Pearl Daily’s episode pits polygyny advocates—like Pearl, citing Abraham and Jacob—against critics like Andrew Wilson, who dismisses biblical justifications while Rob argues it’d worsen marriage rates by making women "market commodities." Studies link polygamy to lower GDP and instability, yet Wilson claims modern monogamy fails due to delayed marriages and women prioritizing "Chad" over family. The debate hinges on whether polygyny could fix societal decline or instead deepen dysfunction, with $10,500 raised for a divorce documentary exposing its flaws. Ultimately, the episode reveals polygamy’s proposed solutions may mirror the very problems they seek to address. [Automatically generated summary]
Today, we're doing an early Friday show, and we're going to be reacting to a debate on polygamy.
This was interesting to me because half of the people in this debate are actually pushing a Christian form of polygamy.
And this was hosted on my friend Glenn Lawrence's channel with also Andrew Wilson on the debate.
So, let's get started in the West.
The answer lies.
Oh, wait, I got to turn off 2x, guys.
Also, if you want to support the show, go to theaudacitynetwork.com and I will read your comments in the live chat.
Merely in the practice of polygyny itself, but in the greater framework of biblical patriarchy, the god-ordained structure of relationship that safeguards marriages, families, and ultimately society.
Biblical patriarchy, founded on male headship, provisions, and protections, stand as a single most important aspect of safe and flourishing marriages in the West.
It provides the structure within which celibacy, monogamy, and polygyny can coexist as divinely ordained practices, reinforcing stability, moral responsibility, and justice.
In this debate, I will take the position, or Robin, I will take the position that polygyny is morally acceptable according to the Bible and does not constitute sin.
Far from being contradictory to biblical values, it complements and reinforces the principles of political patriarchy alongside celibacy and monogamy.
Together, these practices create a flexible and enduring system capable of addressing the crisis of marriage and the families in the West.
At its heart, biblical patriarchy calls men to lead their families as Christ leads the ecclesia or congregation, according to Ephesians 5, with fatificial love, unwavering commitment, and moral responsibility.
It assigns complementary roles to men and women, ensuring that the family structure is built on mutual respect and care.
In a time when Western marriage is fractured by instability, gender confusion, and economic pressure, biblical patriarchy restores order and purpose.
Celibacy provides an opportunity for men to focus entirely on spiritual leadership, community service, and advancing the kingdom of God, as exemplified by Apostle Paul.
Now, I want to say, when I first thought about polygamy, right, obviously coming from the West, it's very taboo.
It's very taboo.
Nobody really, it's kind of weird, right?
And it's really thought of as a Muslim thing.
But the more I've lived life, I've realized that we're already in polygamy.
Most people don't know it yet.
If you take the rate that people cheat within married relationships, you know, up to 50% someday, some say, as little as 25%, that's partially polygamy.
If the woman's married to one guy, cheating with the personal trainer.
On top of that, monogamy used to be one person for life.
So if you have a first wife and a second wife, okay, I guess maybe it's a little different because the guy's not dating them or married to them at the same time.
But the way they would see it in the East is that we do essentially the same thing.
We just kind of do it at different periods in our life.
Patriarchal principles that true leadership flows from submission to God.
Monogamy allows men to exercise focuses, leadership, and care for a single family, deepening the intimacy and trust.
It mirrors Christ's covenantal love for his ecclesia, as stated in Ephesians earlier.
Polygyny on its turn magnifies male responsibility by requiring greater leadership, provisions, and fairness.
It underscores the patriarch's role as just and sacrificial leader and seen in Deuteronomy 21, regulated by Exodus 21, exedently established by Deuteronomy 25, and understood in terms of Leviticus 20, read together with Deuteronomy 22.
No, biblical patriarchy not only reinforces these practices, but also ensures that they work together to benefit men, women, children, and society at large.
Now, if we look at the Bible, it's clear that polygyny is not sinful.
Instead, it is presented as a permissible marital arrangement within God's covenant or framework.
Throughout the Old Testament, we see this patriarch, such as Abraham, Jacob, David.
And in the New Testament, it may be argued that monogamy is elevated as an ideal, particularly in the leadership context, but polygyny is never condemned.
In fact, Paul is clear that celibacy is an idea.
Jesus Christ teaches on marriage in Matthew 19 that emphasizes the sanctity of marriage and condemns setting aside, but does not address polygyny.
Paul instructs in 1 Timothy 3:2 that church leaders should be husband of one wife.
Could be argued as qualification for leadership, but not a universal prohibition of polygyny.
Although this position is highly contentious among Greek scholars, however, the silence of the New Testament on condemning polygyny suggests that there are no condemnation of polygyny suggests that it remains a moral neutral under the new covenant.
Now, critics often reject polygyny based on cultural norms rather than biblical evidence.
So I was thinking of this as a thought experiment.
What's worse?
One man with two wives or a man that has an ex-girlfriend he dated for three years, broke up with, then marries the new wife.
And I was thinking about this as a thought experiment.
Okay.
I'm not, by the way, this is not me co-signing it or pushing it.
I was just thinking about it.
In the second way, the woman, if they had a child, or even just in general, is taken care of for life.
Where, you know, in the first one, you're kind of shit out of luck.
I'm not saying that the ladies deserve lifelong being taken care of, but I was thinking about it as a thought experiment.
And anyways, I'm going to continue.
Paleo-conservative argue for monogamy as a stabilizing force in society, but their position is rooted in Western ideals, not in the breadth of biblical teaching.
Greek orthodoxy shaped by Greco-Roman culture influence idealizes monogamy while ignoring the permissibility of polygyny under the old government.
Both perspectives fail to reconcile their claims with the clear biblical precedent.
And on closure, celibacy, as said, ideal celibacy is the ideal reinforcement for foundation of biblical patriarchy.
Monogamy serves as a powerful expression of biblical patriarchy by mirroring the covenantal love between Christ and Ekisia.
Polygyny, while not commonly commanded, but may be incidentally established, is a biblical permissible practice that magnifies male responsibility and care.
And closure, as Western society faces a crisis in marriage, biblical patriotry provides the solution, it elevates celibacy as the highest ideal, monogamy as a common standard, and polygyny as a permissible and practical alternative.
Together, these practices reinforce the principles of leadership, provision, and justice that protects families and builds strong communities according to the provisions of the scripture.
Polygyny, when practiced within the framework of biblical patriarchy, is not only morally acceptable but also reflects God's wisdom in accommodating diverse needs across cultures.
When you think about it, this argument, this whole debate, is what do we do with all of these women?
You know, they say, okay, maybe we could go back to forcing them to get married.
Arranged.
You're forced.
Yep, no choice.
You want your family's inheritance?
Arranged.
But then the men get together and they say, well, what if she doesn't like it?
Do we really want to force them to sleep with someone they don't like?
And if they don't want to do it, should we really impose that on them?
So they can't.
All right, scrap that.
