failure to be transparent about HIV. (The all-male group also noted "women's selfish impatience with erectile dysfunction," "women preferring men who last longer," "women preferring men with a lot of money,” and "women not loving their husbands enough" as contributing factors to fidelity failure.) The group seemed pleased to work together, and eager to address the problem. The question of members being pro- or anti-polygamy was, apparently, only a side note. As it happens, there are plenty of polygamy problems that have nothing to do with HIV/AIDS. These divisions would exist without the disease. For instance, some preachers who don't support polygamy will sanction divorce and remarriage. One man told me that "true" polygamous marriage -- in which a man has many wives, all supported simultaneously -- is slowly being replaced: rich men now often take younger wives, but divorce and cast aside the previous wives first. The "new" approach looks suspiciously like the Western model of "serial monogamy”... except that the women, left with few resources, rarely marry again. (The gender inequality is highlighted when only one partner has HIV: an HIV-positive man will likely be nursed by his wife, while HIV- positive women can fear anything from abuse to abandonment.) Partly because abandonment is getting so common and partly due to doctrinal interpretations, there is yet a third group of church leaders who not only reject polygamy but refuse to remarry divorced people. Most interestingly, I've noticed that from some perspectives, the current system appears to stack the moral deck in favor of polygyny. A lot of the time, people will claim that there are only three alternatives: (1) abandonment and/or deadbeat fatherhood, (2) cheating, or (3) overt polygyny. If those are the alternatives, then even empowered women will argue in favor of polygyny -- though not happily, since they're quite conscious that a system supporting polygamy without polyandry is completely unfair. For ex