'Cause I kinda want one. For when I get rich and famous.
Well, since a harem refers to either the private quarters of the house (the women’s rooms) or the women of a family (unmarried sisters, wife/wives, unmarried daughters, etc.), I don’t see that one would be illegal in the U.S.
http://www.nvbrothels.net/directory.htm
'nuff said.
A harem is technically the women’s quarters of a home. In these quarters women are secluded from a homes public life. In poorer homes the women cook, sew, raise kiddies, and often run cottage industries of their own (tatooing, weaveing, making butter and that sort of thing). They are populated by wives, unmarried daughters, unmarried cousins, mothers and other female relatives of the male head of household and the male extended family living in the house. This sort of everyday harem still exists in some parts of the world. It is acceptable under Islamic law (but certainly not in all Islamic societys) for a man to have up to four wives, provided he can provide for them all equally.
In more opulent times and places, harmens were inhabited by many many women. While all of these women were considered wives, many of them were given as gifts or bought at slave markets. While they often spent time playing childish games, telling stories and eating sumptious food, they were still imprisoned in their luxery. The only non-eunuch adult male they would ever see was their husband. They engaged in bitter power struggles, and often risked death with their intrigues. Many of these women were from distant lands, gifts from distant rulers, and longed for their home.
Now, I assume that what you really want to know is can you have multiple wives in America. I think you could probably legally keep the first kind of harem, provided you didn’t try to legally marry all of the women (you can consider yourself married in the eyes of your lord, if that makes you happy) and you didn’t make a public spectacle of yourself like certain Mormon polygamists.
I think trying to build up the second kind of harem, however, would fall under anti-slavery or false imprisonment laws. If a harem isn’t seprerated from the public, it isn’t a harem. You would basically be keeping the women in slave-like conditions, which is both illegal and morally depicable.
What if all the women in my harem were volunteers? And I let them do pretty much whatever they wanted?
Gossip has it that our buddy Hugh Hefner has a number of tasty bedfellows with whom he co-habitates.
Including a pair of identical twins. Goodness.
Great!
Now does Hef get hassled by the cops much?
Boy, harems sure are expensive. You gotta build the addition on your house, pay off the cops, get your bathrobe monogrammed, buy food, spend months searching out women who would come live with you, and all those other expenses.
Oh yeah, and music. You CANNOT have a harem without a good sound system.
Sounds like a real headache.
Gossip he has been only too glad to confirm (with pictures of parties or dinners) in every single issue of his publication for the last year and a half. I think he’s got five of them, including the aforementioned pair of identicals. All this, mind you, in his mid-70s …[sub] sob I want his life…[/sub]
And since they are just sharing living space and nobody’s being kept imprisoned nor actually claiming to be married to anybody, there’s no legal hassle.
jrd
I thought they convicted that Morman who was in the news not long ago of polygamy, even though he claimed he was not legally married to more than one woman, because the state of Utah claimed the women were his comman law wives. In short, if multiple women live in your household whom you sleep with and have children by, you’re going to have trouble with the law.
First of all, all people (in the USA, anyway) have a right to freedom of association. If a bunch of women WANT to live with you, there ain’t crap the government can do about it. (Well, modulo some local laws designed to discourage brothel houses. I’ll get to that in a minute…) So given what you said: What if all the women in my harem were volunteers? And I let them do pretty much whatever they wanted? I.e., there is no coercion and they live with you because they want to, you’re fine here.
On the subject of common-law marriage, I commend your attention to this page: http://www.ct-divorce.com/Commlaw.htm . Note the sentence in red in the 9th paragraph. Just living together is not common law marriage by any current definition. You have to live together and you have to both claim you’re common-law married to each other. But just cohabitation isn’t enough.
This means you and, well, several women could quite easily live in the same place and do whatever you wanted, and so long as you don’t claim to be common-law married, you aren’t. So you can’t be hit for bigamy.
