-husbands. India’s national epic, the Mahabharata, was about such a family. I would imagine that the gender imbalance caused by female infanticide was what necessitated the practice.

  158. Jack D says:
    @Anonymous

    Not necessarily the American version where the wives all draw welfare benefits.

    An as AM says, if that is true, why are the places where it is practiced usually shitholes?

    Why did the Church opt for monogamy? Was it just something that they inherited from the Romans or did they have reasons of their own? And was monogamy (fairly unusual in the ancient world) partly responsible for Roman success?

    • Replies: @Flip
    , @Thrallman
  159. @Almost Missouri

    Do you mean Berkshire County?

    Oops. Thanks. I thought it was Berkshire, but confused Stockbridge with Sturbridge, which is in Worcester. Berkshire actually went for FDR all four times. The neighboring counties in Vermont, New York, and Connecticut did the opposite.

    Can’t say if it was immigrants’ kids that changed the voting so much as decadent-stage New England Whiggism.

    Unlikely. Yankees were the most consistent Republican voters of the day. Colleges wouldn’t have been the difference that early; the few students that voted did so at home. Artist colonies, perhaps?

    Rockwell was born a New Yorker. He also lived in Vermont

    The Bronx until high school. Westchester and Vermont were staunchly anti-FDR.

  160. @Anonymous

    In a pre-modern society without a social welfare system, this is arguably true, since the ability to provide for multiple wives is arguably a good proxy for superior genes. In a society such as ours, however, the institution simply favors grifting scumbags and moronic, strutting popinjays. Without taxpaying beta males to support them and their bastard offspring, these pseudo-alpha males would be strung up from the lampposts by the real alphas in short order.

    And even in pre-modern societies, while eugenic, polygamy is still anti-civilizational. You think all those leftover men are going to meekly accept their sexual disenfranchisement? Don’t bet on it. The early Mohammedans weaponized their surplus men and sent them into the neighboring countries to kill the men there and take their women. What will we do with ours?

    • Agree: Hermes
    • Replies: @John Johnson
  161. @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Hell, the polyamorous nerds are bad enough by themselves to oppose recognition of polygamy. Especially if there are children present in the arrangement; an unrelated “partner” living in the house increases the chance of child sexual and physical abuse.

    These nerdy polyamorous relationships can get pretty weird, too: I know of one where it’s two women and three men living together. And another where it’s three men, two of who are “trans women.” The latter group often begs for money to fund their lifestyle. These aren’t friends, just people I met and briefly associated with in college, that I now observe from a distance on social media.

  162. @SafeNow

    Some people in my neighborhood have a definite “trash vibe”! Aka the “bad-credit vibe”.

  163. Over 20 years ago, neocon Stanley Kurtz began warning about this. Although I’ll be celebrating my annual 21st birthday this spring–my chief of research will soon be older than me, and I’ve lived in neighborhoods where Steve could be my great-grandfather–I can remember when neocons were good for something.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  164. @SFG

    True, but the Vikings were hardly SJWs.

    It’s nature plus nurture; it usually is.

    Yes and they really don’t have any more Vikings. The Vikings probably acted as a check against egalitarian madness.

    I really think most of their stronger/aggressive men migrated. Mostly to the US and Germany would be my guess.

    Stockholm and Portland are actually quite similar. A bunch of confused and submissive White men desperately trying to feel “progressive” while their women appear bored and unsatisfied. Both cities could use a Viking infusion.

    This was actually one of Nietzsche’s concerns. The European man becomes too weak from egalitarian rule.

  165. Flip says:
    @Jack D

    I would think that polygamous societies are worse because the non-elite men have less of a stake in society if the elites are scooping up a disproportionate amount of the women.

  166. @advancedatheist

    Implosion Fabrication technique

    The opposite, Explosive Fabrication, is pretty cool too…

  167. I have the intuition, based on some hipsters I knew in NYC years ago, who also looked quite like Dr. Meeks (including one who was famed for his mastery of age of consent laws in New England states, which helped out on weekend jaunts to various colleges) that “polyamory” is less like Muslim polygamy and more like a in-house cucking arrangement. Much better than relying on online matches. (Hey, that’s “the conservative case for polyamory!” Domesticate what you can’t eradicate).

  168. @nebulafox

    “the amount of guys willing to accept “sharing” a woman-at least in the way that “polyamory” suggests-is extremely limited”

    Back in the mists of time I was sharing a girl with a guy up the road (another friend) for a couple of months. The concept of Friends With Benefits didn’t exist then.

