Search important points! Presuming that small numbers of elite men will control women presumes that patriarchy will continue.

To presume that polyamory has to be like the sort of polygamy we see in Utah, where powerful men dominate harems of women and expel young males from the community, is to presume the polyamorous women elsewhere must lack agency.

But to presume that is to presume patriarchy is natural and must continue.

When I see Jordan Peterson making those kind of arguments I have to wonder why he insists on believing women would just lie down and allow themselves to be mistreated. Women today, at least as a class in the United States, insist on rights and agency. Why would they stop?

There’s something in that generalizing kind of argument, by the way, that echoes the societal destruction tropes that homophobes and transphobes promote.

You know, the silly arguments that say if everyone were homosexual, the human population would crash. If all children “become” trans, civilization would end.

It’s this fallacy that just because a small proportion of people are different, that recognizing and celebrating their differences will lead to catastrophic consequences by causing everyone else to be different in exactly the same way.

We see that with Andrew Sullivan bemoaning the loss of lesbians to trans men, even though data show the number of self-identifying lesbians is stable, even increasing a little.

It’s understandable that people fear change, but when fear of change amplifies into fear mongering, people need to take deep breaths and look at the facts.