A TAWDRY Affair?

March 25, 2008

A Tawdry Affair?

Oscar Wilde once said, “What is bigamy? One wife too many. What is monogamy? The same.”

One of the many things distinguishing me from my Muslim students is our very different views on polygamy. For me, a liberal feminist type educated in the west, the very notion of polygamy is chauvinistic, insulting and degrading to women. My students, socialized differently in a different cultural context, find the idea more pragmatic than offensive. While I have not necessarily revised my own view, I will say that following the Spitzer scandal from afar leads me to wonder whether the polygamous system is not in some way more honest and aboveboard than the usual system of tawdry affairs that prevails in my own, my native land as well as seemingly all Western societies. I am aware that I will be shocking some readers here, but do let us engage in the debate, if only for the sake of exercising the grey cells. I welcome reader comments, particularly as I am very much aware that I am trying to present the views of a culture very foreign to my own, so factual inaccuracies or even my own ethnocentrist assumptions may sneak in unawares.

Like all marriage, polygamy was designed to ensure matters of paternity and inheritance as well as financial and social security for women who traditionally did not work outside the home. Polygamy has the added bonus of addressing a social problem that still exists today, namely the demographic fact of life that there are more women out there in the world than men. There are, in short, simply not enough men to go around (a situation destined to continue as long as governments keep waging wars), so women have taken to sharing men in unofficial ways. A legal wife may be unaware that her husband has had one or many mistresses on the side; extramarital relationships frequently endure over the course of years with the wife none the wiser.

Whereas in the US, the distinction is often made between relationships that have a “shelf life” versus those that might have more long-term potential, dating and/or sowing one’s wild oats is not really part of Muslim culture: the idea is that marriage, which should be eternal, is what sanctifies a sexual relationship between a man and a woman. In Muslim cultures, if the relationship is perceived to be a worthwhile one, the tendency is to marry relatively quickly, for it is the moral and religious duty of every man who can afford to do so to marry. In Senegalese society, the marital status of both men and women directly affects their social status: the unmarried are considered not to have met certain obligations, they feel incomplete and inferior, whereas the mere fact of being married ensures a measure of respect from one’s fellows.

Couples have the option of signing a prenuptial agreement specifying either polygamy or monogamy. Interestingly, most modern Senegalese couples in point of fact opt in favor of monogamy, because one of the things specified is equal treatment for all wives, which can become quite a financial burden for the man to bear, especially if his unions are fertile ones. But the crucial point is that a man cannot simply take additional wives on the sly: all parties must know about and have agreed to the polygamous arrangement. The women involved are therefore entitled to all the financial and emotional consideration due a lawful spouse. Given the vagaries of human nature, and the propensity of men to want to vary their diet, in a manner of speaking, polygamy provides a responsible and certainly more inclusive alternative to separation or divorce.

As many defenders of polygamy will argue, there is virtually no difference in having two or more wives versus having one wife plus a mistress (several mistresses?) on the side, except that the man is obligated only to his spouse by law. As the Spitzer, Clinton, Hart etc. scandals demonstrate, while many men would be more than happy to be involved with multiple women simultaneously, they would also prefer to avoid incurring the legal, moral and financial responsibilities of having to take care of plural wives. Polygamy is hence a way of institutionalizing and regulating that behavior which apparently seems to be unavoidable in any case.
I have dwelled on the arguments in favor of polygamy precisely because they might be less familiar to Western readers, but there are obvious flaws with the polygamous system beside its innate sexism. Jealousies and rivalries may abound within the family, and older wives considered past their prime find themselves in a less than very enviable position.

Recently the Archbishop of Canterbury got into hot water by suggesting that elements of sharia law might be adopted in Britain to accommodate the growing Islamic population there. His critics were quick to respond, “Sure, and while you’re at it, tell the king of Saudi Arabia to change the laws of his country to accommodate Westerners.”

Similarly, if what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, I wonder whether those men who are staunch supporters of polygamy would be prepared to allow their wives the same privilege, namely that of marrying plural husbands…?

About the Author : Tamara-Diana Braunstein brings us her stories from Senegal every week. She was born in Brooklyn, New York. She is a restless wanderer who earned an MA from the University of Freiburg and has worked in a youth hostel in the French Alps, a law firm in Montreal, the Metropolitan Museum of Art as well as in university press publishing. At the moment her home base is Dakar, Senegal, where she is supposed to be teaching but is doing far more learning, as you will see by reading her blog at www.senegalschoolmarm.blogspot.com