    I can honestly say I wasn’t jealous, although I sometimes missed having her in my bed.

    The 1970s were great fun to be young in, but plenty of its chickens are flying home now. Here’s an Alpha Mayall of that era, bemoaning having to share his girl and trying not to catch feels. Wonderful sax and guitar from Johnny Almond and Jon Mark.

  169. @New Dealer

    “However, the polyfidelity arrangements didn’t keep people from fighting or being unhappy and some members report that they weren’t any more happy in these arrangements than they had been in monogamous relationships. ”

    You just can’t make some people happy. Especially those dour New Englanders.

  170. @nebulafox

    I don’t agree. Speaking as someone who works in tech, the problem with this is that even among the most Aspergery, un-confident men, the amount of guys willing to accept “sharing” a woman-at least in the way that “polyamory” suggests-is extremely limited. I’m sure they exist, but they are a minority.

    I’m sure in polls they would seem un-interested and it would seem out of character.

    However when guys in a dry spell get a taste of tang they will accept all kinds of things.

    Most women are similar in that they wouldn’t support polygamy in a poll but if it came down to kids or no kids they would sign up. Note that the pushback against Mormon polygamy was always external.

    No amount of cultural conditioning or nagging can erase fundamental biological imperatives, for either sex.

    That is actually why it would work in men or women. The biological imperative is reproduction. I do believe monogamy is part of human nature but it is only secondary. That is why society ends up with so many single moms when monogamy isn’t enforced.

    The mundane reality from what I’ve seen is that most socially awkward tech guys have traditionally ended up married with traditional family arrangements in the end. They might be “late starters” more often, but they get there in the end.

    Not in areas like Redmond and the same is true for military areas. The numbers just aren’t there. They aren’t going to meet women that don’t exist due to supply and demand. You don’t hear about them because they stop socializing with couples. Or they just completely check out.

    It is societal wishful thinking to believe that they all end up fine. There is a similar problem of liberal women in the cities becoming cat moms.

    I think this is less likely to change for them given their financial status than for poorer men.

    This is actually the problem. In military or tech they aren’t competing against poor men like TV tells them. TV tells them that they will have the advantage over some poor redneck. In reality they are competing against each other on equal financial ground while some poor redneck in a small town actually has a girlfriend.

    I have a friend that makes around 220k and has this very problem. The women in his area don’t care about his salary because there are plenty of average men with a 6 figure salary. They correctly deduce that their lifestyle won’t change much if they marry someone in the 80-100k range that has additional qualities. This idea that all these women line up once you make that kind of money is a lie. He even tried the “cool car” and it totally failed. Meanwhile you can find guys in my small town that work at Jiffy Lube and have a family.

    I don’t have the answers but this is a major problem. I’m not suggesting polyandry but it wouldn’t surprise me at all if it gained popularity in military and tech areas. It comes down to supply and demand. Share a woman or no woman.

  171. @Muggles

    “Three people in a marriage? What could go wrong…?”

    Polygamy only works in an actual patriarchy, as in traditional Muslim lands or perhaps frontier Mormonism (both modeled on OT patriarchs). Frithjof Schuon pointed out that granting Muslims the “right” to have up to four wives was not an invitation to swinging, since it was only allowed if one could properly support all those women. Hence, the Sultan and his harem, no so much the ordinary guy. Really designed to facilitate commercial and dynastic marriages, preventing Henry VIII situations.

    In Manos: The Hands of Fate, the Master awakens his dozen or so zombified wives, and there’s an immediate hard cut to the next scene, with him looking dejected as the wives are arguing off screen. As the MST gang points out, he’s clearly regretting the decision: “What was I thinking?”

    https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2Foriginals%2Fa9%2F7f%2F4c%2Fa97f4c4abb3915a561217945fcb46f5b.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

  172. @Nicholas Stix

    Over 20 years ago, neocon Stanley Kurtz began warning about this. Although I’ll be celebrating my annual 21st birthday this spring–my chief of research will soon be older than me, and I’ve lived in neighborhoods where Steve could be my great-grandfather–I can remember when neocons were good for something.

    Neocons get bashed around here for having too many bagel eaters but they at least understood human nature. Strauss understood that you can’t have a society that is just left to secular liberalism and the market.

    Our doofus conservatives have a hard time thinking critically about culture and fertility. They seem to reject thoughtful analysis of what makes a society function.

    They’d rather just wave a flag and pass around some lame joke about Pelosi.

