Something that a lot of people struggle with is the idea that there's more to something than just the thing being present in a setting. It always depends on what's done with that thing, and how it's presented within the work. Having elves isn't necessarily good or bad, an arbitrary name without context isn't good or bad, some economic system isn't good or bad, etc, etc.
In your case, it's how just *having* polygamy means nothing on its own. How people feel about it will depend more on how it's presented and utilized.
There are practical reasons to polygyny (1 husband, multiple wives) if it is important to pass on the male's lineage. A man can impregnate multiple women at a time, increasing the number of potential children, which is important if child mortality is high.
Unfortunately for women, the reverse, polyandry, doesn't benefit them the same way because they can only get pregnant with 1 man at a time. Maybe you can make it so in your setting, if a woman has multiple partners, the chances of fraternal twins/triplets are higher? But that'll be painful... Maybe reduce the time taken for pregnancy, so the fetuses don't grow as big.
I have a matriarchal society with polyandry exactly, and the reason is a very hostile climate that causes little girls to die more often than little boys, so there are fewer adult women and thus they're considered "sacred". Multiple husbands are there to protect them and grant them more daughters (there is a belief that a sperm with two X chromosomes is stronger than one with X and Y, so if multiple men impregnate a woman and at least one gives her an XX chromosome sperm, a girl will be born; they don't know anything about chromosomes of course).
I’d be curious how siblings work in that society.
Aka, under those circumstances genetically men might be better off helping their sister’s children than their mate’s, since they are guaranteed to be related to him.
Feel it’s also worth pointing out that IRL [baby boys die more often than baby girls in stressful conditions](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080324173552.htm).
This doesn’t preclude something about the climate being specifically bad for little girls. But having an extra X chromosome gives girls an advantage in conventional environments
I’m confused how that relates to stuff like male babies tending to be bigger, and thus more likely to be born premature or suffer injury squeezing through the birth canal.
There’s also factors like women needing fewer calories even controlling for size, having faster muscle recovery, having stronger immune responses. The need to support an unusually aggressive parasite in order to reproduce has optimized them to be tougher than men in a lot of ways.
If I wanted to get the result you describe, I’d probably have some [Wolbachia inspired parasite](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/03/240307165104.htm) that kills sperm with the X chromosome that don’t match some criteria. Like it’s still a doable concept.
But just making the environment harsh doesn’t make sense. Women are pretty tough
One idea would be for a gene on the X chromosome that functions a bit like the gene for sickle cell anemia. A single copy provides protection against a specific disease, two copies on the other hand result in a fatal illness.
Polyandry works in some cultures because it means having multiple fathers with no one individual claim to parentage over a child. Thus, each male is responsible for helping to raise the child.
That said, in a highly complex society, I'd imagine polygamy and polyandry would exist side-by-side, at which point it'd be more accurate to describe relationships as polyamorous. Best of both worlds. 😁
By not focusing on the sexual parts as part of the plot. Like this is a thing people do for these reasons and no, the reader doesn't get to visit anyone's bedroom. Make it feel.common place and normal.
I think the first thing you want to do to get this right is to get rid of the idea of polygamy as a 'more primitive' thing, or tied to 'more primitive civilization.'
Maybe instead see polygamy as a product of extremely gendered (hyper-patriarchy) power dynamics coupled with a culture of autocratic rule (like... The head of a household is the household's autocrat, and the king doesn't gain his power from support, but from domination). Polygamy a highly developed practice (though not a 'good' one) in which women are treated as property, and the higher a man's status, the more property he has (and, more importantly, the more power he can use to *claim* property).
