Media personality Akua Yeboah has sparked controversy after openly endorsing men marrying more than one wife, describing the practice as both beneficial and divinely sanctioned, reigniting debates about polygamy in Ghana where the practice remains illegal under civil law but persists under customary traditions.
Speaking in a video that has circulated on social media, Yeboah argued that men are naturally endowed to marry more than one wife and should not be restricted to monogamy. She stated that marrying more than one wife is very good, claiming that God has blessed men with much sperm, and it ought to be utilized through different women instead of going to waste. Her comments have generated significant attention and criticism across social and traditional media platforms.
Yeboah insisted that polygamy is beneficial to society and helps grow communities, adding that men should be allowed to practice it freely. According to her, resistance to polygamy largely comes from religious leaders, particularly pastors who promote monogamous marriages. She accused such pastors of selfishness, singling out women pastors in particular by stating that pastors who promote single marriages are just selfish, especially the women pastors.
The media personality further criticized what she described as changing attitudes among women, claiming that modern marriage practices are driven by self interest rather than communal values. She argued that women today are selfish, alleging they lure men into signing marriage contracts so they can keep them all to themselves, and that is selfish. Yeboah concluded by asserting that every potential child contributes to community growth and that restricting men to one wife limits that potential, reinforcing her belief that polygamy should be socially accepted.
Her comments represent the latest entry in ongoing public discourse about polygamy in Ghana, a practice that occupies a complex legal and social position. Polygamy is illegal in Ghana under civil law, though restrictions are not heavily enforced and polygamous marriages are arguably considered legal under customary law. This dual legal framework creates ambiguity that allows polygamous unions to persist despite formal prohibition.
Six countries in Africa including Benin, Cabo Verde, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, and Nigeria have civil codes that formally prohibit polygamy, but the laws are poorly applied. In Ghana specifically, three different laws govern marriage: the Customary Marriage and Divorce Registration Law, 1985, the Marriage Ordinance, 1884, and the Marriage of Mohammedans Ordinance, 1884. The marriage framework in Ghana gives some room for polygamous marriage to operate, particularly under religious and customary provisions.
Research using nationally representative data from the 2017/2018 Ghana Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey revealed the prevalence of polygyny to be 21.6 percent, indicating that more than one in five married individuals in Ghana participate in polygamous unions despite civil law prohibitions. A study analyzing Ghanaian Christian women found that the prevalence of involvement in polygyny marriage unions was 12.2 percent, with higher prevalence at 15.0 percent among women of Anglican denomination, 13.9 percent among Catholic denomination, and lowest at 8.4 percent among Methodist denominations.
These statistics demonstrate that polygamy persists across religious lines in Ghana, including among Christian populations despite many churches’ theological opposition to the practice. Muslims in Africa are more likely than Christians to live in polygamous arrangements at 25 percent versus 3 percent, while in some nations the practice is also common among folk religion followers and nonreligious individuals. The practice reflects complex interactions between traditional customs, religious teachings, economic factors, and social norms.
Yeboah is not the first Ghanaian media personality to publicly defend polygamy. MC Yaa Yeboah, speaking on United Showbiz in September 2024, boldly supported the act of men marrying multiple women, saying that men should have the freedom to practice polygamy if they choose and are financially capable of doing so. She highlighted double standards in society where men with more than one wife often face heavy criticism, and women who choose to become second wives are judged or looked down upon, yet when powerful men engage in polygamy, it rarely seems to be an issue.
MC Yaa Yeboah stated during that discussion that if a man says he wants to marry ten, fifteen, or even twenty wives and can afford it, society should let them be, noting that society doesn’t have a problem with wealthy men who have more than one wife, but when a woman is a second wife to an average person, they make her feel less of herself. She also challenged the notion that women “snatch” another’s husband, arguing that such narratives are flawed and baseless.
The arguments advanced by both Akua Yeboah and MC Yaa Yeboah reflect longstanding justifications for polygamy rooted in demographic, economic, and cultural factors. Demographic factors such as high infant and child mortality, high male mortality and outmigration, and potentially lethal male activities such as hunting and military combat contribute to an excess supply of women and a scarcity of men, which can promote polygyny. These historical factors, while less relevant in contemporary Ghana, shaped cultural practices that persist.
This ancient practice is encouraged by customary law and religious practices, with polygamy recognized and governed by civil law across most West African countries, allowing a man to marry up to four women in certain situations, including the financial capacity to support multiple wives and families. The financial capacity requirement represents a traditional safeguard ensuring men could adequately provide for multiple households, though enforcement mechanisms for this standard remain unclear.
However, research also documents significant social challenges associated with polygamous unions. Studies on polygyny among men in Ghana have called for interventions to improve universal access to education and social protection policies as critical to reshaping socio-cultural practices and views that engender polygyny, while strengthening existing laws and policies is important in addressing the social challenges caused by polygamous unions.