    When did Con Inc allow in so many nitwit leaders? It almost seems like a conspiracy. I have been around many conservatives and I cannot believe how many really do just cling to church/guns/minimal government as some eternal solution that we don’t need to question.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  173. SFG says:
    @Almost Missouri

    1. The genes for attracting women aren’t the same as the genes for building a good society. Bad boys are sexy but absolutely disastrous on a mass scale.

    2. Monogamy makes women available to less sexy men, who then can invest in society and their children instead of fighting over women.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  174. @epebble

    It’s hard to make the case for polygamy being “evil” or “destructive of society” when the OT is full of it. Same with slavery, of course. The usual “conservative” view is that once you start daring to question the morality of the OT you start on the slippery slope to all this “libberall” stuff.

    This is one of those areas where it’s easy to be more “conservative” than the “conservatives,” where the latter are really just bourgeois, not “radical Traditionalists.”

    Evola is a good example (“Burn down the opera houses!”) and especially his fictional counterpart, Chaim Breisacher in Thomas Mann’s Dr. Faustus, based on a real guy, Oskar Goldberger, a Jewish scholar who terrified the Conservative “Revolutionaries” with his “barbarism is the new avant garde” mentality. Even the Prophets and Solomon were “degenerate liberals” for him; forget the temple, bring back blood sacrifices in the desert!

  175. @New Dealer

    The Four Freedoms (from Want, from Fear, of Speech, of Religion) were illustrated on the endpapers of my primary school history book in 1960s UK.

  176. @John Johnson

    ” many of these tech types buy into liberalism and think they shouldn’t have children anyways cause climate change/overpopulation.”

    If only Greta Thunberg’s parents had followed that advice.

  177. @SFG

    Nations should be free to make their own laws (duh) but if one wants to argue for or against legalized prostitution it’s hard to make the case that it leads to the collapse of civilization. Germany, France, Netherlands, etc. are or at least were far more “civilized” than the USA, which as someone said is the only nation to pass from barbarism to decadence without becoming civilized.

    It’s probably derived from the Puritans LARPing as OT Hebrews, where temple prostitution is abominated. As per usual, it’s likely the Hebrews projecting their own temple cults. The Jewish role in prostitution and sex trafficking is of course OK with them, since it only harms the goyim.

    It’s like the conservative hysteria over age of consent laws; as if Vermont and New Hampshire were not totally indistinguishable, despite having different ages.

    • Agree: Ian Smith
    • Replies: @Ian Smith
  178. Jack D says:
    @John Johnson

    When did Con Inc allow in so many nitwit leaders? It almost seems like a conspiracy. I have been around many conservatives and I cannot believe how many really do just cling to church/guns/minimal government as some eternal solution that we don’t need to question.

    Generally speaking you can critique “bagel eaters” for being a lot of things but dumb isn’t one of them. As they have lost prominence in the Conservative movement (along with Buckley style non-Jewish intellectuals) they have not bee replaced by other intellectual heavy hitters. The academy is more and more Leftist. So the Conservative movement by default has become dominated by those who were left – the church/gun/isolationist crowd.

    It’s just as well – American voters don’t really like intellectuals – witness Biden.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  179. Alrenous says: • Website

    Polygyny is human and normal.

    Polyandry is perverse and unworkable.

    Polygamy is a weird conflation of the two, likely to hide the fact that 15% of men or so can successfully pull off polygyny and the rest would have to settle for polyandry.
    Checksum: two women can be pregnant by one man at the same time, but one woman can’t be pregnant by two men at the same time.
    Double check: jealousy makes men lethally violent. Jealousy makes women horny. Turns out Darwin was aware of the first check.

    Monogamy is sociologically superior to polygyny, but you can’t ban polygyny for the highest tiers of men regardless. They always end up with mistresses or side pieces.
    Radical egalitarianism means pretending every man can pull up multiple women, despite certain mathematical difficulties regarding the whole 1:1 ratio…

    • Replies: @Jack D
  180. syonredux says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    “A German produces on average twice the feces of a Frenchman. Hyperactivity of the bowel at the expense of the brain, which demonstrates their physiological inferiority”

    -Umberto Eco, THE PRAGUE CEMETERY

  181. Jack D says:
    @Alrenous

    OTOH, Darwinian evolution favors (in many species, including humans) that only the fittest males get to impregnate females, such that it is estimated that a very high % of all the men who ever lived (the metaphorical but not actual ancestors of today’s incels) have no living descendants. This way weak, slow, defective genes tend to disappear from the gene pool.