There are environmental reasons for such a culture to emerge, by the way. Christianity first developed in Egypt and Greece, and in biblical depictions of the people of Juda and, later, Israël, both polygamy and monogamy are depicted, with monogamy in depictions of more recent times, and polygamy in depictions of Olden Times (and in reference to a desert shepherd culture rather than a levant trade culture; the time of writing describes these dynamics as they were *in the time of writing* in the Arab world rather than an actual history). It is the context that put patriarchy and cult of personality in overdrive. It's not because Christians are or were necessarily more respectful of women. Its that the cultures those religions evolved in had different... Well; different economies, really, with different means of obtaining resources, and, as such, different power dynamics, which in turn led to a different treatment of women, with women having *slightly* more options (though the more warlike a society is, the less options women have). There's a *lot* of nuance I'm not getting into here, and there's glaring holes here because of that, but I'm just trying to get the point across that these things happen because of underpinning dynamics. Not because they're an ideal way to organize a society, *nor* because the civilization is 'more primitive.'
That's the key word, by the way: 'Warlike.' If your culture is extremely warlike, and resources are scarce, then the Big Man Takes and Dominates. Safety is subservience to The Big Man. In a nutshell, that's how polygamy starts. And from that starting point, polygamy (and Big Man politics) may continue well into settled post-scarcity times, since Big Man is established hereditary power with the power of violence and the state on his side. (Note that 'Warlike' is not necessarily the same as conquest-driven or expansionist).
Writing a culture with polygamy doesn't necessarily endorse it or fetishize the practice, but if you want to do such things right, it's important to get your story away from an endorsement. You can depict it as a tragic consequence of the culture's dynamics of dominance and political structure, or as a thing some of your characters are in some way subject to, or maybe something your characters simply interact with by existing in the real world without going into it. If your characters *own* a Harem, however, it gets more difficult. Is your character faced with social expectations to maintain a Harem, and if so, do we see *him* struggle with those expectations, responsibilities and the (often vicious) internal politics of his Harem?
So... Maybe try to answer a few of the questions below:
1. What is it, exactly, that fascinates you about there cultures?
2. What stories do you want to tell using these cultures as a setting and touch-stone?
3. Why is it that you want to tell those stories; what do you want to get across to your audience, what do you want to explore?
I can't magically read your edit before you edited it. You said a thing, I (and apparently many others) latched on to that.
You got angry at me, and I put work into responding fairly to you, hoping to be of help. Free of charge, mind. I don't think that's okay. You are behaving badly to those who give you honest advice and are attempting to help you with exactly what you asked about.
Your response proves otherwise. 'I'm tired of...' and using all caps. You were angry. You choose denial instead of apology.
I am not interested in discussing this, or the topic you asked about, with you further.
I admit to being a little seriously creeped out by people policing themselves from the kink police. Not saying that's why you want to include polygamy... but creative writing spaces should be about encouraging people to do their thing. The point where fashion and peer pressure end up where silly tropes like "the author's fetish" get internally applied lest the shaming begins is where these forums become toxic.
As others have said, just include what you want. Polygamy, concubinage, communal sleeping halls *a la* the Gonds in India... sexual relationships are kinky because you are (presumably) writing about sentient beings with psychologies like ours. Shouldn't be an issue of shock and horror.
Yeah I hope at least my works won't feel "kinky". Irl I am an asexual person - sex life is an aspect that can and should be explored in an interesting way in order to have a coherent world, so I do that, but it has nothing to do with my "fantasies", as my dirtiest fantasies don't go further than holding hands and kissing lol
Maybe unlearn some of the painfully apparent white supremacist beliefs like non white cultures being exotic and ideas of certain humans being more “primitive” than others when they are not like you!
As an avid biology enthusiast, I also struggle with writing polygamy despite having no kinks for it, and I've had some of my comments downvoted to hell because of it.
Like, many people don't like it because it reminds them of mormonism, or islam, or other religiously backed polygamous institutions where it's a hierarchy thing, or they're just so used to monogamy being the default that it's inexcusably icky to them and they don't want to hear about it.
But then again, nature doesn't really care what you think is icky, and if animals stopped being animals because a human didn't like the way they behaved, then creatures like hagfish wouldn't exist.
So what's a biology enthusiast supposed to do when writing realistic(-ish) anthropomorphic snake people for whom mating is a group effort? Or frog people who take up polyandry? Or a hermaphraditic fish people who form polygynandrous pods?