But when we let them do whatever they want, they keep sleeping with the same guys.
Maybe we just legalize that.
I mean, what?
I mean, these are what society's wrestling with.
Do we force or do we let the ladies choose whoever they want?
And they all date, we all date the same men.
I'm not saying one's better or worse, right?
My opinion changes nothing.
The Muslims are going to do their thing.
We're in soft, we're basically in soft polygamy now.
Under 30 women, you know, date all the same guys, then over 30, and that age is rising.
You know, in Ireland, it's around 35 years old.
Women get married, so it's going to keep going up.
So, like, the ladies are the ones that want the polygamy more than the men.
And that's the interesting thing.
Polygamy is seen as something that the men want.
No, If tomorrow they said, ladies, we're going to make being a side chick a crime and cheating a crime, right?
We're going to make it illegal.
Tomorrow, you will be stoned to death if you cheat on your wife, and you will also be stoned to death if you cheat with a married man.
Do you know who do you know who would protest first?
The ladies.
I mean, we love the show scandal, right?
And the show scandal is what?
About the president's side chick.
Why do women love Monica Lewinsky?
I don't make the rules, right?
But I can describe what's going on here.
And time by grounding an understanding of marriage in scripture rather than culture assumption.
Okay, I'm just sorry.
This guy's mic is so bad.
I'm going to skip over this a little bit.
Oh, the sanctity of marriage.
Protect the vulnerable and create society that reflects God's purpose.
Next guy's going.
Okay, never mind.
Next guy's about to go.
Thank you.
All right, Andrew.
Okay, so you're opening Senate.
Yeah, this argument is blown out in two seconds.
The easiest way to do it is just to point out that under this framework that he just outlined, you could marry your first cousin.
And I doubt that he would advocate that.
There's nothing biblically that would say that you couldn't.
There's nothing biblically that said.
Now, this whole debate, because I did see a bit of it earlier, Andrew is trying to equate polygamy to marrying your first cousin.
Now, Andrew is a very good debater.
I really think he could argue any point, but I'm just trying to think through some of these things.
Do I think that marrying your cousin is the same thing as polygamy?
Well, I guess I have seen some of those countries.
I know in India, they definitely marry their cousins there, but I don't know if India is polygamy.
I'd have to look.
I don't think they are.
But that's the only country I know that they really marry their cousins like that.
I'm sure there's more.
You could let me know in the comments.
I just know I used to get my nails done by this woman when I was in London.
And casually, this lady's doing my nails.
And I was asking her about her life and whatever.
And she just casually tells me she married her cousin.
And I'm thinking, like, are your kids all right?
Do they, I guess they were fine.
I don't know.
It was normal there.
I mean, it happened, in fact, right?
But you wouldn't.
Oh, sorry.
But I wanted to say, I don't, I think he's trying to equate them to be the same thing.
Or I don't know why he keeps bringing this up.
To me, this just isn't that relevant.
Advocate for that.
And anyway, the debate's not about that anyway.
I'd like to take a second to point out that the debate isn't over if polygyny is against Christian ethics or not, though I'm sure at some point we'll touch on that.
For the sake of the argument of the debate, of can it save the West is what I'm arguing against.
The answer is clearly and most certainly no.
Let us start with a demonstration.
Pull up my screen, please.
Because when I hear can it save the West, my first question is: What does save the West look like?
I mean, right now, I don't know, guys.
The power's on.
I have my dishwasher, my Roomba.
Like, what is saving the West?
Is it getting families back together?
Maybe that's what they mean.
Well, yeah, I don't think it would do much.
We just love leaving relationships too much.
I don't know.
We'll see that I have a share screen ready.
Oh, look at that.
Ooh, that's a polygamy map.
Pull that back up, please.
So here on our nice polygamy map, these are the countries where polygamy is allowed and some not.
Now, I don't think this matters where it's allowed, where it's not allowed, because again, we're in soft polygamy in the United.
Whether you like it or not, the dating app data is clear.
It is so clear.
We are in soft polygamy.
People are sharing partners.
So I don't know if the laws really change anything.
You know, when marriage is seven years, you could say, okay, for that seven years, they were monogamous, but what about the rest of their life?
Do you just get to get out of jail free card because you did monogamy for a little while, then went back to polygamy, then back to monogamy.
Is it really monogamy if you're in it for eight years?
I don't know.
But the challenge we have is, you know, no matter how bad the women behave, there's always a simp.
And as you guys know, I have been fighting on the front lines of the simp epidemic for years, but I need to tell you guys about a quiet weapon being ratcheted up against men that is rarely talked about.
It's not just the relentless anti-masculinity propaganda and OnlyFans hoes causing the societal issues that we discuss on this show.
Did you know that the average city's tap water contains trace pharmaceuticals and endocrine disruptors?
This often includes estrogen from birth control.
The average adult consumes a credit card worth of plastic every week.
That's five grams a week on average.
It's no wonder the average male testosterone is half of what it was 50 years ago.
Testosterone levels decline 1% a year.
And without a course correction, we're really headed towards extinction.
No matter how based you are, you need to be naturally boosting your testosterone.
My friends at chalk, C-H-O-Q.com, are on a mission to save mankind from extinction by boosting your vitality.
Chalk's male vitality stack contains premium and potent herbs clinically studied to naturally boost your testosterone levels, sperm count, and overall vitality.
Just one of the many ingredients in the male vitality stack was studied in a double-blind human clinical trial to boost total testosterone 20% in 90 days.
When you boost your testosterone, you'll have more mental clarity.
You're more capable of making decisions and taking risks.
Having high testosterone will also affect your pheromone, so women will find you more attractive subconsciously.
Get the male vitality stack right now on chalk.com.
That's choq.com.
Use my name pearl as your coupon code.
You'll get 25% off-site-wide on chalk.com.
My name Pearl is the discount code, chalkchoq.com.
29% of it is polygynist.
It's polygynist.
I would like you to note that the red, where it's illegal, are the host countries with the most immigrants from the countries in green where it's legal.
The United Nations actually cites polygamy as a primary cause for the instability for various reasons, which we can get into.
And the UN itself doesn't even recommend polygyny as a cultural attitude to be outsourced, which is amazing because they basically do it for almost every other attitude.
There are multitudes of anthropological studies backing up this point.
So many, in fact, it was actually overwhelming.
Let's go over some of the quick bullet points.
Polygyny.
Polygyny destabilizes societies.
According to these anthropological studies, here's how they do it.
Less civil liberties, highest rates of despotism, higher rates of warfare, higher rates of intergroup violence, more government corruption, and less political security, national security.
These associations remain across all countries with polygyny regardless of religion, culture, or ethnicity, meaning that just because you're a Christian polygynist, it doesn't seem to help this whatsoever.
This is because it creates a standing pool of aggrieved young men with no prospects whatsoever for reproductive access.
These are usually poor young men.
Okay, so he's talking about the challenge that does come with polygamy that we're seeing now.