    OTOH, this seems to lead to a few hypermasculine males running everything (see silverback gorillas, Mongol hordes) which is not really a good model for Western civilization. Generally speaking those societies that allowed average men to reproduce and not just the top 15% created Western civilization.

    It’s probably wise to have cutoffs on both ends (guys like kings always had mistresses on the side and you really don’t want the bottom of the barrel losers to reproduce) but if you can fix it so that the middle 70 or 80% or so of men can have one mate that seems to lead to the highest levels of development.

  182. syonredux says:

    Meanwhile, in Hollywood….

    Hollywood will barely dare whisper it but the woke revolution that has driven out white men and ensures that every production is ideologically sound will kill the entertainment industry, writes PETER KIEFER and PETER SAVODNIK

    A few years ago, the editor-in-chief of The Hollywood Reporter pitched a story to the newsroom.

    He had just come back from lunch with a well-known agent, who had suggested the paper take a look at the unintended consequences of Hollywood’s efforts to diversify.

    Those white men who had spent decades writing scripts—which had been turned into blockbuster movies and hit television shows—were no longer getting hired.

    The newsroom blew up.

    The reporters, especially the younger ones, mocked the idea that white men were on the outs. The editor-in-chief, normally self-assured, immediately backtracked. He looked rattled.

    After the meeting, a reporter approached another editor about pursuing it. The editor told the reporter to drop it.

    No one, he said, at The Hollywood Reporter—one of a handful of trade publications that covers the ins and outs of the entertainment industry—was going to risk blowing up their career over this.

    Hollywood had always pushed boundaries—from the 1947 ‘Gentleman’s Agreement,’ which confronted antisemitism, to ‘Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner’ (1967), which tackled interracial marriage, to ‘All in the Family’ (1971-1979), which grappled with race and women’s liberation.

    The original run of ‘Will and Grace’ (1998-2006), did more to advance the cause of gay marriage than anything else pre-Obergefell.

    And then there were the villains: The vast majority—from the Terminator to Hannibal Lecter to Gordon Gekko—were uber-white: an Austrian (robot), a Lithuanian, a WASPy, pinstriped capitalist. (For the insider’s list, see this from The Hollywood Reporter.)

    But it wasn’t until 2015—when the #OscarsSoWhite controversy engulfed the 87th Academy Awards—that studio chiefs and producers really started to rethink how they did business.

    in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE).

    For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said ‘only select staff’ would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024.

    Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season.

    To help producers meet the new standards, the filmmaker Ava DuVernay—who was recently added to Forbes’ list of ‘The Most Powerful Women in Entertainment’ along with Oprah Winfrey and Taylor Swift—last year created ARRAY Crew, a database of women, people of color, and others from underrepresented groups who work on day-to-day production: line producers, camera operators, art directors, sound mixers and so on.

    The Hollywood Reporter declared that ARRAY Crew has ‘fundamentally changed how Hollywood productions will be staffed going forward.’

    More than 900 productions, including ‘Yellowstone’ and ‘Mare of Easttown,’ have used ARRAY Crew, said Jeffrey Tobler, the chief marketing officer of ARRAY, DuVernay’s production company.

    Privately, directors and writers voiced irritation with DuVernay, who, they said, had exploited the ‘post-George Floyd moment.’ But no one dared to criticize her openly. ‘I’m not crazy,’ one screenwriter said.

    ‘Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,’ one writer said.

    One showrunner, afraid to send his emails to us out of fear of them accidentally winding up on the wrong screen, agreed to show us correspondence with agents, writers, and studio chiefs that capture the new thinking at the highest levels of the Hollywood food chain.

    Sitting in his office, in a casita behind his house and next to the pool, we scrolled through the emails on his laptop:

    ‘This one a dead end — they are going to limit search to women and bipoc candidates’

    ‘How tied to hiring him are you? There are some internally that don’t like the idea of hiring a white guy. I wish I had a better way to frame it. Hate this sh[**].’

    ‘Studio now telling us this job must go to a female / bipoc writer. Sorry — it sucks’

    Exhibit A: ‘Woke.’

    The comedy series, which premiered on Hulu in September 2020, should have been the statement on America right now. It’s about a black cartoonist who is awakened to systemic racism after a run-in with the cops.

    The show started off on the right foot: the showrunner, Aeysha Carr, and the writers room she oversaw, delivered a strong batch of early scripts, according to several writers on the show.

    Then the producers weighed in.

