I meannnnn... If we've already come to the point where we're seeing a need for "marriage cops", then maybe we should be asking ourselves if there's anything wrong with the concept inherently.
Should Polygamy (plural marriages, bigamy) be legal?
- Thread starter WascallyWabbit
- Start date
This guy had all his lovers inject themselves to enhance their nuts. One died not too long ago.
Jus saying it's silly to imply only one sexual orientation is to blame for abusive/problematic poly relationships. The whole thing is rife with abuse potential no matter who you are.
It should be legal in the way a libertarian utopia *should* be a thing: it should be the case that normal people can be trusted to act with honor and integrity in their daily lives such that there don't need to be rules and enforcement in order to ensure society doesn't devolve into chaos. What we find time and time again, though, is it doesn't really work out that way so we need to regulate shit and have law and order.
It should be the case that adults should be able to do what they want to do, so long as it's all consensual. What you tend to find in these communities, however, is rampant abuse. And "not all polygamists!" is a thing too, but the sex cult insanity that is the FLDS church and the other various spawn of Joseph Smith's debauchery should be shot into the sun.
Polyamory, or whatever other lifestyles that adults want to have with other adults...sure...whatever...but institutional polygamy based on religious edicts and such? Fuck no. And I say that as a product of such arrangements several generations ago.
It should be the case that adults should be able to do what they want to do, so long as it's all consensual. What you tend to find in these communities, however, is rampant abuse. And "not all polygamists!" is a thing too, but the sex cult insanity that is the FLDS church and the other various spawn of Joseph Smith's debauchery should be shot into the sun.
Polyamory, or whatever other lifestyles that adults want to have with other adults...sure...whatever...but institutional polygamy based on religious edicts and such? Fuck no. And I say that as a product of such arrangements several generations ago.
Sure, but some of the religious ways of going about it can be abusive. Not sure how we handle that.
I was not aware of this. That's messed up.
Okay, banned for gay men too. Polygamy is Lesbians only.
We need cops just to break up domestic disputes between people in monogamous marriages.
Dismantling Fundamentalist Mormonism as a culture group is a radically different task than "should there exist a classification of 'marriage' for poly unions?"
If it's a relationship between consenting adults, I don't see why it matters how many people are involved.
I don't think that male supremacy is remotely commensurate in non-polygamous communities to polygamous communities, no. For sure, there is male supremacy in non-polygamist communities (e.g., the country at large), but not to the degree that is common in most polygamous communities that are well documented.
But the rest of my post that you cut out went onto say, maybe my perception of this is skewed by the many high-profile cases of widespread sexual abuse, spousal abuse, and child abuse that takes place in the relatively tiny amount of polygamous communities that there are in North America.
Yeah this is my thought as well. All marriages/unions will henceforth be composed of prenups.
And it create a lot of "jobs" in marriage law.
The problem is that this "fundamentalist mormonism" type of polygamy is a far larger part of the entire culture than you might think, to the point where it's probably the norm. That was more so my point.
Yeah there is plenty of precedent to suggest this is not a good idea that one would want institutionalized. Men usually are the ones benefitting from open relationships or harem style arrangements. Almost every cult you can think of started with some eerily similar circumstances and power dynamic.
I'll say this, the term "sister-wife" skeeves me out more than anything I've heard in a long while.
As others before me have pointed out, it sounds great in theory but the realities of allowing polygamy are a biiiig nope from me, dawg.
As others before me have pointed out, it sounds great in theory but the realities of allowing polygamy are a biiiig nope from me, dawg.
There's an interesting dichotomy around polygamy where it seems in the poly circles it's sort of presented as being open minded, free thinking, and liberal; but then where it is legal, most of the practicing countries are very conservative and patriarchal. Note that most of the countries where it is legal it is only polygyny that is legal (one man many wives), polyandry is illegal basically everywhere.
Most? I would like to see stats for that, I would imagine that there is a lot of fear and pressure in "regular" marriages as well
Two same sex siblings would be more acceptable than 2 straight siblings marrying eachother but thats only due to assumed genetic defects of the child. IDK the actual stats of that
Yeah family members having sex and getting married is gross to me but that doesn't mean it should be illegal. I do agree that legal status should be removed from marriage though.
Yeah it is ironic. The practice predates most modern legal codes so you have liberal poly relations on one hand and illiberal forced harems on the other hand protected by freedom of religion.
You need "marriage cops" for current marriages too! Most industrialized countries have governmental organisations responsible for famliy matters.
A judge can toss those right out the window on a whim. They're worth their weight in wishful thinking.
And yah, imagine divorce proceedings. If you are all married, and there is a child involved who get custody? Who pays child support? This is a giant mess waiting to happen. Fuck that noise.
Marriage as it is defined now shouldn't be a legal matter anyway, all the legal matters like custody, property ownership, households for tax purposes, etc. shouldn't be tied to such a narrow understanding of family structure, so by that measure sure I suppose. Currently the support structure needed for such polygamist unions to be common does not exist, and given the way they often devolve into abusive situations, I don't think it's wise to support a move like that at the current time. But I suppose you have to get started from somewhere and without the push for legalization/normalization of the practice those support structures may not be built, making it a bit of an chicken and egg situation
yeah. polgamists ruined this. gonna need receipts of this utopian multi husband/wife family that doesn't become chaos.
Then make them legal. Write laws, templates and rules that a standard prenup agreement has to follow to be binding. Make it contain language that the written law superceeds all agreements. Point being that written law as stands doesn't support this. So something will have to change to enable this. And a more codified prenup designed more as a Union contract could do wonders to support such a construct.
I JUST STARTED WATCHING THE HANDMAID'S TALE AND GET THIS REFRENCE
YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
I'd be curious to know how the relationship would actually work. Are the individuals all married to one person, or are all of the people married to one another? If there's a marriage of, say, 5 people, am I married to all 4 of the others? Can I marry only some of them? Divorce only some of them? Maybe it would instead be like becoming a member of some legally recognized entity, like an LLC? And there would be an operating agreement type document that identifies what the members' duties are and what happens when someone withdraws. Seems like there would be a lot to work out.
Based on my research, polygamy is essentially inherently abusive whether overtly, subconsciously, or otherwise. Obviously cultural relativism plays into things as well, but given that no other civilized country seems to allow any form of polygamy, it seems plain that it is not the preferred method of behaviour:
It's definitely not my thing but I'm not opposed to it being legal. If all sides are consensual, consenting adults, go for it!
Just make it available to everyone then. I don't understand why married couples should be entitled to more than a single liver.
I'll just chime in to say that this is likely due to to proliferation of Christianity and Christian monogamy, not because various societies weighed the pros and cons of monogamy and decided monogamy was the way to go.
I'm not saying all poly unions in history were abuse free but the ones that existed were often stamped out by the spread of Christiandom.
Anyway it's not like monogamous unions are abuse free either. The problem of spousal abuse and the problem of union structure are two separate issues in my mind.
I shouldn't have bought up couples. I more meant it should be available to everyone regardless, what is the purpose of incentivising people to get married these days?
In 2000, the United Nations Human Rights Committee reported that polygamy violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), citing concerns that the lack of "equality of treatment with regard to the right to marry" meant that polygamy, restricted to polygyny in practice, violates the dignity of women and should be outlawed.[136] Specifically, the reports to UN Committees have noted violations of the ICCPR due to these inequalities[137] and reports to the General Assembly of the UN have recommended it be outlawed.[138][139] Many Muslim states are not signatories of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), including Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Malaysia, Brunei, Oman, and South Sudan; therefore the UN treaty doesn't apply to these countries.[140]
I don't think it's a religious argument.