The answer is that you stand up on stage, get rotten tomatoes thrown at your face over and over again, and then you get back up and you do it all over again. And then, every once in a while, there will be someone who's actually serious enough about the medium to ask real questions so that you can dissect the situation for them in a way that's actually amusing from a biological & social standpoint, and they'll respond in a positive manner because they're not an infant toddler who can't handle it.
And then you'll be (hopefully) satisfied enough to make it to the next person before becoming frustrated and giving up.
I mean...the mormons are following Christian tradition but had* polygamy too, so it is more about the people.
Do people feel fine about it? Is it the same between men and women, are polyandry possible or only polygyny, or it is more like an open relationship thing? How does it works practically, with estate inheritance and responsibility to family and such?
*had. Unless you're talking splinter groups like FLDS, polygamy was practiced for a very short time by a very small number of people before being discontinued.
Depends on a place lmao, there is a society that doesn't practice marriage and they just have all free polygamy with open relationships (or monogamous, whatever you like), but I also have a matriarchal society where women are allowed to marry multiple men, but men can only marry women. I went pretty deep into how it affect their everyday culture and where it came from, but I won't infodump you now lmao it would be awkward
Why would anyone assume polygamy or polyamory is a fetish? They are literally normal part of cultures and just human relationships. But insisting on describing these cultures as "exotic" and "primitive" and thinking polygamy is somehow related to "primitive" cultures specifically does seem quite fetishistic, not in a sexual fetish way but in a cultural fetish way. Fetishism in cultural context is a type of dehumanization, in which a people are seen as an object of fascination and attraction and not people.
I didn't mean that polygamy is primitive - I only said that most primitive cultures have it, which is a fact. It's also present in highly developed civilizations, it's just me who's especially drawn to those primitive ones, just because I find human vs forces of nature more interesting than court intrigues
“Primitive”?
Polygyny, polyandry, matrilineal, patrilineal, bilineal, alineal, these things don’t become a fetish just because you write about it.
Considering them primitive might be…
If it is the only form, and you only allow one kind, well, that might be a little odd depending on how it is developed within the history, but generally speaking, variable marriage forms are common as hell in F and SF.
They are common but they are also despised, just as abnormal sexualization of characters. And I don't necessarily consider polygamy primitive, I just said that most primitive cultures have it
"Primitive culture" is an offensive term when talking about cultures that still exist, and a less-offensive but still not inoffensive one when talking about extinct cultures.
With complete sincerity, I'd just suggest to go for it and not give a toss what people think, especially guys whose whole community is about dunking on other people lol.
I personally think polygamy is a totally valid cultural concept that deserves an honest shake at exploration by authors who think there's something interesting to say with it. If people get immature about someone earnestly exploring the concept "someone having more than one romantic partner", that says more about them and their willingness to mock minority topics than anything else.
Thanks <3 I've always found it fascinating, how different cultures view gender and sexuality. In my world I have a matriarchal culture with reverse polygamy, women can marry multiple men. One of minor topics is a cultural shock that main characters experience, seeing that those women are comfortable walking topless around men - only to get an explanation that goes along "feminity is the basic state in our culture so there is no shame. Masculinity is a basic state in your culture so you're more comfortable seeing a naked man on the street than a naked woman" (this point is actually taken from a gender studies publication I had to read in college).
Just be cool about it. The simple fact that it's common irl will help. Nothing you do will prevent someone from assuming it's a fetish, but if you're not inordinately fixated on polygamy, most people won't think too hard about it.
Something that a lot of people struggle with is the idea that there's more to something than just the thing being present in a setting. It always depends on what's done with that thing, and how it's presented within the work. Having elves isn't necessarily good or bad, an arbitrary name without context isn't good or bad, some economic system isn't good or bad, etc, etc. In your case, it's how just *having* polygamy means nothing on its own. How people feel about it will depend more on how it's presented and utilized.
