The double standards of polygamous cultures have been discussed for centuries and in my own recent experiences talking to men who come from such backgrounds, they always cite the differences in male and female anatomy and psycho-sexual differences as a justification for polygyny over polyandry. For instance;

Having more than one husband at a time does not benefit a woman because she would be getting pregnant too often and then controversy over the paternity of various babies would ensue (although one polyandrous community in India has figured out a solution to that – rotation of co-habitation with the wife — where there is a will, there is a way.)

Women “naturally” desire to be intimate with one long-term partner whereas men “naturally” desire to have as many sexual partners as is possible for them. This argument supposedly has evolution and modern day men-mars-women-venus pop psychology behind it.

There are usually greater numbers of women than men in any given population and thus polygyny affords all women a guaranteed husband, despite the possiblity of low numbers of men.

The arguments are many.

The very thing he did to his wife, his wife is not allowed to do to him, and he ended up killing her.

That the social set up he lives in thought he was justified in doing what he did.

Anyone bring up the issue of multiple spouses for Muslim men runs one way only? Anything special about that?

And despite all these facts/ data, we are supposed to condone “cultural differences”

C’mon, give me a break…

many many double standards here…

Crimes of passion indeed.!!!What if the first wife, poisoned the man when she found out he got himself another wife?

Oh Pleaze….

SP, human behavior will never evolve beyond the sperm and egg numbers game…that’s the point of evolution..Just witness the rise of Hayden Panettiere

There is a widely held Indian belief from ancient (or at least medieval times) that women are 9 times lustier than men. The statement saying such is in some purana, sutra, tantra or vedic supplement.

In line with this the Bhagavat Purana relays that Kardama Muni had to expand himself into 9 forms to sexually satisfy his wife – the famous Devahuti, mother of Kapila, incarnation of Vishnu (more on the topic and some commentary here http://www.gaudiya-repercussions.com/lofiversion/index.php/t1576.html )

Much discussion has been generated within the Vaishnava community worldwide regarding this topic and what exactly is meant by 9 times more lusty than a man.

One theory is that women have a capacity to enjoy sex more than a man (muliple orgasms, etc).

Do you mean leave in a temporary or permanent sense? And yes, I’m not talking about these types of restrictions – because these aren’t strictly sexual in nature, they’re more of a “showing face to society/ what will the neighbors think?” line of reasoning. Where as women I think have a naturally evolved instinct to prevent them from having strong sexual activity proclivities, as their biological risk is higher. This could also explained as to why women aren’t immediately “turned on” by looks alone. Although it seems that way most of the time.

Seeing that the couple was Muslim, the local Muslim views regarding proper punishment for such (perceived) behaviour would have to be examined as well.

The Islamic legal system(s) say various things from place to place, time to time.

I meant in the sense of protecting them from a bodily investment. The potential risk far outweighs the male potential risk, I didn’t mean protect in the sense of “making sure she’s a good girl” or anythinig constraining like that. Secondly, you are positing that it’s a male centric view, I disagree, because if anything, one could argue that men right now wish for much lower thresholds for women to engage in sexual activity. That’s why “getting lucky” is called “getting lucky” To say women are just drones walking around following rules men set for them is a bit derailing, dont you think?