Okay, let me, I decided I was going to use the whiteboard, but I would decided to make a chart.
Slideshow.
Let's show this chart.
So this is the dating pool right now.
Now, all I did was Google hot people, average people, ugly people.
Okay, so we got the hot woman here.
Now, if we go back to monogamy, it would be the hot woman with the hot guy.
It would make sense.
You know, this guy would be with the average girl, and the ugly guy would take the old woman, the whore, or whatever.
I feel like this guy wouldn't be so bad if he just cleared the acne, got a state, whatever, who cares?
Now, what we have now is all three of these ladies are going towards the hot guy.
You know, before the guy in the middle might have been the hottest guy in the town.
This woman here, well, it would have been illegal for them to be together, but you know, for the sake of it, this woman over here wouldn't know this guy existed.
She doesn't even know what she's missing.
So this guy asks her to marry her.
And she doesn't think about the DM she got from Chad over here.
She doesn't think about that.
She doesn't think, oh, well, what if that's a better option?
Now, let's reverse it, right?
Let's say all of these men were being hit on by women like this.
When this woman, it's not like that, but let's switch the roles, right?
Let's say all these guys had girlfriends that were this hot or women interested in them that were this hot.
I mean, when this average woman over here would come up to them and say, hey, marry me, have kids with me.
They would say, well, I have a better option.
Now, obviously, the roles are reversed, right?
So now the question is, what to do?
What do we do with these two ladies, right?
We got the old woman over here.
Do we mandate and say, you, average woman, go with that average man?
And she says, no, ugh.
Ugh.
But he gives me the ick.
Well, why does he give you the ick?
Well, he reasons.
The ick is real.
Do we say you have to, you know, and there's just part of me.
I know there's a whole Western culture through God's Eyes.
Great channel.
Love them.
They think that we should just force arranged marriage or no deal.
But something about me, I just, I mean, I just, for me personally, I don't know if I'd want to be with someone that doesn't want to be with me.
And the other challenge is, you know, it's not like social media is going anywhere.
So she's still going to be seeing Chad and feeling like this guy isn't enough.
Now, the reason I say this, that we don't force the arranged marriage, is because this guy is going to have such a miserable life being with this woman that doesn't want to be with him.
I mean, it's better he's by himself.
That's why, you know, the MGTOW guys, they make perfect sense.
They say this is a headache, right?
This is drama, a headache.
And then my second question, the reason I think polygamy is actually nicer to women, let's say we legalize Chad to have three wives.
And heck, maybe he gets a second one.
Maybe this guy gets three, second guy gets two.
I mean, honestly, whoever takes this old lady over here, they're kind of doing her a favor, right?
I mean, the bottom ladies on the totem pole, though, because remember, half of the women are going to be single and childless.
We don't know what to do, especially the 50, 60, 70-year-old women.
What do we do with these?
Like, what if we start all living to 90, 100 years old?
There's going to be so many of these ladies going around that, you know, when they were this age, they said, ugh, ugly, ugh, ugly.
And now they're old and these guys are like, ugh, we don't want you, you know.
I mean, if you look at take Donald Trump and his ex-wives, you know, the last, the first one before she passed away, I mean, she wasn't that good looking.
Really, any woman, man that took her was really doing her more of a favor than him.
So these are the questions.
What to do with these ladies?
Do we force them?
Do we at 18, 20, say, you must go with that guy, regardless of how much they don't want to?
Or do we just keep letting the sexes go apart until the ladies start to feel the consequences of our decisions, right?
You know, let's say we take the sexes and just say, okay, ladies, you want to be by yourself?
Go, be alone.
Well, the challenge is: so when the woman looks like this, she's given all these free jobs, free attention, whatever.
But now she looks like this and she realizes she has to work for 40 more years.
Now, do you think Brad over here is going to take this woman to be a housewife?
She says, No, no, no, no, I'm ready.
I'm ready to be a housewife.
He'll say, Yeah.
Good luck.
Now, hypothetically, you could do polygamy.
Yeah, I'm going to keep going with the debate.
We're going to come back.
We're going to come back.
About half the boys in polygamous cultures need to be ejected from their community once they reach puberty to sustain this imbalance.
And these are called lost boys.
Major problem with political instability in these countries.
If most families can't get by, by the way, on one income with only one wife and 1.6 kids, how many men can afford multiple wives and many children?
Well, the answer is almost none.
Yeah, okay.
So then he makes the argument that the men can't afford the wives.
And I actually thought this was a moot point.
And I'll tell you why.
I'm going back to my polygamy slide.
Now, a lot of people will say, How will the men afford all of these wives?
Well, remember, we're in 2024.
Men have a soft, soft man era now.
The men can actually, you know, they said, you know, the men got together and they said, ladies, they said to this hot woman over here, be a mother, go, go have my children.
And she said, nah, nah, I'd rather not.
I want to go do other things.
And so, you know, they don't really want to put a gun to the young women's head and make them if they don't want to do it.
But this lady over here can go make $40,000 a year and have one kid, throw that kid in public school.
She could still hold a job.
Woman number two over here, he could get her pregnant, right?
That's wife number two.
I mean, again, most kids are in public school.
Throw them.
I'm not saying they should be, but I'm saying it's 2024.
I'm trying to work with what we got here.
So, you know, now this woman here has a kid.
She brings in $40,000 a year.
That's 80K.
Now, let's say Chad over here makes 50, right?
I think average guys make 50.
Now, now we're working with.
Now, I understand.
And maybe wife number three, she's too old.
She's infertile.
I mean, let's make her a little hotter than this.
Let's pretend she's like she's 40 and goes to, she looks like a J La.
That's too attractive.
An uglier version of JLo at 40, right?
But she can't have kids anymore.
But she could still contribute.
You know, we have these ladies that they can't have kids anymore, but they can bring in 40K, give it to the guy, or contribute to rent, right?
I don't know if the money argument is going to stand because there's too many jobs available to the ladies.
You could be a housewife with a stay-at-home job.
I mean, we're finding out that the government employees the last decade haven't been going to work or really working.
I mean, everyone kind of knew that, right?
I mean, he could send Shirley over here to go make $40,000 a year for the government and work from home and do nothing.
I mean, there's all these jobs that are given to us for practically doing nothing.
Wouldn't it kind of make sense for the woman to go get the easy money rather than, you know, making Brad or maybe so, maybe this guy in the middle, he hits 45 and these ladies said no to him, you know, at 25, but now he's 45.
He got a cool dirt bike, a motorcycle.
You know, we love the motorcycles, or maybe he got, I don't know, maybe he got a dog.
He got something that just brought the ladies back in.
Got a little, you know, silver fought, whatever.
So now the ladies are back.
They said, Brad, please, or chat.
We know this is Brad.
Brad, please take us, right?
So, and maybe Brad doesn't want kids.
He says, you know, I've seen one too many of my friends get absolutely ruined over having children.
