South African Feminists Try to Legalize Polyandry: Multiple Husbands

South Africa is yet another country being attacked by rabid feminists.


A proposal by the South African government to legalise polyandry – when a woman has more than one husband at the same time – has led to howls of protest from conservative quarters.

This does not surprise Professor Collis Machoko, a renowned academic on the topic.

The objections are “about control,” he told the BBC. “African societies are not ready for true equality. We don’t know what to do with women we cannot control.”

Yes, exactly. Controlling women and other members of society is critical for the flourishing of any healthy society. Destroying the mechanisms of control in the name of “equality” only leads to social destruction, as we see so clearly in any country influenced by Liberal ideals of equality and other such nonsense.

Businessman and TV personality Musa Mseleku – who has four wives – is among those opposed to polyandry.

This will destroy African culture. What about the children of those people? How will they know their identity?” asks Mr Mseleku, who stars in a South African reality TV show about his polygamous family.

“The woman cannot now take the role of the man. It’s unheard of. Will the woman now pay lobola [bride price] for the man. Will the man be expected to take her surname?”

Of course, “this will destroy African culture.” That is the whole point of liberalization: to destroy all world cultures and all world religions. It doesn’t matter how much those cultures and religions mean to people. It doesn’t matter how drastically life will change for people. Those concerns are irrelevant in the face of the golden god of EQUALITY.

One wife nourished the idea of wanting to be a polyandrous woman when she was in grade six [aged around 12 years] after learning about how the queen bee in a hive hosts many bee co-husbands,” the professor said.

When she was an adult she started having sex with multiple partners who were all aware of each other.

“Four of her current nine co-husbands were in that first group of boyfriends.”

Apparently, this feminist decided to be polyandrous at twelve-years old. That’s the age all major life decisions should be made.

It would be stupid enough for a singe person to model her life on the basis of a twelve-year old’s understanding of bees. But how stupid is it for an entire country to change its legal system on that basis?

This is what our world is being reduced to because of these feminists.

RELATED: An Attack on Polygamy Is an Attack on Marriage Itself

So, what kind of men agree to be co-husbands?

Prof Machoko said love was the main reason the men he interviewed said they had agreed to be co-husbands. They did not want to risk losing their wife.

Some men also referred to the fact that they did not satisfy their wives sexually, agreeing to the suggestion of a co-husband to avoid divorce or affairs.

Another reason was infertility – some men consented to the wife taking another husband so that she could have children. In this way, the men “saved face” in public and avoided being stigmatised as “emasculated”.

Avoid looking emasculated… by being a co-husband.

Prof Machoko said he was unaware of polyandrous marriages in South Africa. Nevertheless, gender rights activists have asked the government to legalise such unions in the interest of equality and choice, as the law currently permits a man to take more than one wife.

Their proposal has been included in a document – officially known as a Green Paper – that the government has released for public comment as it embarks on the biggest overhaul of marriage laws since white-minority rule ended in 1994.

“It’s important to remember that this Green Paper sets to uphold human rights and we cannot lose sight of that,” said Charlene May, an advocate at the Women’s Legal Centre, a law firm that fights for women’s rights.

Even these “gender activists” recognize that no South African women are actually engaged in polyandry. So it is not like they are trying to meet some kind of urgent need to legalize a practice people are already engaged in. Their agitation is purely ideological. They want to disrupt the social and legal fabric for the sake of their childish understanding of muh equality. What an embarrassment for South Africa that such people are taken seriously.

This is what happens when you let feminists run rampant in your society.

The [polyandry legislation] also proposes giving legal recognition to Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and Rastafarian marriages.

While this has been largely welcomed by the communities concerned, the proposal to legalise polyandry has been condemned by clerics who hold seats in parliament.

This is what all these liberal groups do. They mix in minority groups so that they can accuse any opposition to their society-destroying policies as “racism.”

