crackhaus:

Dude, this here writeup makes absolutely no sense...can't believe anyone would want to argue this with you in the first place.

The only reason they say men are polygamous by nature is to convey the message that a man can mate, marry, and shoot his seed in as many women as he wants and get them pregnant at the same time.
A woman on the other can't be said to be polygamous by nature just for the simple fact that she can't carry multiple children for multiple partners at the same time - at best, she must wait at least a year to birth a child for husband number 2, another year for husband number 3, and so on and so forth.

God help her if each of these men want at least two kids from her, she's gonna start looking 60years old at just 30 to pull that off.



And what the hell is biological immortality BTW?
The need to throw around fancy words I presume...

And that is exactly why polygyny is more common than polyandry. It is that simple. That does not mean that some women would not like to have different men, it just explains why polygyny is more practicable as compared to polyandry.

crackhaus:

Read this bit again, and with understanding this time:



A woman is a receiver, a vessel...even if she gets to receive sperm from several men, she has no willful power in deciding whose sperm fertilizes her egg... and that one sperm cell out of millions fertilizes her egg doesn't prove who's stronger among the lot of sperm donors - that's just you trying to trivialize a complex biological process by turning it into a rat race of sorts.

Polygamy works on the premise of being able to select multiple mates and have them procreate for you exclusively and simultaneously if that's what the chooser wants.
A woman cannot choose whose baby she wants to carry if she's having sex with two or more husbands at the same time, neither can she carry two children from two men at the same time...she's a sitting duck, a passive participant in this whole shebang of procreation.

The one whose natural status is to select, choose, and impregnate concurrently or simultaneously is the one that's polygamous by nature...not the one who has to wait at least a year to be impregnated again by another man before resuming the process of procreation.


Thanks for the education on biological immortality which you didn't write yourself...now how does it relate to sperm?

Hello Crackhaus, I must say that your response to LordReed is very conceited and most ignorant.

Really, women are passive participants?

innervoice:


And that is exactly why polygyny is more common than polyandry. It is that simple. That does not mean that some women would not like to have different men, it just explains why polygyny is more practicable as compared to polyandry.

Yes, a case of terrain dictating strategy...

Each party employing means that suit their 'reproductive equipment'.

innervoice:


Please, where can I read more about this study?
I want to see how it was conducted. How did they find women who were willing to sleep with different men without contraception not knowing who they will get pregnant from at the end.

Anything oyinbo man talk we must believe


Did they do paternity test for the child? Did they actually allow the woman be a cumbucket for all the men to see whose sperm won out? How many women participated in the study?




Na wa for some people sha

That makes absolute sense doesn't it?

LordReed:


If a man is polygamous by nature simply because he can shoot his seed into several women then a woman is polyandrous by nature because she can receive seed from several men. It's quite simple. Who's seed wins out becomes a true champion.

Sorry if you've never heard of biological immortality before, I guess we learn something new every day.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_immortality

LordReed:


If a man is polygamous by nature simply because he can shoot his seed into several women then a woman is polyandrous by nature because she can receive seed from several men. It's quite simple. Who's seed wins out becomes a true champion.

Sorry if you've never heard of biological immortality before, I guess we learn something new every day.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_immortality

Nice post... You are indeed wise!.

5minsmadness:



Anything oyinbo man talk we must believe


Did they do paternity test for the child? Did they actually allow the woman be a cumbucket for all the men to see whose sperm won out? How many women participated in the study?




Na wa for some people sha

crackhaus:

Read this bit again, and with understanding this time:



A woman is a receiver, a vessel...even if she gets to receive sperm from several men, she has no willful power in deciding whose sperm fertilizes her egg... and that one sperm cell out of millions fertilizes her egg doesn't prove who's stronger among the lot of sperm donors - that's just you trying to trivialize a complex biological process by turning it into a rat race of sorts.

Polygamy works on the premise of being able to select multiple mates and have them procreate for you exclusively and simultaneously if that's what the chooser wants.
A woman cannot choose whose baby she wants to carry if she's having sex with two or more husbands at the same time, neither can she carry two children from two men at the same time...she's a sitting duck, a passive participant in this whole shebang of procreation.

The one whose natural status is to select, choose, and impregnate concurrently or simultaneously is the one that's polygamous by nature...not the one who has to wait at least a year to be impregnated again by another man before resuming the process of procreation.


Thanks for the education on biological immortality which you didn't write yourself...now how does it relate to sperm?

As BuddhaPalm quite rightly pointed out how can you not see how conceited your response is? It is this type of conceited thinking I was aiming for with this thread.
It is this kind of thinking that influences the thought behind blaming women for not birthing boys on demand.

Tell me does the man choose which particular sperm wins out? So how he not also a "passive" player in the game? If a woman has sex with more than one man can any of the men beat his chest and say for sure that it would be his sperm that wins out?

If you choose to call the process of one sperm winning out a rat race that's you trying to put words in my mouth. As I pointed out in a post the process is an interplay between strength, motility and position of the sperm. The number of sperm in there should increase the chance that a "superior" specimen will merge with the ovum or why do you think sperm count matters in fertility?

