Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!eder
From: eder@ssc-vax.UUCP (Dani Eder)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Sexual selection
Message-ID: <1805@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: 27 Mar 88 09:20:02 GMT
References: <1566@mmm.UUCP> <3138@arthur.cs.purdue.edu> <1164@microsoft.UUCP> <25746@cca.CCA.COM>
Organization: Boeing Aerospace Corp., Seattle WA
Lines: 37

In article <25746@cca.CCA.COM>, g-rh@cca.CCA.COM (Richard Harter) writes:
> In article <4368@blia.BLI.COM> heather@blia.BLI.COM (Heather Mackinnon) writes:
> >There have been many human societies with baboon-style alpha male
> >mating patterns.  [Examples of polygamy deleted.]
> 
> 	Not the same thing.  Human polygamy is tied to support.  The
> male with several wives must be able to support them all.  In these
> societies I believe you will find that polygamy was pretty much restricted
> to a relatively wealthy minority, with most people being monogamous.
> 
> >This leads to an interesting question:  when did the move towards monogamy
> >happen and why?  Did it happen when agriculture replaced hunting and 
> >gathering?  Did it happen with the growth of cities?  Did it happen when
> >the male and female populations became more even?  Does it have anything
> >to do with Christianity?  (In India, Hinduism permits polygamy, but
> >Mohammedism forbids it.)
> 
> 	Richard Harter, SMDS  Inc.

I find it interesting that the previous posters refer to polygamy in the past tense.  I have observed a phenomenon which I would consider the modern
equivalent of polygamy.  In a large corporation (such as the one I
work for) there is a definite correlation between status and number
of 'daytime wives' (also known as secretaries).  The lowest status
males (technical aides, manufacturing shop personnel) cannot
even ask a female to do a task.  Medium status males (engineers)
share the use of a female ona ratio of about one female per ten
males.  High status males (management) have dedicated use of one
female per male, and the highest status males (officers) have
more than one each.  The status (salary) of the female is tied to
the stat (level of management) of the male, rather than any
measure of competance for the female.

All the 'daytime wives' are in addition to the nighttime wives.
Here too, there is a progression.  There is a definite correlation
betweemale status and probability of having a nighttime wife.

Dani Eder/Boeing/Space Station Program/ssc-vaeder