    ‘The notes were all so sanctimonious,’ one writer said. ‘It was never supposed to be as serious as it was. We wanted a thought-provoking show that made fun of woke culture and explored notions of what a black artist’s life would be like in San Francisco among white liberals. But we could only punch down at the safest targets’—white men.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10391261/Hollywood-barely-whisper-wokeness-kill-industry-PETER-KIEFER-PETER-SAVODNIK.html

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Joe Stalin
    , @Anonymous
  183. one woman can’t be pregnant by two men at the same time.

    Wrong.

  184. Jack D says:
    @syonredux

    In the movie The Front, which takes place in the 1950s, a television screenwriter Alfred Miller is blacklisted for being a Communist and cannot get work. He asks his friend Howard Prince, a restaurant cashier and small-time bookie, to sign his name to Miller’s television scripts in exchange for ten percent of the money Miller makes from them, i.e. to serve as a “front” for Miller. Howard agrees out of friendship and because he needs the money. The scripts are submitted to network producer Phil Sussman, who is pleased to have a writer not on the television blacklist.

    In the 2022 remake, a television screenwriter Alfred Miller is blacklisted for being white and cannot get work. He asks his friend George Floyd, a porn star and small-time drug dealer, to sign his name to Miller’s television scripts in exchange for fifty percent of the money Miller makes from them, i.e. to serve as a “front” for Miller. Floyd demands 90% and when Miller refuses he shoots him and takes his scripts. The scripts are submitted to network producer Phil Sussman, who is pleased to have a writer who represents the Black felon demographic.

    Seriously, I have been thru this with school “group projects” – all that is going to happen is that half as many white men are now going to have to do twice the work on every show, while the BIPOCs sit around and drink Coke.

    • Agree: bomag
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
  185. Hermes says:
    @anon

    What else did you expect from that creepy autistic weirdo?

    • Replies: @SFG
  186. @syonredux

    This week’s CW network Lois & Clark features the new Superman as becoming a globalist and no more America First for the Kryptonian.

    Superman rescues a North Korean submarine in the beginning to kick off the revised super-hero. The worm turns.

    https://www.cwtv.com/shows/superman-and-lois/what-lies-beneath/?play=d9614d2f-0b3b-403b-8aad-f6469f203cbc

  187. Truth says:

    Countries where polygamy is legal:

    Countries where beastiality is legal:
    https://mapsontheweb.zoom-maps.com/post/189083304545/legality-of-bestiality-by-country

    Strangely, not much ovelap

  188. @SFG

    I’m aware of those as intellectual principles. What I’m asking is why in actual polygamous societies, where the “good” male genes should be enjoying a multiplier effect, they typically do not produce either men or women who are very attractive or capable.

    On paper polygamous societies should have better genetics due to greater (male) genetic attrition, while monogamous societies should have bought social peace at the cost of preserving somewhat inferior genetics. But when you look around the world, that’s not what you see. Monogamous societies’ genetic stock looks pretty good, while polygamous genetic stock is … well, third world. Granted that lately Western (“monogamous”) genetic stock has been deteriorating, but coincidentally the West is simultaneously giving up on monogamy. I think that really is just a coincidence, but whether it is or not, polygamy’s got some explaining to do. Where’s the Polygamy Dividend?

    • Replies: @SFG
  189. Anon[409] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad

    Men and women are simply not the same–not the same in what they bring to the table and ergo not the same in their sexual needs/wants nor what they require for a committed relationship.

    What would you say it is that men require for a committed relationship?

  190. @Jack D

    My daughter had school “group projects” in STEM courses at VA Tech. She hated them because she and one other kid did all the work but everyone got the same grade. But it was easier for the prof to grade 5 projects rather than 20, plus he didn’t have to fail any POCs. Win win for the school.

  191. Brutusale says:
    @Coemgen

    Whitey only led the Winter Hill Gang because Howie Winter went inside.

    Fun fact for movie fan Steve: Alex Rocco (born Alexander Petricone Jr.), who played Moe Green in The Godfather, was a young thug with the Winter Hill Gang. The Irish Gang War that took place in Boston during the 60s started because the member of the rival Irish gang hit on his girlfriend at a Labor Day party on Salisbury Beach.

  192. Anonymous[786] • Disclaimer says:
    @syonredux

    Lifelike CGI is coming. It’s going to dramatically reduce the costs of making TV shows and movies. Big studios and networks are going to be hit hard by this even if they make shows people want to watch, which they’re not, because of this woke obsession. (It will be ironic if the BIPOC take over the industry just before it collapses.)

