As depicted on the TV show Big Love, it was pretty disgusting–even the supposedly progressive kind that Bill was doing. Bill’s one of my least favorite TV characters ever, though…
I think one of the main problems in Big Love, though, is that no one really wants to be with the kids. They want a second or third or fourth wife to foist the boring stuff onto. If you look at the show, all three wives are really happy when they’re working outside the home–Barb when she’s teaching/going back to get her Master’s, Margene when she has her home shopping network show thing, and even Nicki’s temp job in the State Department. They do love their kids, but I think the idea behind polygamy is that in those societies, women wouldn’t work so of course there would always be there. What happens when all members of the family feel more fulfilled working outside the house? It’s the same problem that a regular family with two parents face.
I have to say: Polygyny: It’s a Tiny Bit Better Than Prostitution! isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement.
For the women, of course, they are doing what they can to get along and ahead in this world. I don’t fault them for it. I’m just saying, you don’t exactly make it sound appealing, and its sad that it seems to be one of few options these women have, especially if they are as intelligent and resourceful as you say.
I guess I’m asking: if another arrangement was available, do you think the women would prefer it, or continue to engage in these types of marriages out of preference rather than necessity?
Just because some countries have an economic and social system that makes polygamy the best solution, it doesn’t make it a good system. And here we don’t have that system anyway. It makes just as much economic sense to find a nice daycare and pay them to watch the kids while mom and dad both work.
If they could marry an American, come back to the States and live in a conventional marriage, they would do it in a heartbeat, but once they already have children, they’re fairly well trapped. The fathers own the children.
I think a communal system (which seems to be the aspect that Stoid really likes) is terrific, by the way. Yes, when there are lots of people around helping each other out, it’s good for the kids, but the adults should all be equal and they don’t all have to be boning each other, and a bunch of women being subservient to one man is just bad news all around.
Well, most of you seem to be including all sorts of additional issues as an automatic outcome of the decision to engage in polygamy, when what you are really talking about is specific cultures.
I’m not.
The TLC show hasn’t aired yet, so deciding what that relationship is like from the trailer is jumping the gun. This family was interviewed on Oprah for an hour and it was crystal clear that they were very happy with their decision to live this way, and the reason this was so was clear.
I wouldn’t live like that. But I wouldn’t, and didn’t, have children either, so the biggest reason I support it was never an issue in my own life.
As for the focus on the “he can/she can’t” thing… in this particular relationship, he absolutely cannot “do whatever he wants”. In fact, one wife went into a freakout when she learned that he had sealed his engagement to the fourth wife with a kiss, since she had not kissed him until their wedding day.
Nor can he, in THIS polygamous relationship, foist unwanted new wives on the others: it’s a group decision. They wisely agree that anything less would be a ticket to complete misery.
The fourth wife in this scenario, by the way, has been a part of the family for five months. She was divorced from her first husband after 8 years of a monogamous relationship and was raising three children alone. She had had offers of monogamous marriage, but had rejected them because after having a monogamous marrage she had decided that she wanted “plural” marriage.
So, while you are all more than welcome to discuss various polygamous cultures and societies, what I’m specifically referring to is what this family represents: adult men and women making a well-thought out and carefully considered decision to participate in “plural” marriage while living as part of the greater society, rather than a closed one. A family like the one on “Big Love”, only BETTER, because unlike the Big Love family, which ended up in plural marriage because the first wife had cancer, this family chose it freely from the beginning.
THAT is the kind of polygamy I think is better for child-rearing.
Also, while commune-style living would seem to achieve the same goal, I don’t think it does, for a variety of reasons - not least the lack of real commitment on the part of the adults. In plural marriage, these people are committed to each other in the same way they are in monogamous marriage, and that commitment makes a difference for the children and the overall dynamic.
Secondly, I think, because it’s what I’ve learned from reading about people who had communal living situations, that there is a great deal more in the way of infidelity, sexual jealousy, and fractured families. Buncha men, buncha women, living communally… recipe for sexual shenanigans. Whereas a plural marriage addresses that much more straightforwardly: he gets multiple wives, he has sex with all of them, it’s a given.
Obviously sex and sexual variety is not a super high priority for women who choose this kind of marriage - yet another reason I wouldn’t choose it. (Not the variety issue, just sex itself.)