"Natural status is to select, choose, and impregnate" really? So the woman cannot choose abi? E don turn point and kill for man ba? LOL!

The "nature makes man polygamous" falls flat on its face simply because it exposes this conceit that it the exclusive right of men to choose multiple partners.

I am claiming creative license in my use of the term. It was meant to convey the idea that passing on genes is a form of immortality.

cococandy:
That makes absolute sense doesn't it?

It sure does as a counterbalancing argument.

BuddhaPalm:


Hello Crackhaus, I must say that your response to LordReed is very conceited

You can say that again.

LordReed:


As BuddhaPalm quite rightly pointed out how can you not see how conceited your response is? It is this type of conceited thinking I was aiming for with this thread.
It is this kind of thinking that influences the thought behind blaming women for not birthing boys on demand.

Tell me does the man choose which particular sperm wins out? So how he not also a "passive" player in the game? If a woman has sex with more than one man can any of the men beat his chest and say for sure that it would be his sperm that wins out?

If you choose to call the process of one sperm winning out a rat race that's you trying to put words in my mouth. As I pointed out in a post the process is an interplay between strength, motility and position of the sperm. The number of sperm in there should increase the chance that a "superior" specimen will merge with the ovum or why do you think sperm count matters in fertility?

"Natural status is to select, choose, and impregnate" really? So the woman cannot choose abi? E don turn point and kill for man ba? LOL!

The "nature makes man polygamous" falls flat on its face simply because it exposes this conceit that it the exclusive right of men to choose multiple partners.

I am claiming creative license in my use of the term. It was meant to convey the idea that passing on genes is a form of immortality.

@bold, sure is correct.
Except that I understand your reason for creating this thread, I would be on the other side opposing you but since I know why, I'm playing ball to see if the nature proponents won't see how nature also makes it very appropriate for women to seek multiple partners.

LordReed:


As BuddhaPalm quite rightly pointed out how can you not see how conceited your response is? It is this type of conceited thinking I was aiming for with this thread.
It is this kind of thinking that influences the thought behind blaming women for not birthing boys on demand.

Tell me does the man choose which particular sperm wins out? So how he not also a "passive" player in the game? If a woman has sex with more than one man can any of the men beat his chest and say for sure that it would be his sperm that wins out?

If you choose to call the process of one sperm winning out a rat race that's you trying to put words in my mouth. As I pointed out in a post the process is an interplay between strength, motility and position of the sperm. The number of sperm in there should increase the chance that a "superior" specimen will merge with the ovum or why do you think sperm count matters in fertility?

"Natural status is to select, choose, and impregnate" really? So the woman cannot choose abi? E don turn point and kill for man ba? LOL!

The "nature makes man polygamous" falls flat on its face simply because it exposes this conceit that it the exclusive right of men to choose multiple partners.

I am claiming creative license in my use of the term. It was meant to convey the idea that passing on genes is a form of immortality.

You forgot to mention the right timing or in other words "the fertile window". A woman is only fertile for a few days each month. She therefore has an influence over who to get pregnant for. I didn't think of it initially.

innervoice:


You forgot to mention the right timing or in other words "the fertile window". A woman is only fertile for a few days each month. She therefore has an influence over who to get pregnant for. I didn't think of it initially.

I didn't forget that, I just chose not to include it because I was thinking of a somewhat level playing field with regards to timing. If the any of the multiple men depositing their seed do it before that window, their chances would be extremely limited as their sperm would have reduced viability.

cococandy:


@bold, sure is correct.
Except that I understand your reason for creating this thread, I would be on the other side opposing you but since I know why, I'm playing ball to see if the nature proponents won't see how nature also makes it very appropriate for women to seek multiple partners.

Yes the whole thing is just a big balloon easily punctured and they provide the very needle.

innervoice:


You forgot to mention the right timing or in other words "the fertile window". A woman is only fertile for a few days each month. She therefore has an influence over who to get pregnant for. I didn't think of it initially.

Yeah, and her concealed ovulation is her ultimate card. Her Joker.

It is now known that women tend to dress 'sluttier' (lol is that a word) and to prefer men with very masculine attributes, more, during ovulation.

Lol...
I know where you are going with this, but your attempt is quite misguided, aside the simplicity of it.
Men are polygamous is used to mean that a man is capable of impregnating many women at the same time, nd not because of the amount of sperm cells one has... Indeed, our polygamous fathers did not even know what a sperm cell was, let alone the number...
However, your theory gives a better angle to the concept of equality and equal rights....
The opponents of polygamy do not want their rights to many husbands enforced to balance the equation... what they want is to abolish polygamy...
Your theory does their quest more harm than good, with this, they can legalise polyandry and leave polygamists the hell alone, afterall, they can collect as many sperm from different partners just as a man can knock off 10 women simultaneously... equal aint it .. I don't think polygamists should have a problem with this....
Women are polyandrous while men are polygamous... Everyone should therefore marry as much as he/she wants...

