ABSTRACT

Polygamy is a hotly contested practice and open to widespread misunderstandings. This practice is defined as a relationship between either one husband and multiple wives or one wife and multiple husbands. Today, "polygamy" almost exclusively takes the form of one husband with multiple wives. In this article, my focus will center on limited defenses of polygamy offered recently by Chesire Calhoun and Martha Nussbaum. I will argue that these defenses are unconvincing. The problem with polygamy is primarily that it is a structurally inegalitarian practice in both theory and fact. Polygamy should be opposed for this reason.

. . .

In this article, I have focused on Calhoun's and Nussbaum's limited defenses of polygamy. I argued that these defenses are unconvincing on at least two grounds. The first ground is that polygamy is a structurally inegalitarian practice in fact. I have provided at least prima facie evidence that polygamous marriages subject women to a greater risk of harmful effects. Furthermore, I have argued that polygamous marriages are most often polygynous marriages in fact. Therefore, women lack the equal opportunity of men to form polygamous marriages with multiple partners of the opposite sex in practice.

The second ground is that polygamy is a structurally inegalitarian practice in theory. I have argued that polygamy not only threatens the equality of men and women in fact, but also the equality of polygamous marriage partners as the latter have asymmetrical opportunities to divorce. Finally, I have argued that polygamy is further structurally inegalitarian insofar as it discriminates against nonheterosexuals.

Therefore, while recent work by both Calhoun and Nussbaum provide an important new series of arguments in favor of a limited defense of polygamy, this defense is not ultimately successful. Polygamy is a structurally inegalitarian prac- tice in theory and fact that should be opposed.