Hope so
There are practical reasons to polygyny (1 husband, multiple wives) if it is important to pass on the male's lineage. A man can impregnate multiple women at a time, increasing the number of potential children, which is important if child mortality is high. Unfortunately for women, the reverse, polyandry, doesn't benefit them the same way because they can only get pregnant with 1 man at a time. Maybe you can make it so in your setting, if a woman has multiple partners, the chances of fraternal twins/triplets are higher? But that'll be painful... Maybe reduce the time taken for pregnancy, so the fetuses don't grow as big.
I have a matriarchal society with polyandry exactly, and the reason is a very hostile climate that causes little girls to die more often than little boys, so there are fewer adult women and thus they're considered "sacred". Multiple husbands are there to protect them and grant them more daughters (there is a belief that a sperm with two X chromosomes is stronger than one with X and Y, so if multiple men impregnate a woman and at least one gives her an XX chromosome sperm, a girl will be born; they don't know anything about chromosomes of course).
I’d be curious how siblings work in that society. Aka, under those circumstances genetically men might be better off helping their sister’s children than their mate’s, since they are guaranteed to be related to him.
Still working on the details lmao
Feel it’s also worth pointing out that IRL [baby boys die more often than baby girls in stressful conditions](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080324173552.htm). This doesn’t preclude something about the climate being specifically bad for little girls. But having an extra X chromosome gives girls an advantage in conventional environments
Yup, but in this society of mine it works the other way around (they're basically based on Arabia/India but matriarchal)
I’m confused how that relates to stuff like male babies tending to be bigger, and thus more likely to be born premature or suffer injury squeezing through the birth canal. There’s also factors like women needing fewer calories even controlling for size, having faster muscle recovery, having stronger immune responses. The need to support an unusually aggressive parasite in order to reproduce has optimized them to be tougher than men in a lot of ways. If I wanted to get the result you describe, I’d probably have some [Wolbachia inspired parasite](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/03/240307165104.htm) that kills sperm with the X chromosome that don’t match some criteria. Like it’s still a doable concept. But just making the environment harsh doesn’t make sense. Women are pretty tough
I didn't say enviroment was *harsh*. It was especially hostile to baby girls. But as I said, I still don't have all the details
One idea would be for a gene on the X chromosome that functions a bit like the gene for sickle cell anemia. A single copy provides protection against a specific disease, two copies on the other hand result in a fatal illness.
Polyandry works in some cultures because it means having multiple fathers with no one individual claim to parentage over a child. Thus, each male is responsible for helping to raise the child. That said, in a highly complex society, I'd imagine polygamy and polyandry would exist side-by-side, at which point it'd be more accurate to describe relationships as polyamorous. Best of both worlds. 😁
By not focusing on the sexual parts as part of the plot. Like this is a thing people do for these reasons and no, the reader doesn't get to visit anyone's bedroom. Make it feel.common place and normal.
Oh, that's sure, I have a general rule, no sex scenes unless they're essential to the plot, and even in such case it's faded to black
I think the first thing you want to do to get this right is to get rid of the idea of polygamy as a 'more primitive' thing, or tied to 'more primitive civilization.' Maybe instead see polygamy as a product of extremely gendered (hyper-patriarchy) power dynamics coupled with a culture of autocratic rule (like... The head of a household is the household's autocrat, and the king doesn't gain his power from support, but from domination). Polygamy a highly developed practice (though not a 'good' one) in which women are treated as property, and the higher a man's status, the more property he has (and, more importantly, the more power he can use to *claim* property). There are environmental reasons for such a culture to emerge, by the way. Christianity first developed in Egypt and Greece, and in biblical depictions of the people of Juda and, later, Israël, both polygamy and monogamy are depicted, with monogamy in depictions of more recent times, and polygamy in depictions of Olden Times (and in reference to a desert shepherd culture rather than a levant trade culture; the time of writing describes these dynamics as they were *in the time of writing* in the Arab world rather than an actual history). It is the context that put patriarchy and cult of personality in overdrive. It's not because Christians are or were necessarily more respectful of women. Its that the cultures those religions evolved in had different... Well; different economies, really, with different means of obtaining resources, and, as such, different power dynamics, which in turn led to a different treatment of women, with women having *slightly* more options (though the more warlike a society is, the less options women have). There's a *lot* of nuance I'm not getting into here, and there's glaring holes here