So I think there’s only one thing in your way, and that may be mitigatable. Basically, several cities have laws banning more than N (usually between 4-6) unrelated people from living in a house together. The rational is to prevent brothels from disguising themselves as communal housing.
I can think of a couple ways around this. First, of course, you can simply lie: “In my mansion? Yes, only me and my two friends live here. These 4 other girls? They’re just overnight guests. Sleeping it off after having too much to drink after a party, you know. I have LOTS of parties. With a mansion like this, can you blame me?”
Another approach might be to not even bother to lie, just pay the fines whenever you get caught. If you never caused noise or hassle for the neighbors, I doubt there’d be any reason for the DA to keep after you. I think they generally have bigger fish to fry.
And lastly, of course, you can just lobby to have the law changed. There are lots of good reasons to have several people in the same house, many of which city planners would even like. For instance, it “densifies” population, which means less sprawl. College students like it because they can get lots of people sharing a place and divide the rent many ways. Etc, etc…
Hell, if fall else fails, ask the girls to come along to a city council meeting. Select one among yourselves at random to start, and just randomly all stand up one by one and demand the law be repealed. “Hi, I’m Jane Watson, and I would like to live with Daowajan at his place, along with all my friends that are here with me. I’m doing this of my own free will and I enjoy this living arrangement. I think it’s unfair that an arbitrary law prevents me from living where I want to, with who I want to. I urge you to either strike this law down, or at least grant an exception for myself, my friends, and Daowajan.” After about four or 5 girls in a row, I think the city council will crumble like a poorly-made sand castle under an incoming tide.
So, anyway, provided several women all want to live with you permamantly, hell yeah man, you’re all set! There is very little legally in your way. Nothing really serious.
Oh yeah, before I get accused of being a chauvanist… I also quite support the right of women to keep male harems of this sort. I see no reason why a well-heeled woman shouldn’t be able to keep around as many virule young bucks as she wants. Maybe that makes me a pig, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to be a sexist pig. Equal rights for men and women, including, if that’s what trips their trigger, harems. As long as all the members of the harem are happy about it, too.
-Ben
I have heard that in some states, gay couples and polyamorists can set up a package of legal rights and responsibilities (inheritance, durable power of attorney, custody of children, etc.) that will give you the functional equivalent of a marriage. I have heard that it is expensive–on the order of $10,000.00 per spouse.
Does anyone know any specifics on this?
Daowajan, frankly, I don’t understand what you mean by a ‘harem’. It has a few definitions but Im not sure they fit what you are looking for.
handy, were you asleep when they handed out the copies of The Arabian Nights? Lemme break it down for ya right quick. 
A harem, as it seems to be defined here, is just a group of members of one sex (usually female) living with a single member of the opposite sex (guess, handy, guess) without necessarily needing to be married. The implication being that the single member of one sex would be able to commit acts of reproduction with a variety of partners, all without having to leave the comforts of home.
There, does that answer your question?
And in Hef’s case, there’s a substantial expense for Viagra…
But they convicted the guy. The state basicly said “They’re your (illegal) wives even if you claim they aren’t”. He got five years.
If you do it, you would be well-advised to remember Rule #1 of living in society: Never tweak the Man
The guy in Utah who was convicted of polygamy went on a national talk show to proclaim he had 5 wives.
If you act like a martyr, don’t be surprised if you get nailed to a cross.
On the other hand, if you lived with your “harem” and didn’t make a big deal out of it, you’d probably be ok.
I think a bigger problem would be finding decent women who are ok with that sort of arrangement.
Derleth, why would I be asleep? I have a dictionary, I assume you have one too? (From Webster’s):
Main Entry:harem
Pronunciation:*har-*m
1 a : a usually secluded house or part of a house allotted to women in a Muslim household b : the wives, concubines, female relatives, and servants occupying a harem
2 : a group of women associated with one man
3 : a group of females associated with one male — used of polygamous animals
So, why would you complain about me asking the OP for clarification?