The research evidence suggests complex relationships between education, modernization, and polygamy prevalence. Age is significantly associated with increased odds of men engaging in polygyny in Ghana, with those aged 45 to 59 having higher odds than those aged 15 to 29, possibly due to the effect of modernization in changing cultural norms that promote polygamous marriage within Ghanaian society, which might influence the younger cohort to be less inclined to engage in polygamous unions compared to the older cohort.
Education also plays a significant role. Men with secondary education have lower odds of engaging in polygyny compared with men with no education, suggesting that formal education exposure correlates with reduced likelihood of polygamous marriage, possibly through changed attitudes, expanded economic opportunities for women, or exposure to alternative family models.
With the arrival of Christianity and colonists, polygamy came to be recognized as a form of slavery that needed to be abolished, and it has been a source of consternation for Christian missionaries. Different Christian denominations adopted varying approaches to the practice. Roman Catholic and Lutheran missions condemn polygamy, refuse to baptize members of polygamous marriages, and demand that polygamous marriages be dissolved, regarding polygamy as a sin. Baptist and Methodist missions baptize those who entered a polygamous marriage before hearing the Gospel or before deciding to accept Christ, not regarding polygamy as a sin but believing it is not God’s ideal.
These theological divisions continue influencing contemporary Christian attitudes toward polygamy in Ghana, creating the tensions Akua Yeboah referenced when criticizing pastors who promote monogamous marriages. However, her characterization of such religious leaders as selfish oversimplifies complex theological, ethical, and practical considerations that inform Christian teaching on marriage.
Women’s rights perspectives on polygamy present additional complexity. Academic analysis of women’s rights and the practice of polygamy in Ghana examines various justifications given for the practice and colonial attitudes toward it, highlighting ongoing debates about whether polygamy inherently disadvantages women or whether such disadvantage stems from specific implementation rather than the practice itself.
Critics of polygamy argue that the practice perpetuates gender inequality, concentrates power in men’s hands, creates competition and conflict among co wives, disadvantages children through divided resources and attention, and reflects patriarchal structures that subordinate women. Defenders counter that when practiced with consent and adequate resources, polygamy can provide social support networks among co wives, economic advantages through shared household labor, and solutions to demographic imbalances.
Akua Yeboah’s specific argument that men possess abundant sperm requiring utilization through multiple women to avoid waste represents a biological determinism argument that most contemporary relationship experts and ethicists would reject. Human reproductive biology does not necessitate polygamy, and framing marriage primarily through fertility maximization perspectives ignores the relational, emotional, legal, and social dimensions of marital unions.
Her criticism of women who prefer monogamous marriages as selfish inverts traditional critiques that position polygamy as serving male interests at women’s expense. By framing monogamy as female selfishness, Yeboah challenges conventional narratives but does so through rhetoric that may obscure rather than clarify the complex trade offs women navigate in choosing between monogamous and polygamous arrangements.
The argument that restricting men to one wife limits community growth through reduced births assumes that maximizing population represents an unqualified good, neglecting considerations about quality of care children receive, environmental sustainability, economic capacity to support growing populations, and women’s agency in reproductive decision making. Contemporary development frameworks increasingly emphasize child wellbeing and women’s reproductive autonomy over simply maximizing birth numbers.
Yeboah’s comments arrive amid broader conversations about marriage, gender relations, and modernization in Ghana. Changing economic conditions, urbanization, women’s increasing educational attainment and economic participation, exposure to global media and values, and evolving legal frameworks all influence marriage practices and attitudes. These shifts create tensions between those seeking to preserve traditional practices and those advocating for reformed or alternative family structures.
The viral spread of Yeboah’s video demonstrates the polarizing nature of polygamy discussions in Ghana. Supporters argue that adults should have freedom to structure family arrangements as they choose provided all parties consent, that polygamy represents valid cultural heritage deserving respect, and that monogamy represents Western imposition rather than universal norm. Critics contend that polygamy perpetuates gender inequality, that civil law prohibitions should be enforced, and that modernization requires abandoning practices rooted in historical circumstances no longer applicable.
Social media reactions to Yeboah’s statements have been mixed, with some users supporting her right to express views favoring polygamy while others have criticized her arguments as retrograde and harmful to women’s advancement. The debate reflects deeper societal divisions about gender roles, tradition versus modernity, individual freedom versus collective norms, and the appropriate role of religion and custom in shaping contemporary Ghanaian society.
As Ghana continues grappling with questions about marriage, family structure, and gender equality, voices like Yeboah’s ensure polygamy remains part of public discourse rather than relegated to purely academic or policy discussions. Whether her intervention advances productive dialogue or simply reinforces existing divisions depends partly on how subsequent conversations engage with the complex realities of polygamous practice rather than simplified caricatures from either defenders or critics.