No kids, but I do want some company, ladies.
I mean, I don't, I don't see, you know, everyone says we got to go back to traditionalism.
Do the ladies, do we really deserve traditionalism?
I mean, what's in it for the men now?
They get 1.5 kids.
Maybe if you get like six or seven, you get one.
I mean, daycare is state-funded in some states.
I'm not saying that's best for the kids, right?
But I'm just trying to be pragmatic here.
Okay, I'm going to keep going.
So I don't know.
The money argument to me, there's too many women that don't want to have kids where they could be a second, third wife, hypothetically, and just not have children.
I mean, that's kind of what we're doing in the soft polygamy era anyway.
Children from polygamous families report higher rates of aggression, behavioral problems, likely to be less competitive, confusion with parental roles.
Wives end up with more mental health problems from unequal treatment.
Now, he's saying the wives are going to end up with mental health problems.
Well, I mean, one in four women are on SSRIs in the United States.
We have mental health problems anyway.
I don't know if that's polygamy.
I mean, I don't know if we can attribute that to polygamy in itself.
Social media, maybe.
But, you know, when one in four of the ladies have it, I just can't, I can't say that that.
Yeah, I can't say that's going to be it.
Favoritism, unhealthy competition, lack of trust, lack of marital satisfaction.
Also, can I just again, okay, so then I got to think through this, right?
I got to think through the marital satisfaction is bad for the polygamous places.
Well, we tried Christian monogamy.
And the only way, the way you see how people, the way you see what people truly want is when you give them the freedom to do anything and look at what decisions we made.
We have this idea that women were brainwashed by feminism.
I don't think anybody's brainwashed.
I think us ladies, we know exactly what we're picking.
And I think what we found out is one, women are not as monogamous as we thought.
And they weren't as happy in their marriages as we thought because when we got the freedom to do anything, they left.
I know that's not like a happy conclusion, but it's kind of like, okay, imagine you think your wife is or your husband.
Let's flip it.
You think your husband is amazing and he's loyal forever.
But then he gets really rich and he starts banging hot 22-year-olds.
He probably always wanted to do that, but now he gets the choice.
It's the same thing with the ladies, you know.
Once we got the choice, we got the job, we got the birth control.
Too many of them picked it for me to think, ah, you know, that they were the marital satisfaction.
I mean, to be fair, I just think us and as a gender, we're just not all, but we're just not really satisfied with anything ever because we're the most privileged class of people in all of history, probably.
We still complain.
So, for like, I wouldn't use marital satisfaction, what we say as a metric at all, because I just think we're never satisfied.
Point out that all these countries have the lowest GDP on planet Earth: sub-Saharan Africa, Afghanistan, Polynesia, Papua New Guinea.
I can tell you about a little island off the coast of that if you'd like, and Southeast Asia.
Lowest GDP there is, highest polygyny rate.
I could see that.
You know, the guys they think, do I need to be rich and make a bunch of money for a wife and kids?
Eh, eh, I don't think that's going to happen for me, not anytime soon.
Why do it?
But then we go back to the question: do we force the ladies or give them free will?
Force free will, force free will.
Pick your poison.
It's called the polygamy belt, West and Central Africa, Middle East, Southeast Asia.
In Kenya, for instance, highly Christian, by the way, 43% of households with polyamorous men are poor compared to 27% of the monogamous household, much richer.
Well-established link between polygamy, poverty, warfare, underdeveloped nations, and warlords.
Overwhelming.
It's not even close.
There's no way you could ever make a case that polygyny or polygamy is going to save the West.
It can't save the countries that it's in right this second.
But to address Mr. Kowalski's arguments for polygamy, they are surface level and they're totally ridiculous.
They don't actually even make sense.
He argues there aren't enough virtuous women to go around while also arguing Protestant churches have more women than men in them, which is true.
There are many easily pointed out issues here.
One, if more women than men are in Protestant churches, yet there are less virtuous women than men, it would entail that Protestant churches aren't producing virtuous women.
But secular ethics is producing virtuous men.
That is really fucking stupid, by the way.
That is really stupid.
Two, if it were the case, as he argues, polygamy is real and virtuous women are polygamous and that's fine as that's how they were designed rather than a passion to overcome, then all it would mean is that the already small pool of virtuous women would marry the same virtuous man, creating an even smaller pool of virtuous women.
That already happens.
That's what I say.
We're already in polygamy, right?
Okay.
So when I was in a Protestant church for like, I don't know, two, three years, I went, I went, I was kind of nosy.
I wanted to see what was going on.
You don't think that the guys in the, I mean, in the churches, it's like the guys in the band, you know, the guys on the guitar, the ladies, you know, we love, we love the musical instruments.
Or, you know, the one, you know, it was interesting because I was in this church, right?
And this church was probably 80 to 90% female.
They did like a dating thing in the church where they were trying to set people up, whatever.
And even though it was 80 to 90% female, the women would get set up with a guy and they would still reject him.
They're like, we want a Christian man.
And then they would say, here you go.
And they're like, not that one.
And then the ladies would get together and they would say, oh my gosh, there's one woman.
She was like a 30-year-old virgin.
I mean, alleged, who knows, right?
But she claimed.
And it was crazy because she was really pretty.
But they would say, What about this guy?
Is he good?
And then she would say, Well, I just think I have, she would think that her faith was better than his faith.
And I would just keep thinking, What more does this guy got?
He's at church.
He volunteers.
He's in the band.
Like, he reads his Bible.
Like, what are you doing that makes you so?
I mean, and then it would be like, well, he tried, he tried to have sex with me.
And I'm like, yeah, well, he's a guy.
That's what they're going to do, you know?
I'm like, I mean, what?
Do you want him to be a saint?
You're old.
Like, you're not.
And so I would still see the same thing, even when it was all women, pretty much.
So I'm going to read comments.
If you guys have comments, you go to theaudacitynetwork.com and then I do read your comments.
So Andrew on the ball as usual.
Alexander said she's reviewing this debate.
I thought, saw the thumbnail for it yesterday.
Pearl, do you think if the collective of men learned to improve their looks, would they qualify for women's standards?
Or do you think that women would narrow their standards even further?
I do think that men going to the gym is because we already have money as women.
You know, we can either get it through sugar dating, through men just throwing their resources at women for being hot.
I mean, you guys see this, like the ladies don't even have to put out anymore.
Men will just throw it at them.
We also get these jobs that pay a lot.
Like I had a roommate in college.
She made like 60K a year right out of school.
Human resources, you know, jobs like that.
So we have the security now.
We don't, the money aspect, you can't really, you know, pay for women like you used to.
You know, we used to say, ah, I need, I need money.
We're going to, we're going to marry that guy.
That's all, that's off the table.
So I think that improves men's, you know, chances the best, but unfortunately, we're just never happy, sadly enough.
Feminism means men can't be fathers.
The government needs to stop simping to women.
Then they need husbands.