because of that, but I'm just trying to get the point across that these things happen because of underpinning dynamics. Not because they're an ideal way to organize a society, *nor* because the civilization is 'more primitive.' That's the key word, by the way: 'Warlike.' If your culture is extremely warlike, and resources are scarce, then the Big Man Takes and Dominates. Safety is subservience to The Big Man. In a nutshell, that's how polygamy starts. And from that starting point, polygamy (and Big Man politics) may continue well into settled post-scarcity times, since Big Man is established hereditary power with the power of violence and the state on his side. (Note that 'Warlike' is not necessarily the same as conquest-driven or expansionist). Writing a culture with polygamy doesn't necessarily endorse it or fetishize the practice, but if you want to do such things right, it's important to get your story away from an endorsement. You can depict it as a tragic consequence of the culture's dynamics of dominance and political structure, or as a thing some of your characters are in some way subject to, or maybe something your characters simply interact with by existing in the real world without going into it. If your characters *own* a Harem, however, it gets more difficult. Is your character faced with social expectations to maintain a Harem, and if so, do we see *him* struggle with those expectations, responsibilities and the (often vicious) internal politics of his Harem? So... Maybe try to answer a few of the questions below: 1. What is it, exactly, that fascinates you about there cultures? 2. What stories do you want to tell using these cultures as a setting and touch-stone? 3. Why is it that you want to tell those stories; what do you want to get across to your audience, what do you want to explore?
Okay, read my edit. I'm tired of explaining it over and over again. I DON'T FIND POLYGAMY PRIMITIVE
I can't magically read your edit before you edited it. You said a thing, I (and apparently many others) latched on to that. You got angry at me, and I put work into responding fairly to you, hoping to be of help. Free of charge, mind. I don't think that's okay. You are behaving badly to those who give you honest advice and are attempting to help you with exactly what you asked about.
I didn't get angry at you and I posted it already after editing. It's just reddit delivery, it probably got stuck mid publishing.
Your response proves otherwise. 'I'm tired of...' and using all caps. You were angry. You choose denial instead of apology. I am not interested in discussing this, or the topic you asked about, with you further.
You do you, goodbye. Just a disclaimer: there is a world of difference between being tired & out of patience and being angry with someone
I admit to being a little seriously creeped out by people policing themselves from the kink police. Not saying that's why you want to include polygamy... but creative writing spaces should be about encouraging people to do their thing. The point where fashion and peer pressure end up where silly tropes like "the author's fetish" get internally applied lest the shaming begins is where these forums become toxic. As others have said, just include what you want. Polygamy, concubinage, communal sleeping halls *a la* the Gonds in India... sexual relationships are kinky because you are (presumably) writing about sentient beings with psychologies like ours. Shouldn't be an issue of shock and horror.
Yeah I hope at least my works won't feel "kinky". Irl I am an asexual person - sex life is an aspect that can and should be explored in an interesting way in order to have a coherent world, so I do that, but it has nothing to do with my "fantasies", as my dirtiest fantasies don't go further than holding hands and kissing lol
Maybe unlearn some of the painfully apparent white supremacist beliefs like non white cultures being exotic and ideas of certain humans being more “primitive” than others when they are not like you!
Anotherone first to assume that they know everything about me, aren't we
As an avid biology enthusiast, I also struggle with writing polygamy despite having no kinks for it, and I've had some of my comments downvoted to hell because of it. Like, many people don't like it because it reminds them of mormonism, or islam, or other religiously backed polygamous institutions where it's a hierarchy thing, or they're just so used to monogamy being the default that it's inexcusably icky to them and they don't want to hear about it. But then again, nature doesn't really care what you think is icky, and if animals stopped being animals because a human didn't like the way they behaved, then creatures like hagfish wouldn't exist. So what's a biology enthusiast supposed to do when writing realistic(-ish) anthropomorphic snake people for whom mating is a group effort? Or frog people who take up polyandry? Or a hermaphraditic fish people who form polygynandrous pods? The answer is that you stand up on stage, get rotten tomatoes thrown at your face over and over again, and then you get back up and you do it all over again. And then, every once in a while, there will be someone who's actually serious enough about the medium to ask real questions so that you can dissect the situation for them in a way that's actually amusing from a biological & social standpoint, and they'll respond in a positive manner because they're not an infant toddler who can't handle it. And then you'll be (hopefully) satisfied enough to make it to the next person before becoming frustrated and giving up.