So actually, I guess complete polyamory would probably be another successful way to raise kids…if everyone is part of everyone’s family on all levels, then you bypass the sneaky-lying stuff. But I think that’s so incredibly difficult to pull off… I’ve never heard of it. I’d be interested to know if it’s ever been done successfully.
I’d also add they have to be able to show they are entering into the marriage capable of a informed choice. Most girls who enter into the marriages are brainwashed into it, they don’t know any other way.
I’d also enforce incest rules and various rules on recieveing welfare etc. No marrying your daughter or having six wives all on the dole while you sit around watching TV and having sex with girls 1/3 your age.
Here’s the thing- we have basically two kinds of poly relationships in the USA- the first is a threesome living together as “spouses”- they entered into this as a informed choice. No one gives a rats ass about these people. The bigamy laws are never (afaik) enforced or even brought up. The closest thing they do to pushing the envelope is maybe having two dependents on their health insuance. I have no probelm with these folks. Yes, it’s more often two women and one guy, but I have seen it the other way too, in fact I have three friends living togther on a ranch, two guys and one woman, and it works for them- but they are all college educated professionals, and the relationship occured later in life. I’m cool with it.
Then there’s the weird ass sicko perverts from some strange heritic Mormon cult, like **Hilarity N. Suze **sez. The girls are basicly forced into the marriages, they are so brainwashed they have no way of making a informed choice. It’s one guy and several females, some of whom are likely related to him, and in many cases are underaged. Often, he’s only legally married to one of them, the rest collect “AFDC” welfare, etc, as “single moms”, so not only is the sick pervert getting to fuck/rape his 16yo sister or daughter, YOU also pay him to do it. In other words, us taxpayers get to support a incestuous pedophile in his personal lifestyle choice.
I’m with **Dio **and **Lynn **and others. The idea sounds all happy and good and beneficent, the reality is something else entirely. I also agree that a communal sort of arrangement doesn’t necessarily need to have all adults sleeping with each other or in sexual relationships at all.
Big Love is fiction – a reprehensible, unrealistic attempt to whitewash and sanitize white slavery. The women on the TLC show are not in an equitable relationship. They are subservient to a male authority without the same rights as the man. Why is that something you would want to see modeled for little girls? Does gender equity mean nothing to you? Would you really want to be part of a harem? Is that something little girls should be encouraged to aspire to?
I don’t think so. If you really watch Big Love, you see that most of the women seem dissatisfied to some degree. Early on, third wife Margene gets dumped with the scut work that the other two don’t want to do–they foist the childcare off on her when they want to go off on their own (particularly Nicki). Margene seemed pretty eager for a fourth wife, too, so I think she relished the idea of moving up in the hierarchy. It’s a pretty complex show. It has its faults, but it’s not saying, “Yay, polygamy!” It shows some of the real problems with it.
Stoid, can you address what I brought up earlier? The fact that the women in Big Love seem pretty dissatisfied and the fact that despite them paying lip service to the whole, “MUST HAVE BABIES!” party line, none of them seems to want to actually care for their kids, full time? In theory it’s great to have a communal service but they all seem most satisfied when they’re working and the lower ranking members of the household tend to get shafted with childcare–in seasons one and two, you often saw Margene or Sarah doing most of the childcare.
Hi Dio! Your beliefs and opinions are duly noted, thanks for sharing.
But I’m not going to turn this thread into The Dio Show, the plot of which is very familiar to most of us: you decide that other people are saying is something other than they’ve specifically and clearly said, you assert that absolute reality is what you say it is, etc. I don’t have time.
(I swear sometimes I think that your username was stolen by someone completely different a few years ago… but it’s probably just my memory.)
I asked you a question. Do you believe men and women should be equal in a relationship or don’t you? It’s a fair question. You started a thread in HMO. Don’t complain if you get other opinions or get asked questions about your own.
And not for nothing, but the majority in this thread appear to be agreeing with me.
i’m not sure what you want me to address… it’s fiction. I would address it by saying that the writers of the show are layering their expectations and attitudes into their writing.
The “Sister Wives” of the Brown family include one wife who chooses to be a stay-at-home mother, she prefers it. The other three work outside the home but like most working mothers they take up their motherly work when they get home.