For men.
Three, he argues that the skanks of society would basically be taken care of through polygamy, in this case, polygyny, because of course, men wouldn't mind marrying them if they already had a virtuous woman.
This also makes no sense if you think about it for one second, because if you had a virtuous woman, why the hell would you want to marry a skank to begin with?
Makes no sense.
I assume because she gives better head, I don't really understand why else you'd want to do it.
You know, I've seen men do crazy things because a woman is good.
I mean, you wonder how these women that have been through everybody still end up getting married at the end of it.
Could a man hypothetically marry a woman because she gives really good blow jobs?
Could I see that happening?
I got to be honest.
I really could.
I wouldn't put it past them.
You know what I mean?
I don't even understand the argument.
It's silly on its face.
It just seems like it's a movement towards the pleasure of the flesh.
It also has another problem as well, which is that it would basically be promoting promiscuity if it did work by adding an additional societal safeguard to promiscuous women, essentially assuring them a husband as long as she acted as a fuck puppet for him, which isn't very different from how secular women already act outside of Christian ethics.
In fact, there's so many problems with the arguments that he made that I can barely scratch the surface.
But I think that this is good for right now and we can just move right into the debate.
I just want to let both of you guys know right now.
Um, I went in depth into all of your positions, and this debate is not going to go well for either of you.
Uh, ready when you are.
Thank you.
Well, actually, I'd rather address a few things since he started.
We're going to go ahead and let it open and let you guys go back and forth.
All right, guys.
So, I mean, okay, so Andrew said that, you know, talking about marrying first cousins, maybe we saw that once or twice in the Old Testament.
You know, people say, well, you can murder people, or no, that was something that Mike Winger said.
But we see this repeatedly practiced by our spiritual offspring over and over, never a word of condemnation, never a word of punishment, not one single time in thousands of years.
Now, people will say, oh, you know, the one flesh argument means monogamy.
Well, why didn't the Israelites believe that for thousands of years?
I'm not here to argue about the biblical basis for polygyny.
That's not the topic of the debate.
The topic of the debate is centered around whether or not it can save the West.
I'd like to dive in.
I really wish they clarified what does saving the West mean?
I think this is a pretty good time in history to be alive.
I don't know.
I saw the maybe, would you guys rather be fighting in a war right now?
I don't know.
Maybe you guys would find it exciting.
Your arguments here.
You said it would destabilize societies.
Yeah.
Israel went from zero, from one man, to overthrowing the greatest country in the world at the time, Egypt, in 500 years.
So power of polygyny.
Oh, well, geez, this nation, the power of Puritan Protestants, overthrew the most powerful nation which had ever existed, and we were not polygynous, sir.
Stop, sir, stop, stop.
I want you to answer to this.
Stop, sir, stop, sir.
My turn.
If it were the case that, oh, you can overthrow a very powerful government through the power of polygyny.
Okay, well, this is a non-polygynist, non-polygynist in the 13 colonies.
Absolutely was a violation of Christian ethics.
They overthrew the most powerful military in the history of the world.
So that's not a good argument for your position.
That's what you're talking about because I'm not following.
Who did they overthrow?
They overthrew England.
No, that's my whole point.
If the argument for you is because this country got overthrown by the power of polygyny, my counterargument is, well, this country got overthrown and we weren't polygynous.
So clearly, them just being polygynous has zero to do with the overthrow.
No, not necessarily zero, but zero.
They went from 70 people entering Egypt to 2.4 million people leaving Egypt in 430 years.
Monogamy can't duplicate.
They can't, you can't multiply at that rate under monogamy.
Yes.
Yeah.
Okay.
Wait.
Just the math.
The math alone tells us that every man had to have an average of four wives.
So people will say, no, it was only for the rich men, certain kings.
Yeah, who cares, dude?
Who cares?
Can we get to how it's going to help the West?
Yeah, we got one in three.
We got one in three children being raised in fatherless homes right now.
Women that are going to be single.
And see, they're asking the same question.
What do we do with these single moms?
There's so many.
They're like, I match with this hot woman on the dating apps.
Single mom.
Match with this hot woman on the dating apps.
Herpes.
Matched with this hot woman on the dating apps.
Bipolar.
They're like, what are we going to do with these ladies?
The year 2030 is somewhere around 50%.
Now you're saying that's better than being in a polygyny?
Okay, can we start?
Can we start with the argument here?
Here's the argument.
Common sense does the new thing.
Here's the argument that you make.
Do you agree with me that the Protestant church is overwhelmingly female, 60% female to about 40% male?
More than 60%, probably.
More than 60%, but I'm just being as charitable as I can be.
60-40 split at least.
Chef, yes, I do.
Okay, do you also agree that in modernity, men are more virtuous than women?
When you say, I don't think women are looking necessarily for virtuous men, if that's not what I asked you, I asked you if in modernity men are more virtuous than women.
I don't know.
Okay, are they at least as are they at least as virtuous as women?
When you say virtuous, are you talking about sexual purity?
Hang on, are they at least as virtuous as we are?
We're talking about sexual purity.
I'm talking about the virtues associated with Christian ethics, the fruits of the spirit, the removal of the pursuant of the flesh.
They're just as virtuous as women are.
Yes, they're just, I don't know.
I don't know the answer to that question.
Well, if they're just as virtuous as women are, then what you're actually saying there is an intelligent is that secular ethics is creating virtuous men, not Christian ethics.
Because if women outnumber men in the church and men somehow are still just as virtuous as them, then that would mean that secular ethics itself is producing virtue, not Christianity.
I didn't follow what you said, but let me ask you this.
Oh my God.
I need you to answer to this question before we can move to yours.
I'll let you ask yours, but I need an answer.
I didn't follow what you asked.
Okay.
Christianity produces virtue.
Yes or no?
Yes.
People who follow Christianity produce virtue.
Great.
Okay.
If women outnumber men in the Protestant church, there should be necessarily more virtuous women than virtuous men, then, right?
When you say virtuous, what I'm saying is sexual pure.
Okay, now look, does that mean she's not like an X304?
There's no way for you.
X304 is not virtuous.
There's no possible way then for you to say that women are more virtuous in modernity than men when it comes to promiscuity because they're not.
We don't care about men that are virgins.
They don't even care about how many sexual partners.
It's like saying, you know, the saying that goes, a lock that can be opened by any key is a worthless lock.
A key that can open any lock is a valuable key.
It's a master key.
Yeah.
Yes, exactly.
Yeah, it's an old saying.
This doesn't answer to the question, sir.
And I, so how do you define virtuous?
I've already told you it's a following of Christian ethics, the embrace of the fruits of the spirit, the rejection of the pursuits of the flesh.
Hang on, hang on, dude.
I'm trying to explain, answer your question.
That's how you would explain virtue.
Now, there are actual virtues that we can point to.
Things like for women, it would be things like chastity.
It would be things like loyalty.
