A case for four husbands

Allow me to have a go. I think the issue has more to do with impracticability than anything else. The whole premise is based on the institution of marriage between a man and a woman found more or less in equal numbers. The question thus is, how to protect this institution and introduce enough flexibility to cater to extreme circumstances when gender imbalance occurs.  One can do this in only two ways. Restrict a man from having more than one wife or restrict the women from having more than one husband. The third option of arbitrary switching between one or the other is a recipe for guaranteed chaos. Now let us consider the options.

First of all, the constraint of having more than one wife provision in Quranic law is such that it can only be applicable in extreme circumstances. And is normally applicable within societies where there are no other social safety nets. Hence the allowance for more than one wife is nothing but an option; an option restricted to such an extent that in normal times it is humanly not possible and remains restricted to widowed women with kids. This was a quick fix solution to a serious problem of fatherless families, with almost zero possibility of surviving on their own. To somehow take this option and run with it is not on.

Let us bring the discussion up to speed and out of the ''desire'' circle. Now let us try to make a case for women having this option or for that matter both sexes were to have the option of multiple partners. Let us no assume that women with considerable fortune decide to have four husbands simultaneously within the Islamic injunctions or for that matter any system of laws. I have a few questions to raise, again this just for research considerations :)

How will a woman be able to treat all four husbands equally, a must under Islamic Injunctions? If a woman were to get pregnant with one husband she will simultaneously have to get pregnant with all 4 or at least try to. While a man is able to at least attempt the same, say within an acceptable period of four days. In case of a woman it will have to be at least say ten months apart or a race to who will win kind of absurdity.

One could make a case for implanting three additional worms once the science is perfected. Or, artificially inseminate with three more children of the other three husband is another way to go. We will have to still make a case where medical science is not up to the mark. It does not stop there.

Going forward, If her life is in danger because of one fetus out of the four, will a woman be willing to abort only that particular fetus without terminating the other pregnancies. Again possible but given the time constraints, to identify the cause in time and carry out the procedure without medical complications will have to be looked at.

Or women will have to settle for men who may be willing to wait for 4 to 5 years before they have a turn to have a child with them. One can look past the social fairness issue but we run into the established fact that has to do with the very survival of a society. In ideal circumstances, a society needs a 2.11 birth rate to survive beyond 25 years. No society is able to recover from a birth rate below this threshold. If taken to its logical conclusion every woman will have to be mandated to be reduced to a baby making machine just to keep up with this rate

Now comes the kicker, will a woman allow her husbands to take three wives each. Its only fair and they, in turn, will each have four husbands, perhaps, some of these couplings may even overlap, I guess you know where I am going with this. If no, why not and if yes will she "fend" for them as well, your fortune must be enough to fulfill your financial obligation in spite of your time off for delivery and post-delivery obligations

If all four of them decide to divorce her in a series, will she be willing to abstain for 16 months ( a mandatory 4-month wait)? Mind you this waiting period has more than biological implication since the period is also treated as a cooling off period with a chance to reconcile. So a simple pregnancy test will not do, plus the already limited time at hand given the 2.11 birth rate constraints further complicate the issue.

At the time of war, women will have to go to the front otherwise it would be sexist. Will she be willing to go to the front line pregnant, just to be fair to the other women and provide guarantees to ensure her unborn doesn't die or be injured? 

Will she relinquish her right to be given the benefit of the doubt (the present prerogative rests with the woman in case of a ''he said she said'' situation) when more than one husband accuses you of any financial or moral wrongdoing. The present one on one balance will be removed in multiple accusations.

Given time I can come up with a dozen more but seriously, just the fact that the option made available to men only has more to do with biology than any sexist consideration and in true Islam there is one husband and one wife unless you are a saint :)