    (CGI is already having a serious impact in the field of still photography. The ‘bread and butter’ of photographers – things like photographing items in sales catalogs – is increasingly moving to CGI, because it’s faster and cheaper. There’s lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth on photography forums over this, but the trend is unstoppable.)

  193. Ed says:
    @Almost Missouri

    Yup NYT is already on board the polygamy train.

  194. Anon[809] • Disclaimer says:
    @ginger bread man

    Look in Vice, Vox, Slate and those other liberal magazines and you’ll come across all the opinions piece saying arguing that love is love and therefore incest and man-boy love/ man-child love should be Decriminalized, or at very least DEstigmatized. The idea of consenting children in the latter seems to be no issue,

    A viable movement, one with mainstream support, for the normalization of sex with prepubescent children? Is there really compelling evidence of that?

    Or a trend that would place the US more in-line with Europe with regard to post-pubescent adolescents?

    @mc23:

    When does World War P for Paedopedia kick in?

    When pedohysteria ceases to be such a useful weapon to wield against one’s enemies?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @Hermes
  195. @Anon

    Both the left and the right now and then catch somebody in the opposition being a pedophile, so there’s not much of a partisan tilt on the issue.

  196. Hermes says:
    @Anon

    A viable movement, one with mainstream support, for the normalization of sex with prepubescent children? Is there really compelling evidence of that?

    No, and there also are no articles on Vice, Vox, and Slate arguing that love is love and therefore incest and man-boy love/ man-child love should be Decriminalized, or at very least DEstigmatized. (There have been occasional pieces saying we should be more understanding of the idea that this is an affliction some people didn’t choose to have, so we can get them therapy and help them avoid abusing children, but none that come within a million miles of arguing that it’s OK or should be destigmatized for adults to do sexual things to children.)

    For some reason there’s this weird belief among some segments of the online right that the left is pro-pedophilia, but it’s not based in any sort of reality.

    • Agree: syonredux
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  197. @Hermes

    Right. Pedophilia is the only sexual kink you are still allowed to hate, so lots of people hate it and are sure their enemies love it.

    • Agree: Hermes
  198. @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    And even in pre-modern societies, while eugenic, polygamy is still anti-civilizational. You think all those leftover men are going to meekly accept their sexual disenfranchisement? Don’t bet on it. The early Mohammedans weaponized their surplus men and sent them into the neighboring countries to kill the men there and take their women. What will we do with ours?

    European countries have done the same thing many times.

    Excess population in the cities? Time to acquire some new territories.

    Wouldn’t have been so bad if Napolean and Hitler had looked overseas for land.

    Napolean’s wars were so dysgenic that the French men actually lost 1 inch in height.

  199. @Jack D

    The academy is more and more Leftist. So the Conservative movement by default has become dominated by those who were left – the church/gun/isolationist crowd.

    It’s just as well – American voters don’t really like intellectuals – witness Biden.

    Just as well??? They have no strategy and the left knows how to hang them in a debate.

    Con Inc has married themselves to a horrible idea which is “private everything even if we can’t explain why” and left can just talk about something like health care and all the right can do is mumble and fumble. We saw that in the Trump/Biden debate. Bannon was right that Trump needed to go center on health care and ignore the nutcase libertarians of the party.

    The US right also won’t touch race which lets allows the left to be protected from their main weakness.

    The Achilles heel of the left is race and always has been. It is like kryptonite to them.

    Our GOP however still loves finding a Black conservative like Larry Elder even if polls show that Blacks consistently vote Democrat 90% of the time. BUT THIS WILL CHANGE EVERYTHING U GUYZ…..HE IS BLACK.

    The GOP seems to have zero memory. If a strategy fails it will only be a few years until they try it again. HEY LOOK WE FOUND A BLACK GUY.

    Not that I have any hope for the GOP. The only way out of this mess is a populist alliance with Catholic Hispanics. No more tax breaks for the wealthy or defending private health care.

  200. @stillCARealist

    As to why prostitution should remain illegal, and have those laws enforced, you can clearly see. Drugs, trafficking, abuse, disease, abortion, manipulation, blackmail, filth. Plus, it’s terrible for a society trying to encourage families and children.

    I don’t think so at all. Most men would not choose prostitutes over marriage. Prostitution was once common in the west and men still sought out families.

    The advantage of prostitution is that it balances out the dating market, especially one where there are too many men.