These would be actual Christian virtues, right?
That would be associated with the feminine and not necessarily the masculine.
There's no possible way you can make an argument in modernity in the United States that women are more virtuous than men.
It's not even possible if you're talking about those traits, right?
If you're talking about chastity, yes.
Yeah, there's no possible way women are more virtuous than men.
Men aren't virtuous, especially when you consider chastity out of choice.
Yeah, but just follow along with me for a second.
They're forced into sexuality.
Yeah, I get it.
I get it.
But the point is, is that women cannot, by this entailment, be more virtuous than men.
If that is the case, and there's 20% or in your, by your measure, 30% more women in Protestant churches than men, why isn't the Protestant church producing virtuous women?
You think that men are choosing to stay abstinent?
They're not.
Are you allergic to answering questions?
It's like an allergy.
I just think the feminized church is driving men out of the church, my humble opinion.
Why?
Okay.
If there's 30% more women in the Protestant church than men, why aren't there more virtuous women than men?
Because it's a complete complex of the patriarchy.
Complete complexity.
So the Protestant church has collapsed.
Oh, yes.
The Protestant church, the Greek Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church.
No, the Greek Orthodox Church hasn't collapsed.
The Greek Orthodox Church has 55% to 45%.
The only church, the only church that where men.
I got to be honest, guys.
I don't think any church will completely circumvent this.
I just don't see it.
I mean, I really, everyone, It's interesting because everyone seems I've interviewed a lot of religious, like very deeply religious people on the show, right?
So I've interviewed really, um, I can't remember his name, but there was one guy really deeply Catholic, right?
Then I have had the Orthodox people on the show.
I've had devout Muslims on the show, and everyone seems to think that their religion is going to like save things or circumvent things.
But I just look at the last hundred years, and I haven't seen any of the churches really win any battles with the culture.
And even in their church, I see the feminization generally across the board.
And if I look at the young women of all of their churches, I don't see much of a difference.
Not really, anyways.
If you look at their life choices, age of first marriage, number of kids.
And then a lot of times you get the phenomenon of when they do marry young, they're going to divorce at like first rounds around like late 20s, early 30s for the women that got married in high school or right after high school, right out of college.
I hope I would like that to be true.
I just don't see it circumventing or changing anything.
Outnumber the women.
You're the only one.
Well, I mean, well, I just want to say that.
Yeah, someone said people need to go directly to God.
Okay.
I just don't see that happening based on the trends that I'm seeing.
Consistent with your own.
Let me say one thing.
I think we need to delineate two things about you.
Is polygyny morally just or morally irrepresented?
Reprehensible?
That's the first thing.
I'm going to assume for the sake of the debate that polygyny is acceptable under Christian ethics.
I want to know how it's going to save the West.
And as we dive into it, one, you're saying that Christianity in the West has already been destroyed.
So how are you going to have Christian anything, let alone polygyny, if the Protestant church has been so decimated it can't even produce virtuous women?
How in the hell is just adding a sprinkle of polygyny with the sprinkle of degeneracy with a sprinkle of Jesus going to help this?
You're going to listen to my opening statement because I didn't argue.
I say the patriarchy.
I say biblical patriarchy.
And I want to mention that I moved away from I say biblical patriarchy.
And biblical patriarchy because you have absolute patriarchy.
I mean, do you have, do you have limited patriarchy?
Andrew, I remember you had a debate with your on one of your channels.
You said that if you travel hotel and you tell your wife, listen, in three hours, I need to, we need to move.
She would listen and she would go because there's absolutely absolute patriarchy in your household.
Yeah, if I was fucking her best friend, how would that be helpful?
Well, that's terrible for you to say, but that then just adds one.
What if I married her best friend and I was also humping her?
How would that?
Well, it would actually, let's think who is the best friend?
Is the best friend a 40-year-old woman with no prospects?
It would probably be very helpful to her.
You know, she doesn't get STDs.
She's having sex with one man.
Maybe she gets protection, provisioning.
Like, I'm just thinking of the alternatives.
Let's say her best friend is a single, middle-aged, or older woman, maybe a single mother.
I see much more benefit on the woman's side than the man's.
On her own, someone breaks into her house.
She's cooked.
Done.
Let's say she's in a lot of debt.
Maybe he could help her get her finances in order.
Again, when they're thinking of polygamy, they're thinking, oh, hot young wives.
No, The hot young ladies are for they're not going to be anybody's wife.
It's maybe, I hope you guys get lucky, but it's just not.
The trends don't indicate that.
I mean, Gen Z women rank men seventh on their priority list.
And men go to fourth when women hit their 30s.
So maybe by 40, you guys are second or first, you know.
So again, if it's an older woman, a single mother, I see way more benefit on the woman's side than the man for being in a polygamous relationship.
How would that in some way be an assistant to my wife?
Aubrey, I'd like to chime in.
Rob, let them finish their exchange and then I'll pass the mic over to you.
If I was married to my wife's best friend, I was also plowing her, how would that in any way assist with the idea that, you know, if I told my wife within three hours we needed to move, we needed to move, if she was willing to do that, how would it be helpful in some way that I was also plowing some other chick on top of that?
It makes no sense.
Well, if you're moving, that's an extra set of hands.
I'm really just trying to think of this practically here.
What could you do?
Let's say you're a guy and you go, you get a 40-year-old woman, let's say 35, you get one kid out of her.
You have kids with two women, they're in the same house, they're probably both going to be working just statistically.
That's an extra 40K for the household.
That's, you know, the woman hypothetically could go, I'll think of me personally.
I have volleyball.
I like to play.
You know, now you got another mom.
You hand them the kids.
You can go play volleyball or go to the gym.
The women can alternate.
I'm not saying you should do this.
It's a little bit weird, especially like coming from, you know, a Christian nation-ish, right?
Soft Christianity, I guess.
But I'm just thinking like from a practical perspective, I could see how it would be helpful.
Well, I can tell you what.
First of all, you need to state if it's if you're going to follow absolute patriarchy or you're going to follow limited patriarchy.
And that's part of it.
If you're if you're going to have, and this once again, there's a responsibility that's raised upon every man when he engages in marriage.
And when he engages in marriage, he has to do it responsibly.
If he doesn't, if he goes and he sleeps around with woman, he's fully paying.
That is a sin in itself.
Let me show you biblical patriarchy.
Woman, get down here and give me a cup of coffee.
There's some biblical patriarchy for you.
So back to this.
When you talk about limited patriarchy, you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
What does that even mean?
There's no differentiation here.
A patriarchal system simply means from the father.
The Orthodox Church is a patriarchal system.
It comes from the father.
Your priests are father.
Your bishop is father.
Everything comes from the father.
There's nothing limited here whatsoever.
Why adding the addition of multiple women would make it more patriarchal?
The challenge is so many men listen to women and think about women before men that I just still see that as being a challenge in the church.
No idea.
