So, from your two statements, can we infer that (almost certainly) you are in a relationship which is in some way chaotic, abusive or lacks intimacy?
Everything we know about humans, from the way we behave now, to our evolutionary history, to our very biology tells us that lifelong monogamy is not what we’re designed for. It is not in our nature. We, as a species, are either serial monogomists, or tend towad mild* polygamy. There is no escaping that fact.
Attempts to ascribe interest in non-monogmous (“chaotic”) relationships to childhood trauma flies in the face of everything we know about ourselves. In fact, “childhood trauma” is such a vague term, I wonder if it has any use at all in this discussion.
Diogenes: You really either need to put up or shut up in this thread. I don’t see any evidence that you have any idea what you’re talking about.
*a few females per (successful) male
Then it’s up to you to point out that he seems to be committing the fallacy of post hoc, ergo propter hoc, and show that merely having abuse in the past is not a sufficiently strong casual link for his argument.
I feel like I have to correct a bunch of things I’m being accused of saying that I haven’t said.
I have not said that polygamy is necessarily harmful to women (although it may be harmful to children depending on the circumstances).
I have not said that it should be illegal (although, maybe I should clarify that to polyamorous living arrangements. I do think that the civil law involved in polygamous permutations could be a nightmare).
I have not said that women in polygamous marriages are immoral (If anything I see them as victims- especially in the Tom Green variety of polygamy).
I have not said that women in polygamous marriages are “mentally ill.” A trauma history does not mean mentally ill.
I have not said that all women with abuse histories will seek out polyamorous relationships. I’ve said they will seek out chaotic relationships and that one manifestation of chaos is polyamory.
I will confess that I don’t have much respect for any husband who can’t stay faithful to one wife. I’m not much of a moralist but that’s one moral opinion that I do have and I don’t care if people think it makes me an asshole.
My bottom line is that I don’t think most healthy women want to be treated as chattel and that the ones who choose that probably had something happen to them as children.
Lilairen, what do you think about polygamous paradigms where only the man is allowed to have multiple partners?
I should have said “without intervention…blah blah blah…”
I had to go to a shrink as a teenager. I worked some shit out but I still have anger management issues (believe it or not).
Hold on, now. Can anyone make any assertion and leave the burden of disproof on everyone else? That’s a little backwards. Besides which, Lilairen has provided cites, and Basandre stepped forward as a case in point. That’s way more evidence than Dio has provided. All we have from him is bluster.
What do you want proof for? That childhood trauma leads to chaos in adulthood? Ae you serious?
Basandre’s post is not exactly empirical evidence by the way. None of it is verifiable. I didn’t say there was 100% correlation anyway. I said there was a high probablity of trauma.
It’s been said very clearly. Prove that polyamory is inherently chaotic.
What you did say was:
The opposite of being mentally healthy is to be mentally unhealthy. You accused her of being non-feminist, and you called her husband and lover “pigs”. Or is she the pig?
And that crack about “chaotic” relationships hasn’t been supported yet either. You’re painting a picture of a woman whose life is out of control; you characterize her as somehow damaged. Yet you know nothing about her but what she chooses to tell us here. What do you base these statements on?
I find monogamy too damn complicated, personally, which is why I stick with the simple shit. I have extremely limited patience for drama, and see no good reason to invite more of it into my life.
People can freely consent to whatever they want. I would not participate. (I know a number of relationship systems with similar restrictions; they generally work for the people involved. As a non-involved person, I do not invite myself in to other people’s relationships to argue with how they choose to arrange them; as far as I’m concerned that is unspeakably and unforgivably rude.)
There exist societies in which such consent is not deemed relevant or in which the ability to consent is restricted by inculturation or by force. In those, I have problems with the accessibility of consent; however, as someone who is not a part of such cultures nor in extensive contact with any of their members, my scope of practical action is limited to supporting those organisations that attempt to improve those conditions.
Which, again, you fail to back up in any way, shape, or form whatsoever other than fishing for anecdotal evidence from others on this board (which also didn’t support you). So in the end, basically you’ve got nothing, so why do you keep repeating it? First thing to do is stop digging yourself deeper.
Oh, the men are definitely pigs. It’s only the women I think are unhealthy. But again, I don’t think it’s the polygamy that makes them unhealthty, I think it’s the lack oif emotional health that makes them think it’s ok to be treated like chattle.
I haven’t been “fishing” for anything (but I should point out that Lilairen all but admitted I was right). If you want proof that trauma in childhood leads to intimacy problems and chaos in adulthood, I’ll see what I can do but I didn’t learn this stuff from the internet so I don’t know what I’m going to find online.
The more people who are involved in a relationship the less intimacy it has and the more inherently unstable. What a stupid question.
Someone may claim that because one event follows another, the second is caused by the first. That’s the fallacy of post hoc, ergo propter hoc. To defuse the fallacy, you must show that there is no evidence of causation between the two events. It’s not shifting the burden of proof to you; it’s your illustration of how the original argument is flawed. It’s easy enough: simply point out that no evidence of causation has been adduced.
But she’s the one with multiple lovers. Doesn’t that put them in the “chattle” column? Could she be in an honest, loving relationship with both these men or is she in it just because they buy her purty thangs? Or simply for the sex? She’s the one that’s crossed the line you believe exists between healthy, non-exploitive relationships and the dark side.
Frex, the middle east, where a lot of guys can’t expect to get married until their 30s, if they marry at all. And people wonder where all the suicide bomber candidates come from.
By saying that I wasn’t interested in discussing personal matters with someone who was only interested in attacking me, and acknowledging that my refusal to engage with your prying personal questions would leave you the opening to claim victory? (And, in your most recent post as of this writing, adding a bonus of attacking my partners, which will surely improve my disposition.) That’s a strange “admission of right”.
I had a fairly typical smart-kid introvert childhood, actually. I wouldn’t call it idyllic – certainly not up to Basandre’s standards, I only got riding lessons – but it compares pretty fairly with those of the people I knew as a child and I know now, aside from my husband, whose parents are some of the most lovely people on the planet. If I’m so deeply damaged as a result of it, then I must run with an atypically broken crowd.
No, that isn’t what you’re being asked to prove. You will prove that poly relationships are “chaotic” and constitute “intimacy problems”, or you will continue flapping about with unsupported assertions, or you will apologize and concede.
Well, I have to say I’m surprised to see Diogenes taking such an explicitly sexist, hetero-centrist stance in this thread. Tell me, Dio, if a man enters into serious, long term relationships with two different men at the same time, is it just him who’s the pig, or all three of them? What if we’re talking about a trio of lesbians? What about a woman who’s in serious relationships with a man and a woman? Is the husband a pig because his wife is polyamorous, even if he’s only with her? Are both the women in the relationship victims, or just the one with multiple partners? Is it possible for a woman to enter into a polyamorous relationship because she is controlling, abusive, and manipulative, or is it your position that those features unknown amongst the fairer sex?