THE EFFECTS OF POLYGAMY?

The population division amongst males and females in the human race worldwide, and also in individual countries, are about equal, ie for every 100 women, there are approximately more or less 100 men.

Looking at the fundamentalist Islamic countries such as Arabia, Iraq and Iran, where polygamy (up to 4 wives) is acceptable, yet homosexuallity is forbidden, what sexual outlet do those men have who miss out in the availablity of having a wife (or mistress)? Remember also that pornography is banned (no masturbation there) in these countries!. The women in public are covered from head to foot with only a slit in the material for their eyes, evoking little sexual excitement. The men also are dressed in such a uniform fashion in that only the bearded face is visible, without being able to identify the puffy physique from the lovely athletic type. HOW SAD!

Taking a sample of 100 men, assume that only a meagre 10% of them have 4 wives each, this then leaves 60 women available out of a pool of 100 women. 60 Men grab up the remaining 60 women, the other 30% men lose out. This percentage of course will be much higher where some other men might have 2 or 3 wives each, or where those with 4 wives have additional concubines. (Islam has a limit of 4 on the number of legal wives, yet seem to have no limit on the number of concumbines allowed).

Other progressive Islamic countries such as Turkey and Egypt seem to practise western standards of monogamy, so one does not forsee any major problem there.

I would assume the above argument to apply to other cultures practising polygamy.

Myself never having been in any of the countries mentioned above, tell me if my reasoning is cock and bull and if so, please counter it with a plausable explanation.

As an aside. Another observation of mine is that the fundamentalist orthodox Jew also has a perchant for dressing very drably and in a uniform fashion (dark hat, dark suit, beard, plaited side hair, dark shoes) (a dim and narrow outlook on life?). How boring can one get?

Robby, whoever told you that the female to male ratio was 7 to 1 had to have been pulling your leg. Groot is right when he says it's near parity.

Actually -- and I'm working from memory here, so don't hold me to precise figures -- there's something like 106 male babies born for every 100 females, but the infant mortality rate is higher for males than for female babies. Add in males' greater propensity for risk-taking -- that's an inborn trait, and not primarily the result of testosterone, since it is evidenced long before a boy gets anywhere near puberty -- and the m-f ratio continues to decline until, around age 21, there are only about 101 males for every 100 females. Then as industrial deaths (95% of whom are male), suicides (80% of whom are male), other accidents and lifestyle diseases (heart attack, cancer) begin to take their toll, it becomes even by around age 30. By age 65, it's down to maybe 90 males for every 100 females, and gets worse from there.

As for Muslim countries and the extent of polygamy, it's not quite as bad as Groot postulates. Most men have only one wife because that's all they can afford. I doubt that more than a few tenths of a percent have 4 wives, but a significant number do have 2, and he's right about the concubines. The upshot of it all is that there's a sizeable number of unattached males in most Muslim countries who have no ready prospects for marriage. That's how the Islamists can recruit suicide attackers: Promise such frustrated men 72 virgins when they go to heaven, and it begins to look like a good deal.

Oh, and Robby -- the Chinese kill their female babies because males are more valuable, not because there are so many more of them. In that culture, the male helps with the farm or business when young, and takes care of the parents in their old age. A female is viewed as a burden, not an asset. But nothing to do with relative birth rates.