    Women that are homely can’t act as if they are the only game in town. They can’t string out a man on sex if he can just go pay for it directly.

    In fact I would argue that polyandry could take off because prostitution is no longer allowed in most states.

    Prostitution has always been a threat to undesired women. They don’t like the competition as they benefit from keeping the market restricted. It isn’t “by chance” that so many anti-prostitution activists are rough around the edges.

  201. SFG says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    You subby guys…I feel so sorry for you. Never enough dommes to go around. 😉

  202. SFG says:
    @Almost Missouri

    I agree with you, those are the facts!

    You’re asking the mechanism? I would guess the Big Men/alphas who have all the wives and pass on their genes have traits that don’t lead to stable societies…too many dudes with giant egos talking about themselves and getting into fights.

  203. SFG says:
    @Hermes

    It’s the whole culture over there. There aren’t enough women to go around so they share.

    The bride looks…how you would expect. No makeup, glasses, and very pale.

    Honestly they’re probably well suited for each other. I kinda feel like the culture let *them* down…50 years ago they’d just be a stable, dowdy academic family a la Milton and Rose Friedman. Now they’ll probably split up in 3 years, albeit on amicable terms.

    • Replies: @Hermes
  204. Hermes says:
    @SFG

    I don’t follow Scott, but I have the vague recollection of reading somewhere that he’s not originally from the SF Bay Area. I could be wrong, but if I’m right, he chose to move to a super-high-cost-of-living area with a dearth of women.

    He posted a screenshot of a tweet at the very beginning of the post linked upthread about how he met his wife at a naked party. Ladies and gentlemen, your psychiatrist, proud naked party attender!

    https://lorienpsych.com/

    He’s definitely got more than one screw loose. I wonder if his getting married means he has terminated his bizarre practice of living in a house with 8 other people despite having a multi-six-figure income?

    • Replies: @SFG
  205. @ginger bread man

    “the nudists of 100 years ago were sun worshipers and members of other fringe religious groups, which seem to be uniquely American.”

    Actually, the nudists and sun worshipers of 100 years ago were Germans, some of whom migrated to California (in search of the sun, I suppose) and were the first “hippies.”

    Just ask Steve:

    June 27, 2012
    Did hippies have German roots?
    Back in the 1960s, where did hippies come from? They emerged with incredible suddenness over about a one year period between 1966 and 1967. Did they have any precursors? My new Taki Magazine column considers the question of one luridly famous example of social change to see if the more things change, the more they stay the same.

    Read the whole thing there.http://takimag.com/article/the_original_nature_boys_steve_sailer#axzz1yyVmEzBZ

  206. Anon[418] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Pedophilia is the only sexual kink you are still allowed to hate, so lots of people hate it and are sure their enemies love it.

    It also helps that so much of what people call “pedophilia” is not that at all but various proclivities and phenomena that are (at a minimum) far more common.

    Male attraction to the post-pubescent, adolescent female? Entirely normal, as John Derbyshire and any number of others have defiantly pointed-out. (There are, of course, compelling social and moral arguments for constraining such impulses.)

    Female attraction to the fresh, still-tender adolescent male who, although not yet fully developed, is nonetheless both quite capable as well as quite eager to please her carnally? Not quite fully normal, perhaps (for the adult female, that is), but hardly the most unwholesome of fancies.

    Adult male attraction to the younger, adolescent male? A particularly and especially complex, complicated and fraught area, this one is. Suffice it to say for now that if the historical record and any number of other pieces of evidence are any indication, then such inter-generational male homoeroticism has always, at a minimum, been both far more common as well as far more accepted than the adult-to-adult quasi-/pseudo- monogamous model for which toleration acceptance exuberant veneration of is presently de rigueur.

    All of the proclivities covered by the above outline are commonly referred-to indiscriminately as “pedophilia”. Preposterously broadly (and inaccurately) defined thusly, there are very few men who could not be branded with the radioactive “pedophile” epithet, and at least more than a very few women who could be.

  207. Thrallman says:
    @Jack D

    One theory is that monogamy has an advantage because poor women can’t marry up. They have no choice but to reproduce the productive, peasant class. Otherwise they would join a prince’s harem and breed effete nobles.

    For example, Saudi Arabia imports a lot of foreign labor, because their own people cannot bear the shame of menial work.

  208. Anonymous[702] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    In the 1970s, there was a big and serious push by the European left to ‘normalize’ frank, outward, explicit, unabashed paedophilia.
    The trendy lefties of that time saw it as another ‘liberation struggle’ – and thus a chance to earn some trendy cooties and make a name for oneself.