You would essentially have to admit then that Adam and Eve, because Eve was the only woman who was available to Adam, that Adam was not a true patriarch.
How is that?
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Wouldn't Adam be a true patriarch, even though he only had one woman?
Maybe he wasn't.
Can we define biblical monogamy?
Because what's your body count, Andrew?
Is it more than one?
Yeah.
You're not monogamous.
Yeah.
I've sinned.
Sure, sure.
What I'm saying is you're trying to uphold something that you don't even.
I know what Rob.
Know Andrew is going to say, you can't attack me personally because Andrew is coming at this from what is best for society point of view.
Rob is trying to get into the nitty-gritty and he's trying to get practical here.
He's like saying, Look, it didn't work for you.
It didn't work for me.
Nobody's really monogamous.
I bet that that's how this is going to go.
You haven't even kept.
Well, how are you making this is such a lazy argument from hypocrisy?
No, it's a two-quo-quay fallacy.
What you're making is monogamous.
What you're making is a fallacious.
Let's say for a second that I was in complete violation of my own principles.
It wouldn't have any bearing on the argument.
It's a two-quay or two-quote fallacy.
Stop, stop, bro.
Let me respond.
There's two of you.
There's one of me.
You got to give me the luxury of having some speaking time here.
So, A. Andrew, you talked the whole time.
He keeps telling people to stop talking over him.
And he's stopped like most of the time.
It's a two-quote fallacy.
Yeah, he's saying, yeah, that's what someone said in the chat.
So Andrew is saying, look, this is the ideal.
But the problem with that is it doesn't matter what the ideal is.
That's just a wish list.
That's saying, Rob is saying, we have to work with the reality now.
This is what's happening.
You can't keep monogamy.
She can't keep, nobody's keeping monogamy.
Where Andrew is saying, oh, sorry, I like Andrew.
I'm going to mock him a little bit.
Sorry.
But, oh, like, this is what would be best for society.
It was better 100 years ago.
Okay.
But we're not in 100 years ago, right?
You fallacy.
Yeah, ideal is not the real world.
You can't use those in arguments.
It's a fallacious move.
So what you're doing is you're saying you yourself don't adhere to the principles that you value.
It has no bearing on the argument whatsoever.
If I went out tonight and I got 300 hookers and snipped cocaine off of their navels, it would have nothing to do with the argument that we're having right now.
What it illustrates is that it's an impossible standard.
And this is why I went to a play last night.
I'm in New York City right now.
And they had, it was Tammy Faye.
It was about PTL ministries.
And they had Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggert and this guy, Marvin Gorman.
And all three of them fell to sexual sin.
These are men that love God and they all fell to sexual sin because it's an impossible standard that was never in the Bible.
It's not impossible standard.
It was never in the Bible.
It's a true.
Okay, let me, let me, we're going to go back to this.
Okay.
We're going to go back to my slideshow here.
Why is it an impossible standard now when it wasn't 100 years ago for men?
We're going to think about this.
So the reason it's an impossible standard now.
Okay, so these are, this is the dating pool.
I want, for the sake of this, pretend this old woman is an ugly woman, but younger for the sake of this.
So they're all young.
Let's just say college, okay?
18 to 21.
This is the only guy that's going to get sexual access here, right?
So at 18, this guy is going to get access to all the women.
Now, you could say, please, top men, stop having sex with everybody, but that's not going to work.
And you could say, please, ladies, stop having sex with men that are completely out of your league.
Good luck with that.
The same way, if men had, you know, Margot Robbie in her prime banging on their door, and you said, please, men, stop having sex with these super hot women out of your league.
And they would say, F off, right?
So you're not going to stop this.
Now, the challenge is this guy in the middle, which is most men, they're either here or here.
You know, usually the guy at the top, that's the guy that's selected for short-term sexual encounters.
Sometimes they want long.
Guy in the middle is the guy that only gets sexual access through relationships.
Guy on the bottom doesn't get any at all.
Okay.
And usually they can, men can like move through all of these stages in life.
The challenge is the guy in the middle, you're saying wait till marriage, but the women will not marry until they're old.
And so the problem is the guy, you're now saying to the guy, wait till you're middle age to have sex.
Wait till you're 40.
Wait till you're 35, 30.
I'm not saying it's impossible.
I'm sure there are people that have done it.
But if you take 10 men, I think that's, and the other problem is then he becomes a target because he hasn't really dealt with women.
He gets to 30.
Now the ladies are interested in him.
It's like 30, 35 when it switches.
Now he's a mark.
And this lady on the top over here, she's been banging this guy for a decade.
And she said, oh, I need to settle down.
I need to.
And he doesn't really know what he's getting himself into because he can't tell the difference between a good woman or a bad woman.
Because women were very good at hiding things.
I mean, you saw Nala did it out in the open, but women used to, you know, have crazy stuff and then go, go to God, become a new woman.
And then this guy becomes a target or like become a new woman, not really.
So let me go back.
That's why it's more impossible now.
And this isn't the men's choice, right?
The men, men, I think, would be much more willing to marry young.
But the problem is the ladies just won't do it.
They said, please settle down.
The lady said, nah, unless you're Chad.
Listen, it's Christian mythology.
So are you saying that if we have sex outside of marriage, that's not sinful?
Let me ask you this.
I'm asked you a question, sir.
If you have sex outside of marriage, is it sinful?
I believe it is, yes.
Okay, well, then how is this?
That's the same impossibility of standard.
I had sex outside of marriage.
I had sex outside of marriage, like many, many, many people do.
Yes, is it sinful?
Of course it is.
But for you to say, but for you to say, stop, dude.
For you to say, for you, dude, stop.
Let me finish.
For you to say, though, hey, this is an impossible standard to adhere to.
Just make the same argument.
Say, okay, well, then other men have also done it the other way.
So it makes no sense, right?
Just saying, just making the affirmative statements an impossible standard is in and of itself another fallacy.
It's not in the Bible.
It's not in the Bible.
What's not in the Bible?
Let me just ask a second.
Is marrying your first cousin in the Bible?
The title of this podcast was, or this debate was, Can Christian Polygamy Save Marriage in the West?
Let me just, simple question for everyone watching.
If a man knew that he could take more than one, would he be more likely to marry a little bit faster?
Because the average age that men get married right now is 30.5 years old.
Yeah, why?
What do they do in their 20s?
How come, though?
They fornicate.
They sow their own.
How come they have?
Yeah, I disagree.
I don't think that men are the ones pushing marriage.
I think it's women.
If men were the ones waiting to get married, then you would see the men marrying young women.
You know, you would see 40-year-old men with 20-year-old women or 25-year-old women because men are attracted to youth and beauty, right?
But because we see the females' age of first marriage going up, that tells me that it's the women that don't want to get married, not the men.
Age is in their 30s.
Do you know why?
Because they wait for the unicorn.
The wrong one.
Wrong.
I'll tell you exactly why.