I would think that most freely-chosen plural marriages would be wise to make sure that at least one of the wives prefers to stay at home, just as it would be wise to make sure at least one wants to work outside it to contribute income.
Stoid, the show HAS aired…I’ve seen 5 episodes as well as the Oprah interview. I wouldn’t take that interview at face value if I were you. Yes, these women went into the decision freely, and yes, it was their stated choice.
That doesn’t make it healthy by any stretch of the imagination. It maybe makes it morally sound from the public perspective, but it doesn’t make it an excellent way to have a marriage or a family. At least one of the wives has very bad jealously and insecurity issues, which were all brought to the fore again with the addition of the new wife, and the husband told her that it’s too bad that the process makes heartbreak happen (not HIS heartbreak, mind you, only hers, because as hard as it is for her, it’s his right to move ahead with it anyway). In my opinion, having watched the show, it is massive cognitive dissonance to say that you are happy in a marriage in which the very structure of it causes you pain.
It is true, he can’t just indiscriminately go around sleeping with whomever he wants, there are protocols for courtship and marriage (although he doesn’t seem as keen on following those protocols as his wives perhaps are). He ostensibly gets the blessing of the other wives for any new person he wants to bring in. But that does not change the fact that in their system, he is allowed to fall in love with someone new, nurture that love and relationship, and make it permanent. They are not allowed the same freedom. I simply can’t see how it’s a good thing for children to be taught that this is an appropriate way for a man and a woman to have a relationship.
Well, what I’m saying is I don’t think the reality of the situation is going to work out that way. In theory, yeah, you can try to make sure there’s at least one stay at home mom but people change. And I don’t know that if each wife has kids, one stay at home mom is going to be enough. Yeah, you can hire outside help (daycare, nannies, etc.) for the kids or make other arrangements, but then why is polygamy any different than a two parent household in that regard?
It seems to me that there will always be someone to care for the child if the women have no wish or ability to work outside the home. But there’s no real way to guarantee that.
Actually, they have broadcast 5 epis, according to wiki.
Sure, it’s a “group decision”. :dubious: Except that the wives were brought up in a poly religous cult environment, where it’s been drummed into them from birth they this is the only way to live, that they must obey their husband, and having a divorce or leaving him means burning in hell forever. Thus, it’s not a "well-thought out and carefully considered decision ".
And note they are raising their kids in the exact same environment “The children attend a polygamist cooperative school” so that the daughters are also being brainwashed. As for the boys, one of them will get to continue the lifestyle, the rest will be dumped. He also has thirteen kids**- in todays world, how is that moral or ideal?
Yes, this family appears ideal. None of the women are underaged, none are related to him, and it doesn’t appear any are on welfare- at least two of the wives have jobs. Of course, this family was carefully hand picked to portray the lifestyle. It does not appear to be typical of the lifestyle. They are carefully manipulating the story to make these folks appear normal, much as on Big Love.
Here’s the real story:
A few select bits: "On January 10, 2004, Dan Barlow (the mayor of Colorado City) and about 20 other men were excommunicated from the church and stripped of their wives and children (who would be reassigned to other men), and the right to live in the town." Yep, those folks were "adult men and women making a well-thought out and carefully considered decision to participate ".
In July 2005, eight men of the church were indicted for sexual contact with minors. NOT “adult men and women making a well-thought out and carefully considered decision to participate”
In July 2005, six young adult lost boys who claimed they were cast out of their homes on the Utah–Arizona border to reduce competition for wives, filed suit against the FLDS Church. “The [boys] have been excommunicated pursuant to that policy and practice and have been cut off from family, friends, benefits, business and employment relationships, and purportedly condemned to eternal damnation,” NOT "adult men and women making a well-thought out and carefully considered decision to participate ".
