Talk:Serial monogamy

message: Might discuss (here or elsewhere): by whom, in what cultures and under what circumstances is marriage following the death of a spouse considered unacceptable. --Daniel C. Boyer 16:27, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cultures 

message: from Talk:Serial polygamy
this article needs to be renamed.  It is not serial polygamy, it is "Serial Monogamy" -- just like a serial killer (a bad comparison, but useful) kills one person at a time, but over and over, a serial mogamist is married to one person at a time, but over and over.  All the scholarly literature I know on this topic refers to it as serial mogamy or (the term I prefer)  Chain Marriage, not serial polygamy Slrubenstein
: Renaming sounds fine, but maybe this could redirect to the new one. I think I've heard the term 'serial polygamy' used in more popular writing, possibly something like Megatrends or Megatrends 2000. Is mogamy a contraction for monogamy?  Wesley
Made a redirect. 'Serial polygamy' doesn't fit the definition of polygamy.
:Vacuum
Serial polygamy was moved here to preserve the page history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angela (talk • contribs) 23:22, 6 January 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've undone that move because there's now a redirect at the "Serial polygamy" title. I've also imported two of the early edits from the May 2003 database dump to the history atTalk:Serial polygamy. Graham87 04:02, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serial polygamy 

message: The comment on serial polygamy does not conform to the verifiability policy of Wikipedia. If the comment on serial polygamy cannot be verified, it should be removed from this article. Kelly 20:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Citations added. The comment most certainly DOES conform to the verifiability policy, as a ONE-second Google search showed.Dogface 11:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation needed for serial polygamy

message: After perusing the history of these two pages (mono- and poly- serial marriage) it seems that they are both referring to the same phenomena.  Looking at the two sections as they now are there seems to be a great overlap, the first taking the form ABC and the second ACD.  I propose that a combination, of the form ABCD, be compiled. Alpha designations are explained in the table:
¶ Summary                       	Serial Monogamy	Serial Polygamy	Combination
series of single partners (A)   	X              	X              	X
descriptive not prescriptive (B)	X              	               	X
in all animals (C)              	X              	X              	X
term comparison (D)             	               	X              	X
Red Baron 16:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Combination of the two

message: I just searched dictionary.com, merriam-webster online, OneLook Dictionary Search, YourDictionary.com, Dictionary.msn, Cambridge dictionary, worldcentral.com, and thefreedictionary.com, to find serial monogamy and serial polygamy.  I think two times I found the latter (both by reference to this Wikipedia page), and found the former in all.  It seems that the latter is a pejorative that is used to demean those who practice this multiple marriage thing, by referencing it to the illegal practice of polygamy.Red Baron 17:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I got the feeling that Serial Polygamy is either WP:OR, a neologism or someone with an axe to grind.  I think the whole article needs to be re-worked and I wouldn't mind doing so if I have the time.  WLU 14:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There seem to be some web references to serial polygamy: one for every 62 (Yahoo) or 13 (Google) references to serial monogamy.  So, I think that this term has some place in the article, but only insofar as saying something like:  "Some people refer to this practice as serial polygamy, in order to add a stigma to the practice..."--Red Baron 15:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Having reviewed Wikipedia's policy, categorizing serial polygamy as a neologism seems to be accurate.  I think we should go ahead with a rewrite that reflects this.—Red Baron 15:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pejorative "Polygamy"

message: Someone (user 81.169.185.225) has made a major change to the text of this article that has been substantially different than anything discussed here, in fact quite the opposite, without giving any justification for doing so.  As stated above, the preference of polygamy seems to be dubious, yet this was made the authoritative term by the unknown editor.  I see that this change has been reverted, and I am glad to see it.—Red Baron 15:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's probably the same person that has been messing with the article for a couple weeks now.  I've reverted.  WLU 15:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Who made this major change?

message: *A website, Health 24.com, defines SM as "long-term, exclusive sexual relationships entered into consecutively over the lifespan."
*A study by Helen Fisher has a biological slant at this Forum.
*Serena Petrella (Department of Sociology, Carleton University, Canada) declares SM a norm in her article Only with You – Maybe – If You Make Me Happy: A Genealogy of Serial Monogamy as Governance and Self- Governance.  The site Tikkun agrees.
*Trivia-Library.com says that SM was "rife" in ancient Rome, and used to be "almost exclusively the province of kings and queens."
*A Canadian Marriage Study is reported to state that most people who marry do not divorce; that 46% of those whose first marriage ends will remarry; but that fewer than 1% of the "ever married population" indulge in a third marriage.
*The Moral Animal reportedly states that the negative economic effects from SM (on divorced women and their children) have potential to be worse than from polygamy
:::Red Baron 16:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible sources