It's because inside the Western nations, the United States, the United States government is notorious for this, but so is the Australian government.
So is most of the North American and Western European governments.
What they do is they have a mass campaign that they started in the 1980s where they taught women to value education over reproductive years.
Again, it's that subtle language.
They taught the women to value education.
If women cared about education, if we cared about getting smart in our careers, we would be picking careers that make a lot of money or degrees that teach you a lot, not gender studies, not these, you know, sociology degrees where you're really doing nothing, right?
Women enjoy the excitement of going to college, right?
It's exciting.
It's fun.
I mean, it's not this brainwashing.
It's not this forcing.
It's not this.
The ladies were not brainwashed.
What happened was you got to see exactly what we wanted to do.
What women do is they go to college, right?
They go to college during their reproductive years and they get married later in life.
That's why you also, here's my proof of this: you have what's called a reproduction or replication crisis, reproduction crisis.
You could just call it the birth rate crisis if you want, okay, whichever way you want to sway it.
We are under the reproduction replacement rate in the United States for children.
Remember, if you look at abortion rates, women under 25 are the most likely ones to get abortions.
So the age of first birth is going up, and women are aborting their kids.
What does that tell us?
We thought that the ladies really wanted to be moms, but I mean, every data point shows they don't.
They don't want to raise their kids.
They don't want to stay home with their kids.
They'd rather put their kids in daycare than watch them.
And they'll abort them.
This is because women, women get married later in life because they spend their 20s in school.
They spend their 20s getting college degrees.
You can look at this in the stats.
Overwhelmingly, men go to trade schools, women go to college.
Every single anthropological study which has been done on this has shown.
Yeah, but it's deeper than that.
It's not just college.
It's the women getting the free parties, going to part like the bars.
It's getting a cushy job, you know, drinks after work, all of the fun stuff.
You're essentially worshipped as a woman with Instagram, right?
All these people worshiping you, all these fun opportunities.
And demonstrated that in every single Western nation where women value education over their reproductive years, the birth rate goes straight down and marriage ends up happening later in life.
So again, what do we do?
Do we force?
Is it forced?
Do we say, nope, you can't, you're going to do exactly what we say to do.
Go get married and have kids.
Do we force them?
I don't know.
That feels kind of weird to me.
Or do you say, okay, do it.
Deal with the consequences.
The problem now is we don't have consequences for any of this stuff because there's always a guy that's going to bail the ladies out, or there's always a government program or child support or alimony that bails us out of the bad decisions.
Personally, what I would prescribe is I would say we got to get rid of the bailout programs.
And then you're going to see things resettle a little bit, not completely, right?
But, you know, you got to, you know, if you want a divorce, fine.
I'm, I'm not going to for, I don't want, I don't think the men should be forced to be with a woman that doesn't want to be with them.
That's torture.
But you need to pay for yourself the rest of your life.
The guy doesn't have to do it.
That's why it's going on, sir.
Okay, let me tell you what.
If a woman's sleeping with a man, there's about nine times out of ten she wants to marry that man and she will marry that man.
I don't care how that is not true.
That is not true at all.
How young she is.
And if polygyny was accepted, one of the most common complaints I've gotten from guys is that the women want to have sex with them.
You know, there's one I asked a guy friend of mine who, like, I don't know, he's, he would say, like, maybe one out of 10 women want a relationship.
Maybe.
When they get older, that changes.
But when they're younger, the women do not want to be in relationships because, again, they have to, by being in a relationship, you have to turn down free concerts, free trips.
You know, all of your friends are going to Miami for a girls' trip and going on a boat in Miami.
Are you going to say no?
Or maybe it's in your town, right?
Maybe it's not Miami.
It's just the coolest things to do in your town.
All of the single girls are going and it's fun.
And the young, especially young women, they're given so much.
We took the ring girl from the Jake Paul fight.
She was in a relationship at a small town, or I forgot what southern school she was at.
She was in a relationship.
She had a long-term boyfriend.
Had she had the boyfriend, do you think she would have reached this global fame being a ring girl, meeting all these celebrities?
Is she going to turn that down for an average man?
Sadly, unfortunately, no.
Not so stigmatized by people like you and legally mandated by the government.
There would not be any women not getting.
I let you talk.
Can you give me proofs though to demonstrate that?
I totally let you talk and now you're talking over me, brother.
Yeah, he does do that.
He does that a lot.
I just want the proofs with what you're saying.
Look, if it's common sense that if look, if polygyny was accepted and you didn't marry your high school sweetheart, you knew the 35-year-old down the street with two wives already has been looking at her and he's going to marry her.
Right now, it's a buyer's market for men.
We don't need to marry.
That's why the marriage rate is in the toilet.
It's the budget below.
Why?
Because we don't need to marry.
We can get all the benefits of marriage without doing it.
So women are sitting on the market like these houses they can't sell, trying to find a buyer.
No, they want to get married.
They want to have babies, but no.
There's no evidence that suggests that women want to do either of those things.
Women are stepping up to marry them because of this horse shit called this is a lot of the Christian guys get fooled by this because the women will say that, but I've never met a woman that says she wants to be married.
I say, okay, how many dates are you going on a week?
Are you going on two dates a week?
Three dates a week?
Are you dating aggressively to get to where you want to go?
I'm not saying you got to sleep with them all, but you do got to go download Hinge.
Are you okay?
You don't want to meet them online?
Are you going to a bar twice a week?
Okay.
Going to different churches.
Your church hasn't worked.
Going to a different church?
Like, what are you doing?
There's never anything.
Okay, guys.
I do have to get going, but I may finish this on Monday.
If you guys want me to keep reacting to this, let me know.
I might continue, might not.
Let me know what you guys want.
I'm going to read the rest of the comments, which if you guys do want to add a comment to the show, you go to theaudacitynetwork.com.
We do have an app, so you can download the app onto your phone.
And you just go into the live chat.
And then, you know, usually I read pretty much all the comments.
Dane says LGBT, oh, and it is one $10 a month payment or 80 bucks a year.
And you get to put all the comments you want in the chat.
So LGBTQ is an outright sin, no question.
Polygamy is not covered as a sin biblically, but it sets up a format that allows actual sin to thrive.
Thrive, Mitchell, fake, they aren't Christian.
Dane, here's a smile for you.
Pearl polygamy is like a woman going to the club that isn't a sin, but it sets her up to sin.
Mitchell, if you're willing to go to the club, then you're faking it.
Paul says to turn the one claiming to be a Christian out of the church if he does such things.
Well, okay, guys, let me know what you think in the comments.
Make sure you like the video on your way out and subscribe to the channel.
This was a really interesting debate.
Let me know if you want me to continue it Monday.
Also, we are on Spotify.
So go look up Pearl Daily on Spotify.
And we do have a GoFundMe for our divorce documentary.
We hit $10,500.
We're looking to hit $20K in the next month.
So if you guys want, no pressure, but if you want, go download or go donate to the GoFundMe.