    Daniel Kohn-Bendit (or should it be Child-Bandit?) the leader of the 1968 Paris rebellion literally gushed over his sexual abuse of kindergarten age children.
    In the UK the late unlamented untalented Harriet Harman MP worked assiduously to defend paedophiles.

    • Replies: @Alrenous
    , @Anon
  209. Alrenous says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    NAMBLA still exists. (If you need to google it, treasure your ignorance, and don’t.)

    It’s not like persecution is impossible: ever seen a Klan cell with more members than feds? Got any neo-nazi organizations that can meet in public?

    So. It’s an intentional choice to not persecute open incitement to lawbreaking.

    I personally think this is one of the hard lines that’s immune to Sophistry. It will never be normal to be naked in public, and soliciting pre-pubescents will always be criminal. You can’t trick someone into thinking they want creepy old men approaching them as a kid, nor can you trick parents into thinking it’s good for their kids.

    • Replies: @Athenian Gentleman
  210. Anon[982] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    In the 1970s, there was a big and serious push by the European left to ‘normalize’ frank, outward, explicit, unabashed paedophilia.

    Could you, perhaps, provide some citations* for your claims? That could allow us to judge how objectively accurate your characterizations are.

    *To the individuals-in-question own words, in context; not merely to other third-party characterizations and polemics.

    literally gushed over his sexual abuse of kindergarten age children.

    Literally gushed? One can imagine that (as opposed to merely gushing figuratively) as having been quite a spectacle to behold.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @Anonymous
  211. SFG says:
    @Hermes

    He lost his psych job after being outed by the NYT, and it could be a FIRE thing. Those people usually try to stop renting ASAP though, obviously, so maybe it’s a social outlet of sorts.

    • Replies: @Hermes
  212. Hermes says:
    @SFG

    I’m pretty sure his unusual living arrangements well-predated his loss of employment.

  213. Anonymous[980] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Look.

    Just Google up ‘Harriett Harman, National Council for Civil Liberties, Paedophile Information Exchange, PIE, Daily Mail’ .
    As for Kohn-Bendit just Google up his Memoires written when this bastard was a kindergarten teacher – there is copious material on both.

  214. @Alrenous

    NAMBLA […] ever seen a Klan cell with more members than feds? Got any neo-nazi organizations that can meet in public?

    What makes you think NAMBLA enjoys any more credibility, influence or even legitimacy than any of those examples you cited? At one time, perhaps, but it’s been as much a decade or two, at least, since NAMBLA has been viewed or treated much differently than NAZI-LARPER types, et al.

    It will never be normal to be naked in public, and soliciting pre-pubescents will always be criminal. You can’t trick someone into thinking they want creepy old men approaching them as a kid, nor can you trick parents into thinking it’s good for their kids.

    (Emphasis added- AG)
    Right. But what about (a) when the minors-in-question are post-pubescent adolescents; when it is said teens who do the solicting; and when the men are not “creepy” but charming, conscientious, intelligent, decent and loving? (Nor even necessarily that “old”) When such conditions are met are where (as also noted by John Derbyshire and others), matters at least begin to become more complex and ambiguous; open to legitimate debate among reasonable, responsible and decent individuals.

    But again*, who is arguing against any of the statements in your above paragraph? Anyone with any real influence or power to speak of? Statements such as yours and fringe entities such as NAMBLA would seem analgous to inveighing against the groteseque antics of, say, Westboro Baptist Church (i.e., picketing US servicemen’s funerals with signs and chants of “God Hates Fags”).

    *Yes, Anon[809] and Anon[418] were me. (The change in # was random; posting via Tor).

  215. IHTG says:

    I think any push for polyamory or polygamy will be hindered by the fact that woke people don’t actually get laid.

  216. @Steve Sailer

    Ok. But pedophilia actually is harmful, since it involves preying on non-consenting children. But a man dressing as a woman is pretty harmless. Transvestites have been known since antiquity, and I don’t see what is the problem with this. They figure even in Greek pantomimes from 500 B.C.

    Maybe the problem here is not that this is a truly objectionable “kink”, but that, as a staunch conservative, you are easily repulsed/disgusted by things that are unfamiliar to you? Psychological studies have shown that conservatives score very low in the trait they call “openness”

  217. Ian Smith says:
    @James J O'Meara

    Prostitution was legal in the medieval Europe that trad caths idealize.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
How America was neoconned into World War IV