And it would increase the individual value of each woman, each wife.
I think that this would reduce "honor killings" - and this would increase the VALUE OF EACH LIFE in these cultures, which would reduce the appeal of jihadoterrorism.
A few of these links are to articles written BEFORE 9/11. Here's an excerpt from one:
... everything the world has learned in the past decade about why some countries develop and others stay mired in poverty shows that women can make all the difference. National standards of living improve -- family income, education, nutrition and life expectancy all rise, and birthrates fall -- as women move toward equality, ... When women's influence increases, these experts explain, it strengthens the moderate center, bolstering economic stability and democratic order. Women might serve as powerful assets in the West's attempt to counter Islamic radicalism. ... for the past 30 years, Islamic extremism has flourished throughout the Middle East. As women have been pushed out of the political and economic spheres, their traditional moderating role has declined. "This is the warriors' time," said Fouad Ajami, director of Middle East Studies at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Washington. "The warriors, the martyrs -- they're all men. In this moment of history, with the world of the Arabs and the larger world of Islam on the boil, the whole question of women and women's progress is shelved." Angry young men, many of them unemployed, have seized the public arena from Algeria to South Asia and filled it with hate, intolerance and the abuse of women, Ajami said. "This is the class that is most hostile to women," Ajami said. "If this class dominates the Islamists, feminism and modernity are doomed." "The issue of gender is so crucial to progress and modernity," he said, "But if the cult of the martyr and the children of the stones on the West Bank, if that's the dominant cult, then what little place there was for women is shrinking."
[From an article by Barbara Crossette, and published in The New York Times - Sunday, November 4, 2001 - three weeks after 9/11.]
In this post - and my prior one on gender imbalances in Muslim countries - I have tried to argue that widespread misogyny and polygamy have had (and continue to have) a profound effect on socio-economic conditions in Muslim nations (probably as much a negative effect as anything else - the barbaric and backward practices derived from Islam's anti-female cultural attitudes contribute to their nation's poverty and ignorance) and their tolerance of tyranny, AND to their propensity for domestic and international violence. If and when Islam banishes polygamy and punishes misogyny, then Islam can end jihadofascism and jihadoterrorism.
UPDATE: CLICK HERE FOR AN ARTICLE BY AYAAN HIRSI ALI ON MISOGYNY IN ISLAM - FROM TODAY'S WSJ! EXCERPT: In every society where family affairs are regulated according to instructions derived from the Shariah or Islamic law, women are disadvantaged. The injustices these women are exposed to in the name of Islam vary from extreme cruelty (forced marriages; imprisonment or death after rape) to grossly unfair treatment in matters of marriage, divorce and inheritance. I have argued - in this post and a prior one - that Islam's cruel gender discrimination shows up in demographic data, and that this is a root cause of jiahoterror, arguing that if Muslims believe it is good to murder female family members, then of course they can commit terror agaisnt "infidels."
And... ROGER L. SIMON AGREES: "Women's rights are the very center of the War on Terror. In fact I would argue Islamofascism at its core is more than anything else an expression of rage against women and that Islam itself is not much better on that score."