In this case, the “recognition” doesn’t even make sense because Muslims, Hindus, Jews, et al., are already allowed to get married and even practice polygamy in South Africa. They are not lacking any marriage rights.

This is not unlike gay marriage shills in the Muslim community like Yaqeen Institute and Jonathan Brown who warn Muslims that they must support gay marriage otherwise Muslims won’t be able to get married. Meanwhile, Muslims living in the West have rejected Qawm Lut marriage for decades and have had exactly zero problems getting married, contrary to the scare-mongering of these Qawm Lut enablers.

The leader of the opposition African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP), Reverend Kenneth Meshoe, said it would “destroy society”.

“There will come a time when one of the men will say, ‘You spend most of the time with that man and not with me’ – and there will be conflict between the two men,” he added.

No woman actually wants multiple husbands. The only reason some degenerate women might entertain the idea is for attention. Wanting to attract the attention of as many men as possible is one of the base desires of women. And, in theory, having multiple husbands means multiple men showering the wife with attention.

The problem is, the men who are so emasculated to be co-husbands are not the kind of men a woman would be happy about paying her attention.

This is one of the reasons that polyandrous relationships are so unstable. The woman gets tired of being surrounded by cucked losers.

The other reason is that co-husbands quickly get jealous and start killing each other and each others’ children. Anthropological research backs this up.

This is why there are only a couple of cultures in the entire world that are polyandrous and they are just small villages on the verge of extinction. Meanwhile, almost all the largest civilizations throughout history, including Islamic civilization of course, have been polygamous.

RELATED: Confused About Polygamy: Christianity, Prostitution, and More

As for Mr Mseleku, he urged South Africans not to take the principle of equality “too far”.

“Just because something is in the constitution that does not mean it will be good for us.”

Asked why it should be any different for women, given he had four wives, he replied: “I’ve been called a hypocrite because of my marriages but I’d rather speak now than be silent.

“All I can say it that this is un-African. We cannot change who we are.”

It is not only “un-African.” It is un-human, like many of the societal reforms that Liberalism and Feminism push onto the world.

These agents of Satan will transform us into inhuman beasts if we let them.

[Satan said:] “And I will mislead them, and I will arouse in them [sinful] desires, and I will command them so they will slit the ears of cattle, and I will command them so they will change the creation of Allah.” And whoever takes Satan as an ally instead of Allah has certainly sustained a clear loss. (Quran 4:119)

MuslimSkeptic Needs Your Support!
Notify of

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I was hoping you’d justify polygamy whilst criticising polyandry (I know polygamy is allowed in Islam but adding a few good arguments would have been better for learning the differences) It was good article though 👏


“This is why there are only a couple of cultures in the entire world that are polyandrous and they are just small villages on the verge of extinction. Meanwhile, almost all the largest civilizations throughout history, including Islamic civilization of course, have been polygamous”

be careful with your terminology to avoid being inaccurate. Here are the definitions of three words, don’t mix them up.

Polyandry= woman having more than one husband at a time.

Polygyny= man having more than one wife at a time. Which is what Islam and some other traditional cultures support.

Polygamy= a blanket term referring to either polygyny or Polyandry.

Polygamy= Polygyny+Polyandry.

The Greek root words:
Poly=many or multiple

Don’t use the word polygamy to exclusively refer to muslim practice of multiple wives (polygyny) while excluding Polyandry, because that is linguistically incorrect. Polyandry is linguistically included within the definition of polygamy. Instead it would be more appropriate to clear up confusion, if you start only using the word polygyny (instead of polygamy) to call the islam-approved marriage practice.


Same sex “marriage” was never about equality. Without same sex marriage, gay people already had equal rights to normal people. A gay man can marry a woman. A normal man can marry a woman.

I don’t understand how people ate up that nonsense that gays could not get married without same sex marriage.

And isn’t South Africa the number 1 rape country in the world? Perhaps feminists should do something about that rather than try to legalize stuff that will destroy south Africa even more.