*On November 5, 2009, a Schleicher County, Texas jury found Raymond Merril Jessop, 38, guilty of sexual assault of a child. According to evidence admitted at trial, Raymond Merril Jessop sexually assaulted a 16 year old girl to whom he had been “spiritually married” when the girl was 15 years old.[52] The same jury sentenced Raymond Jessop to 10 years in prison and assessed a fine of $8,000.00.[53]
On December 18, 2009, a Schleicher County, Texas jury found Allan Keate guilty of sexual assault of a child. He was sentenced to 33 years in prison. Allan Keate fathered a child with a 15-year old girl.[54] According to documents admitted at trial, Keate had also given three of his own daughters away in “spiritual” or “celestial” marriage, two of them at 15 and one at 14, to older men. The youngest of the three went to Warren Jeffs.[55]
On January 22, 2010, Michael George Emack pled no contest to sexual assault charges and was sentenced to seven years in prison. He married a 16-year-old girl at YFZ Ranch on August 5, 2004. She gave birth to a son less than a year later.[56]
On March 17, 2010, a Tom Green County, Texas jury found Merril Leroy Jessop guilty of sexual assault of a child after deliberating only one hour.[52] Evidence admitted at the criminal trial proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Merril Leroy Jessop, 35, sexually assaulted a 15 year old girl while living at the FLDS Ranch in Schleicher County, Texas.[52] The jury sentenced Jessop to 75 years in prison and assessed a $10,000.00 fine.[57]* Yep, more "adult men and women making a well-thought out and carefully considered decision to participate ". Especially the “adult” part.
*The FLDS Church teaches the doctrine of plural marriage, which states that a man having multiple wives is ordained by God; the doctrine requires it in order for a man to receive the highest form of salvation. It is generally believed in the church that a man should have a minimum of three wives to fulfill this requirement.[61] Connected with this doctrine is patriarchal doctrine, the belief that wives are required to be subordinate to their husbands.
The church currently practices placement marriage, whereby a young woman of marriageable age is assigned a husband by revelation from God to the leader of the church, who is regarded as a prophet.[62] The prophet elects to take and give wives to and from men according to their worthiness. This is also called the law of placing.* Of course, this sounds a lot like "adult men and women making a well-thought out and carefully considered decision to participate ". :rolleyes:
Church leaders have encouraged their flock to take advantage of government assistance in the form of welfare and the WIC (woman-infant-child) programs.(citation needed, disputed) Since the government recognizes only one woman as the legal wife of a man, the rest of his wives are considered single mothers and are eligible to receive government assistance. The more wives and children one has, the more welfare checks and food stamps one can receive. By 2003, for example, more than $6 million dollars in public funds were being channeled into the community of Colorado City, AZ. In his book Under the Banner of Heaven (p. 15), Jon Krakauer writes that, “Fundamentalists call defrauding the government ‘bleeding the beast’ and regard it as a virtuous act.” Carolyn Campbell (“Inside Polygamy in the '90s,”, 102) adds, “The attitude of some polygamists is ‘the government is untrustworthy and corrupt, and I’m above it, but give me those food stamps and free medical care.’”[74 And, now we get to pay for this "adult men and women making a well-thought out and carefully considered decision to participate ":dubious:
In its Spring 2005 “Intelligence Report,” the Southern Poverty Law Center named the FLDS Church to its “hate group” listing[78] because of the church’s teachings on race, which include a fierce condemnation of interracial relationships. Warren Jeffs has said, “the black race is the people through which the devil has always been able to bring evil unto the earth.”[79] Yep, that certainly is a "well-thought out and carefully considered decision’. Great, now not only are my tax dollars going to support incestous pedophile religous fanatics, they are *racist *incestous pedophile religous fanatics. :rolleyes::mad:
There’s one way to guarantee it, or pretty close…it’s for other family members to pressure her into staying where she is. It’s bad enough that women sometimes get pressured by husbands into the stay at home role, but when there is a husband AND three other wives who are happy with the arrangement, how easy is it going to be for her to change what she’s doing?
You can ask a question, but I won’t participate in turning this thread into the topic you want, which seems to be sexual equality - you can start your own thread for that.
As for your question: as I define “equal”, I don’t personally know of any relationship where both partners are equal. I don’t think it’s possible or even desirable.
However, most relationships I know of are equitable, and the way that is achieved depends on the needs and desires of the individuals involved, which vary widely.
What is amusing to me is that on the one hand you criticize others for deciding what the relationship is like based on a trailer, and yet feel you know it is a healthy, happy, voluntary relationship based on an hour of Oprah.
Seriously, get real. A male acquaintance I knew for years, and socialized with him and his wife on a regular basis - well, it turns out he was a wife beating son of a bitch. Neither me, nor my ex-wife, nor any of our other mutual friends knew it was happening.