Polygamy

[Insult to Rocks]

So..... I recently read an article about polygamy on the internet.... I really don't know what to think about it. I honestly don't have enough info on modern polygamy to really make a judgment, so I thought I would ask everyone on the forum what they think/know. I would appreciate it, as the feminist in me is really confused at this point.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

So..... I recently read an article about polygamy on the internet.... I really don't know what to think about it. I honestly don't have enough info on modern polygamy to really make a judgment, so I thought I would ask everyone on the forum what they think/know. I would appreciate it, as the feminist in me is really confused at this point.

Dopey and illegal.

I hear 'the prophet' received a message from GAWD and passed it on to the LDS bunch, but some just never listen.  :roll:

[Plu]

It's funny when you come back from a weekend of having fun with another couple and this is the first thread you see :P

(So yeah. Polygamy is cool and awesome, and like everything religion tries to abuse the hell out of it, but that's religion's problem and not polygamy's. And polygamy is also not for everyone. It's very hard to do.)

[Jason78]

Polygamy meaning multiple marriages?    It's not a problem for me.   Have as many husbands and wives as you want.  

Polygamy meaning romantic love towards more than one person?   That's just a fact of life, how you act on those feelings is up to you.

If people want to love more than one person, who am I to say that it's wrong?

[Mermaid]

I don't care. I couldn't do it, but it's not about me. If all are adults and are consenting, it's not up to anyone but those involved to decide whether it's right or wrong. The thought of having more than one husband or sharing one with another woman or women makes me tired. But if it works for you, knock yourself out.

[stromboli]

A. Polygamy among consenting adults is fine, so long as all parties are treated equally and consent without any forced provocation.

B. Very, very seldom is this the case. Nearly always it is done in a religious context with a patriarchal mindset, e.g. the patriarch/man has control over what and how it is done and who has rights and who doesn't. And in that context it very often violates the rights of the female, especially when said patriarch can determine what and with whom the female can interact with.

C. In the real world, there is probably a lot of what amounts to polygamy among consenting adults that goes on below the radar. Polygamy implies marriage vows between all participants, but multiple people can live together without vows and be polygamous in practice.

D. Get rid of the religious, patriarchal aspect of polygamy and it would more than likely work just fine.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Meh..still dopey. I don't want one wife anymore much less more than one and damn sure don't want to be husband 2, 3, 4 or 5.  :shock:

[stromboli]

Meh..still dopey. I don't want one wife anymore much less more than one and damn sure don't want to be husband 2, 3, 4 or 5.  :shock:

Which is actually the point. It is about choice. You and I are old enough to remember when the thought of two adults living together was horrific, blatant fornication without marriage. Now things are different. Enough people made the choice that it is now acceptable. I think eventually polygamy will be legal, because it is about choice.

[Poison Tree]

A couple years back I read a study that had been done on polygamous  societies (I tried to find it last time the topic came up here, but was unable to. I thought I'd posted it on the forum before, but I'm sure that would have been pre-crash, if I actually did post it.). The study concluded that polygamy has a negative impact: basically you end up with a few old, rich guys with a bunch of young (often underage) wives. This obviously means that there are not enough wives for the younger/poor guys to have any. These unwed young males are typically seen as threats/rivals by the older (successfully) polygamous males and end up ostracized from society (see, for example, FLSD's lost boys).

It certainly may be possible to have a polygamous group (especially a small one amidst non-polygamous neighbors) without these problems, but it seems like that is not what ends up happening.

[Plu]

A couple years back I read a study that had been done on polygamous  societies (I tried to find it last time the topic came up here, but was unable to. I thought I'd posted it on the forum before, but I'm sure that would have been pre-crash, if I actually did post it.). The study concluded that polygamy has a negative impact: basically you end up with a few old, rich guys with a bunch of young (often underage) wives. This obviously means that there are not enough wives for the younger/poor guys to have any. These unwed young males are typically seen as threats/rivals by the older (successfully) polygamous males and end up ostracized from society (see, for example, FLSD's lost boys).

It certainly may be possible to have a polygamous group (especially a small one amidst non-polygamous neighbors) without these problems, but it seems like that is not what ends up happening.

Sounds just like capitalism to me. Makes sense.

[stromboli]

A couple years back I read a study that had been done on polygamous  societies (I tried to find it last time the topic came up here, but was unable to. I thought I'd posted it on the forum before, but I'm sure that would have been pre-crash, if I actually did post it.). The study concluded that polygamy has a negative impact: basically you end up with a few old, rich guys with a bunch of young (often underage) wives. This obviously means that there are not enough wives for the younger/poor guys to have any. These unwed young males are typically seen as threats/rivals by the older (successfully) polygamous males and end up ostracized from society (see, for example, FLSD's lost boys).

It certainly may be possible to have a polygamous group (especially a small one amidst non-polygamous neighbors) without these problems, but it seems like that is not what ends up happening.

No question. Everything about the FLDS is power based, and a lot of money changes hands around the issue of women. It is ridiculous that sixtyish men can be married to half a dozen young wives based on their power and placement, and young men get booted out because they are superfluous. Like I said, without a level playing field and free choice, the whole issue is corrupt. When it becomes competitive, even more so.

[jumper]

...

[stromboli]

I watch a show on TLC called 'Sister wives' about a modern polygamist family... a man and his four wives and 18 children (I think it's 18, somewhere around there) They moved from Utah to Las Vegas to get away from the strict laws in Utah. Sometimes it seems like he is completely dominated by his wives and is like a dog with his tail between his legs when the wives get together or when a wife gets mad. Very few times it does seem like he rules the roost, but very few instances. Seems like those 4 women are in charge and he just runs from house to house trying to make all his wives happy - which is impossible. I see a LOT of jealousy and unhappiness in the women in interviews and such. And, from what I can tell, his kids don't have much respect for him. He's an egotistical goof for the most part. I know I can't know all about polygamy from watching one reality show, (scripted? probably. made for tv? of course) But I watch it sometimes anyways. I've seen another show about polygamy on TLC called something like "Me and my five wives" and it seems like the man has more control and it seems like the wives get along much better. But really, how much reality is there on a reality show...  :roll: I'd love to know some polygamists in real life, it's interesting to me, I don't know why.

Yeah. the Sister Wives guy bought himself a whole bunch of hurt by going public, and it shows how disfunctional such a family can be. What most people don't realize is that a lot of polygamy goes on in suburbia underneath people's noses. The LDS church makes a lot of speeches against it, but from a doctrine standpoint it is still valid and many people tacitly support it, otherwise it couldn't exist.

Personally I think the guy was stupid to allow the show in the first place.

[Jason78]

Stromboli, surely that's an argument against the LDS Church rather than polygamy?

[stromboli]

Stromboli, surely that's an argument against the LDS Church rather than polygamy?

The LDS church doesn't officially support polygamy, in fact they would insist they do everything to suppress it. And yes, that is an argument against the church because it is hypocritical. But the doctrine still exists- no one has taken it from the Doctrine and Covenants, so the FLDS and others claim the doctrine is still valid. And in fact the argument can be made that it is. So you have a dichotomy, some members secretly supporting it and the church officially denouncing it. This is the land of Mormonism. Confusing? You betcha.