'why is it always one man and multiple women, and not vice versa?'

Possessing a significant IQ and generally being someone that has zero tolerance for all things bulls***, I avoid daytime talk shows like the plague, however, while restarting my computer I had a few seconds to spare and decided to tune in just out of sheer curiosity. In the few seconds I watched I managed to see Anderson Cooper ask a presumably polygamous couple (a man with 4 wives) why it was considered ok for a man to have several wives but not ok for a woman to have several husbands. It goes without saying that his pandering to the base garnered cheers and applause, although it was, sad to say, not apropos. To begin, men and women are not the same. Men have testosterone, have peni', while women have estrogen and give birth. These two simple fact account for virtually every social construct in existence, and has everything to do with anthropology and sexual dimorphism, and nothing to do with "misogyny". First, humans are naturally polygamous/polygynous (one male/ multiple female pairings). This is not only evident by observing the behavior of humans, and studying human history, but it is also evident by the sexual dimorphism of the human species. Every animal species that shares our sexual dimorphism is also polygynous (lions, silverback gorillas, etc). The mating style of a given species is directly tied to their dimorphism. It's just an inconvenient fact that flies in the face of western (Christian) culture. The construct of limiting men to one female in western culture comes from the early churches hatred for sex. This is,why even today, the really religious (priests, nuns etc) are forbidden from even marrying one person, let alone several. The early church even attempted to teach that no christian should get married, and that married converts should divorce their wives. Soon after they realized that heir membership would die out with such a stupid rule, they allowed for one partner per lay member. This was all based on some Pauline teachings concerning it being "preferable to not marry at all if possible" and if " one MUST marry, marrying only one wife" despite the fat that Jews (which Jesus was, and Paul claimed to be) allowed for multiple wives, providing that the man could afford to take care of all of them. Back to Amderson. The reason cultures, societies, religions, evolution, sexual dimorphism have all dictated that it is normal for a man to have several female partners, and not the other way around, has to do with the fact that women can get pregnant while men cannot. Men have a tendency to not care for offspring that are not their own. Throughout human history, this has led to abandonment of the spouse and child, which for most of history would have meant certain death. Men are stronger than women and do not get pregnant. The logical conclusion to this was that a society would form wherein the men were the ones responsible for protection, and providing resources, while the woman's only obligation would be to provide offspring for the man. The invention of marriage was essentially a a contract that protected both parties and their respective interests. The man was interested in having progeny, and the woman was interested in having protection from the elements, other people, and wild life, as well as having the resources that would enable successful reproduction. This is why women were severely penalized for "adultery", because this was her only obligation. Men don't need women for hunting, building shelters etc, they on.y need them for progeny (ie the only thing that other men can't provide) while the women needed the men for resources and protection. This fact is even evident today.this is why women look for men that have doctorates, money and intelligence, while men don't care if the women is educated, has money etc, as long as she is attractive. The features that men consider attractive are actually genetic cues from females that denote that they are fertile and fecund (breasts, healthy hair, etc). Now, imagine a man with 4 wives living 12,000 years ago. If they all get pregnant by him, one can still be sure who the mother and father is to all 4 babies. However, if one woman was married to 4 men and she got pregnant, none of them would know who was the father, and as such, the ones that suspect it wasn't their own, would abandon the woman and child because evolutionarily speaking, unknowingly raising the offspring of another male is considered the worst failure imaginable. This is why it's not as accepted for one woman to have multiple male partners Anderson. A little thing called evolution.

Please excuse any typos, this was typed on an iPad