I forgot to thank you for your perspective. It is hard to find someone with any experience from a non-muslim background.

I cannot deny that my thinking is influenced by personal greed and lust, but it would be unfair to judge purely based on equality. For example, if there were a gender imbalance in the population during wartime, it would be devastating if polygyny were not allowed based on equality. These women shouldn't die alone, but that's irrelevant to my point; I'm just presenting a "fair" case.

However, there's another issue in Western society: the inactivity of men and the eugenics-reinforcing behavior of women. Again, I don't know enough about it, and I believe it's too complex to judge based on a few parameters.

The situation isn't as extreme as it is in wartime scenarios. However, it has produced many confused men and women who cannot effectively engage with each other. Personally, I see sperm banks as unethical and as a symptom of anything but medical necessity.

Ultimately, I believe many of these women would rather engage in polygyny than start a family with a "lesser" man. By "lesser," I mean a man that the female brain automatically filters out—they deem what is lesser. In purely equal terms, it would be better for a woman to start a family with a lesser man, but that could also be seen as unrealistic. Therefore, the result will be either no children or a sperm bank. There aren't enough high-quality men in Western society.

I also wish to start a large family, but I can't think of a way to achieve that and be equal. Ultimately, everything we do is based on egoistical principles, but not everything is egotiscal.