Case closed

BuddhaPalm:


Yeah, and her concealed ovulation is her ultimate card. Her Joker.

It is now known that women tend to dress 'sluttier' (lol is that a word) and to prefer men with very masculine attributes, more, during ovulation.

True.

innervoice:


You forgot to mention the right timing or in other words "the fertile window". A woman is only fertile for a few days each month. She therefore has an influence over who to get pregnant for. I didn't think of it initially.

Which makes the man even more passive in the reproduction process.

LordReed:

I am claiming creative license in my use of the term. It was meant to convey the idea that passing on genes is a form of immortality.

Actually, there's a very very popular book on this subject: The Selfish Gene. By a Richard Dawkin, I think.

cococandy:


Which makes the man even more passive in the reproduction process.

Under good circumstances nobody is passive. Under less fortunate circumstances there is nothing to be enjoyed for one of them or even both.
However, it is true that women receive and men give.

njokusboy:
Lol...
I know where you are going with this, but your attempt is quite misguided, aside the simplicity of it.
Men are polygamous is used to mean that a man is capable of impregnating many women at the same time, nd not because of the amount of sperm cells one has... Indeed, our polygamous fathers did not even know what a sperm cell was, let alone the number...
However, your theory gives a better angle to the concept of equality and equal rights....
The opponents of polygamy do not want their rights to many husbands enforced to balance the equation... what they want is to abolish polygamy...
Your theory does their quest more harm than good, with this, they can legalise polyandry [size=40pt]and leave polygamists the hell alone,[/size] afterall, they can collect as many sperm from different partners just as a man can knock off 10 women simultaneously... equal aint it .. I don't think polygamists should have a problem with this....
Women are polyandrous while men are polygamous... Everyone should therefore marry as much as he/she wants...

Case closed

Is there any law stopping a Nigerian man from being polygamous i.e marrying many wives?

innervoice:


Under good circumstances nobody is passive. Under less fortunate circumstances there is nothing to be enjoyed for one of them or even both.
However, it is true that women receive and men give.

Or women give and men receive. It depends on the style abi? I'm just kidding.

I agree that under true circumstances, nobody is passive like you said. Still the woman has more control over reproduction than the man does. So if we are to say anyone is passive, it would be the man.
Isn't this topic revolving around reproduction?

cococandy:


Or women give and men receive. It depends on the style abi? I'm just kidding.

I agree that under true circumstances, nobody is passive like you said. Still the woman has more control over reproduction than the man does. So if we are to say anyone is passive, it would be the man.
Isn't this topic revolving around reproduction?

You are naughty.

innervoice:


You are naughty.

that I am.

FrancisTony:

Is there any law stopping a Nigerian man from being polygamous i.e marrying many wives?

Not in Nigeria, but they are working on it...
There are laws in the US though...

Nice one

Tydies:
In fact, the average male will produce
roughly 525 billion sperm cells over a
lifetime and shed at least one billion of
them per month. A healthy adult male can
release between 40 million and 1.2 billion
sperm cells in a single ejaculation.

So my friend, they don't need multiply partners. They already have enough. #TakeYourBattleSomeWhereEsle

njokusboy:


Not in Nigeria, but they are working on it...
There are laws in the US though...

That's an American business not ours.
It's just that I see countless of threads where Nairaland men scream polygamy, polygamy!.

Nigeria depise polyandry, homosexualism et al and accept polygamy, paedophilia.
America despise polyandry, polygamy, paedophilia and accept homosexualism.

You see, on a moral ground, we are not better off.
Let's free America, jare.

FrancisTony:

That's an American business not ours.
It's just that I see countless of threads where Nairaland men scream polygamy, polygamy!.

Nigeria depise polyandry, homosexualism et al and accept polygamy, paedophilia.
America despise polyandry, polygamy, paedophilia and accept homosexualism.

You see, on a moral ground, we are not better off.
Let's free America, jare.

Don't be a dimwit...
Does the fact that there are no laws in favour of homosexuality in nigeria make the topic irrelevant to Nigerians?
Why is the united states bothered about anti gay laws in Africa, is Africa their country?
The only thing we ask of the Americans is to approach issues with the same openness...

njokusboy:


Don't be a dimwit...
Does the fact that there are no laws in favour of homosexuality in nigeria make the topic irrelevant to Nigerians?
Why is the united states bothered about anti gay laws in Africa, is Africa their country?
The only thing we ask of the Americans is to approach issues with the same openness...

Dimwit Okay!
I think America is bothered about homosexualism in Nigeria because we are running to them for their aides.

When we start solving our problems without running to them, they'll stop pestering us for a favour in return.

FrancisTony:

Dimwit Okay!
I think America is bothered about homosexualism in Nigeria because we are running to them for their aides.

When we start solving our problems without running to them, they'll stop pestering us for a favour in return.

Ok

cococandy:
that I am.

and ure happy ure naughty?