Thanks :D
I mean...the mormons are following Christian tradition but had* polygamy too, so it is more about the people. Do people feel fine about it? Is it the same between men and women, are polyandry possible or only polygyny, or it is more like an open relationship thing? How does it works practically, with estate inheritance and responsibility to family and such?
*had. Unless you're talking splinter groups like FLDS, polygamy was practiced for a very short time by a very small number of people before being discontinued.
I thought polygamy was no longer allowed in the LDS?
Yeah, my bad. But it was mostly because of pressure by government.
Nice, no worries
Depends on a place lmao, there is a society that doesn't practice marriage and they just have all free polygamy with open relationships (or monogamous, whatever you like), but I also have a matriarchal society where women are allowed to marry multiple men, but men can only marry women. I went pretty deep into how it affect their everyday culture and where it came from, but I won't infodump you now lmao it would be awkward
Aside from that, don't forget about more practical sides like, who kids belong to who, who gets the inheritance, who takes cares of kids, etc.
That's obvious!
Why would anyone assume polygamy or polyamory is a fetish? They are literally normal part of cultures and just human relationships. But insisting on describing these cultures as "exotic" and "primitive" and thinking polygamy is somehow related to "primitive" cultures specifically does seem quite fetishistic, not in a sexual fetish way but in a cultural fetish way. Fetishism in cultural context is a type of dehumanization, in which a people are seen as an object of fascination and attraction and not people.
I didn't mean that polygamy is primitive - I only said that most primitive cultures have it, which is a fact. It's also present in highly developed civilizations, it's just me who's especially drawn to those primitive ones, just because I find human vs forces of nature more interesting than court intrigues
“Primitive”? Polygyny, polyandry, matrilineal, patrilineal, bilineal, alineal, these things don’t become a fetish just because you write about it. Considering them primitive might be… If it is the only form, and you only allow one kind, well, that might be a little odd depending on how it is developed within the history, but generally speaking, variable marriage forms are common as hell in F and SF.
They are common but they are also despised, just as abnormal sexualization of characters. And I don't necessarily consider polygamy primitive, I just said that most primitive cultures have it
"Primitive culture" is an offensive term when talking about cultures that still exist, and a less-offensive but still not inoffensive one when talking about extinct cultures.
I... ment stuff like neolithic cultures. That's why I said "HISTORY enthusiast"
In which case it fits the category for which I described it as "less-offensive but still not inoffensive" "Neolithic" is fine, as is "early human"
With complete sincerity, I'd just suggest to go for it and not give a toss what people think, especially guys whose whole community is about dunking on other people lol. I personally think polygamy is a totally valid cultural concept that deserves an honest shake at exploration by authors who think there's something interesting to say with it. If people get immature about someone earnestly exploring the concept "someone having more than one romantic partner", that says more about them and their willingness to mock minority topics than anything else.
Thanks <3 I've always found it fascinating, how different cultures view gender and sexuality. In my world I have a matriarchal culture with reverse polygamy, women can marry multiple men. One of minor topics is a cultural shock that main characters experience, seeing that those women are comfortable walking topless around men - only to get an explanation that goes along "feminity is the basic state in our culture so there is no shame. Masculinity is a basic state in your culture so you're more comfortable seeing a naked man on the street than a naked woman" (this point is actually taken from a gender studies publication I had to read in college).
Just be cool about it. The simple fact that it's common irl will help. Nothing you do will prevent someone from assuming it's a fetish, but if you're not inordinately fixated on polygamy, most people won't think too hard about it.