On Polygamy

My social media follower once wrote to me that she doesn’t know how to deal with male polygamy. Apparently, Khakamada (Khakamada herself!) claimed that men should be given freedom, because they are polygamous. Here is a counter question: should women be given freedom too? And what would happen if the answer is yes? Or if the answer is no?

The question regarding male polygamy fascinated me, and I started looking for the proof of a fact that men are polygamous. And I didn’t find it. To be precise, I found centuries-old confirmation that men are polygamous only because “by nature” — I really don’t like this expression — a man should inseminate in order to continue the human race. Male polygamy is defined anthropologically. But then someone, contrary to “nature”, deprived women of polygamy, which anthropologically does not make sense, because a woman must choose a strong male in order to continue the race. And if one male is not strong enough (or if he doesn’t get a boner, after all), she has a full right to choose another one, correct? And what if the second one has a weak semen, and fertilization cannot occur, then she has the right to move on to the third one, right? Or am I getting something wrong?

When my comrades start to use the common term “by nature” to explain the male polygamy, I retort: in nature, both males and females are polygamous. The exceptions would be swans and penguins, and maybe some other creatures. And even in such cases, it is not clear why. There is no need to walk far — my lady cat, and not only mine, which screams like she is cut into pieces while asking for fertilization. For naturalists, I would like to note that a cat can carry kittens from numerous cats in one pregnancy. Here, naturalists can parry me with words like,
“well, they are cats, but we are people!” This is where all the problems initiate: skirmishes, feuds, wars. Precisely because we are humans, “nature” fades into the background, and we turn into conscious creatures who must understand that any action has consequences. Ah, not everyone is lucky in this case …

We are people! That means that we are moved not only by instincts, but also by desires, and by these desires we live. Every person has a right to control or not control — however each individual can. In the context of polygamy, I often hear that women aren’t polygamous because their desire to have multiple partners is impermissible, because feelings are recognized as the foundation of a woman’s sexual appeal. Moreover, my female clients usually tell me: “For me, in order to receive pleasure from sex, I need to love a man.” Hence, this becomes some kind of vicious circle. There is an anecdote that says: “nobody fucks the pimples.” In other words, in order to have sex, love has to be present, but if there is no love, then there can be no sex. In short, neither love, nor sex in life. Consequently, a woman condemns herself to loneliness. And for a Russian woman to be without a man is… “dude, it’s a fiasco!” After all, Russian women usually compete with each other by showing off their men: “Mine is better, he bought me a fur coat. What about yours?Wait, you don’t have a man at all ??? Lame! How do you live? Well, by myself…” That’s where the conversation usually ends, and the one with the fur coat wins.

It’s not easy for a Russian Orthodox woman to find love, because she is monogamous due to the public convincing rather than her own feelings and awareness. Oh well, love without sex does not exist (with a few rare exceptions), but it can’t be said vice versa. In reality, sex tends to be very successful for many people who don’t love each other, especially for men. Hence the quesiton, in order for a man to receive pleasure from sex, he doesn’t need to be in love with his partner, but for a woman it doesn’t work this way? Another question then. Who said and proved that feelings can only be for one person, and who said that a person can merely love one other person? To prove my point, I can provide examples of my numerous female clients, who have both a husband and a lover and claim that they love both. As a matter of fact, I can also provide examples of my male clients who also claim that they love both their wives and lovers. Therefore, it is possible to love more than just one person at the same time. Although if women do so, they are immediately labeled as “whores”, but again, it is merely a label. However, technically these women are simply not monogamous. To reframe, not all women are monogamous after all, they are just in the minority.

It is interesting to think that if you are a female and currently don’t love anyone, would it be possible to see a person on a random picture, on social media, at a friend’s house, at a grocery store, or at a restaurant, and just immediately want him?Feel a sudden sexual appeal? Without any strong feelings of love, responsibility, but instead something simply based on sympathy?

I am for monogamy, but occassionally the male polygamy and the female monogamy is a kind of excuse for their behavior, actions and thoughts. For a man, it is easy (technically) to experience an orgrasm without being able to control his desires, and that’s why they are polygamous. Nevertheless, for a woman, it is challenging to have an orgasm (technically), and that’s why they’re monogamous. When a woman tells her partner how she feels, the primary idea is that she TRUSTS him. For it is not so easy to entrust your body to the first person you encounter. For we are not cats. Yet, for a man it is quite the opposite, technically speaking. Ultimately, men are very lucky. They can happily entrust their dick to anyone, because if some female makes it hard, then it will definitely happen. For women, unfortunately, physiologically this is a more complex procedure. Therefore, women who are not confident in themselves can hardly ever entrust their body to a
“stranger”. And that’s why when a woman comes on a first date, it is crucial for her to establish some kind of connection in order to feel trust.

The more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that all these terms are of little use. Both men and women are driven by libido. Both male and female have or should have sex drive. This is the basic instinct which drives this world. There is a certain suspicion that a female has come up with an excuse for herself. Many women have convinced themselves of monogamy merely because they are not in touch with themselves and their bodies, so they have no idea how to get pleasure from sex technically. What I mean is, they don’t know how to relax (something that men have succeeded in, by the way).

I insist that humans are just like mammals, and they can be polygamous. The only main difference between humans and animals is their conscious choice to be or not to be polygamous. Therefore, if your male partner is prone to polygamy, it doesn’t mean that he needs to be given freedom. And if touching upon the topic of nature, then each of us comes and leaves this world ALONE. Eventually, it doesn’t matter if we are monogamous or polygamous during our lifetime.

© Masha Lopatova