Because first **you use a quote from a review **to refute a fact, a quote that actually supports the fact, but you use it like it undermines it.
Then** you dismiss the value of reviewers** words because they are just reviewers, not investigative journalists.
Then you quote a reviewers personal doubts about the accuracy of something, which is nothing but the reviewer’s unsupported feelings, presented as though it proves something.
Which I think is an interesting point-- as someone who watches the show, I’m seeing the shit hit the proverbial fan and that’s with the family knowing they are being filmed and trying to put on the best face of polygamy that they can. That means things are probably far worse than these smaller eruptions we actually see.
I don’t know, stoid, i’ve been married for 12 years and i think there’s been less crying than what i saw on 5 episodes of this show. the bottom line is that there is one set of rules for the man, a different set for the women, and their pain is treated as an unfortunate side effect of the actions he has the right to take. i woudn’t have a marriage like that…would you? (sorry for lack of caps and formatting…typing on my phone)
Oh and btw i don’t assume there’s inherent inequity. He comes right out and says it’s “against god and nature” for women to have more than one husband. I highly recommed you watch the show. All the episodes.
Stoid, I really hate to tell you this, but some stuff that appears on TV is not true. This would include not just the stuff that’s labeled fiction, but also much of the stuff that’s labeled non-fiction. It’s worthless to constantly demand some specific proof that these particular appearances on Oprah were carefully scripted. Everything on Oprah is scripted to hit viewers’ emotional buttons. Same for all the similar shows. That’s how television works.
Sex is a strange topic that causes people to react in funny ways. Even intelligent people seem to lose their common sense when it’s mentioned. Just consider how many men honestly believe that the women who appear in pornography find pornography to be “empowering” or “liberating”, merely because their porn magazines say that it’s true. Similarly, TV viewers find the idea of freakish family patterns such as polygamy to be entertaining and exciting. TV plays to those viewers by pretending that polygamous families can be happy and stable.
You keep insisting that “plural marriage is not the culprit” as regards groups like FLDS, and then “it can be practiced outside that situation”. It cannot. Name one places on earth where there are a lot of people choosing to participate in stable, happy polygamous marriages for any other reason. No such place exists.
You keep asking for some actually research showing that polygamy is tied to harmful things. Here you go. Wherever polygamy is practiced, there are higher rates of violence and rape, and women and children have lower social status. No exceptions. Those are the facts.
Yeah, good point. I watched the first episode and it all seemed hunky dory and great. And then…and then there was the crying because Kody kissed Robyn when they got engaged. Now, the crying and rage and offense wasn’t directed at KODY who had done the kissing. No, no, it was directed at ROBYN for allowing her whore lips to be kissed, I guess.
And it was Robyn who had to apologize.
And it was Kody who sat there like a big smug turd.
That family is horribly fucked up beyond all belief. I really tried to give them a chance and refrain from judgment, but…no.
Right. And, it’s kind of funny. She saw them on Oprah and read some reviews and articles. I saw them on Oprah, read some reviews and articles, AND have actually watched 5 episodes of their show. Somehow, though, Stoid has enough information to form a reasonable opinion, but I don’t. This isn’t the Dio show, it’s the Stoid show.
Like Peeta, I was fairly impressed after episode 1. They seemed alarmingly normal. If they were moms of my 1st grader’s classmates, I wouldn’t notice a thing about them that was different, unusual, non-mainstream or in any way atypical from other suburban moms. I thought it was cool that one of them was a career woman, another was in college…it all seemed pretty modern and not at all like “those” polygamists you hear about in Utah. No weird clothes, no Duggarish Pollyanna-ish sweetness. Kids who seemed just like the kids I know. But the subsequent episodes showed a dark side to it that had a lot of justifications that didn’t make sense to me, and shouldn’t make sense to the wives.
What do you mean by “nuanced?” I mean, people who say that “women get nothing out of it” that’s obviously an incorrect view when you’re literal.
The thrust of your post tends to support the view that polygyny is the result of inherent coercion that results from low social status and lack of options. You describe a situation that is essentially sexual slavery that can only be escaped by becoming a prostitute. Is it the best situation these women can get under the circumstances? I believe you when you say it is. Someone who turns to cannibalism to survive is also doing the best they can. That doesn’t make it a good or even beneficial option for people who are not in that dire state of existence.
No I do not and have not, I’ve simply (and accurately) pointed out that multiple cites of cults, religious organizations, and entire societies that practice plural marriage alongside a host of other things proves absolutely nothing whatsoever about plural marriage, that’s the classic fallacy of equating correlation with causation, and I know you know better than that. I’m just as familiar with all that stuff as the rest of you.
Unfortunately, most of the time plural marriage is practiced as one part of a whole series of other practices, making it extremely difficult to assess it outside of those other practices, beliefs and structures. But just because that happens to be the way that it is usually practiced, it does not follow that it is the only way it can be.
Plural marriage in and of itself, by itself, does not lead to any of the things being asserted. It can be and is practiced by some people very successfully and happily.
It does remind me a lot of Big Love–Nicki suspects Margene and Bill of premarital sex. When she does, she gets really mad and yells at Margene and demands to know the truth, but I don’t recall Bill getting the third degree.
And Bill and Ana…
I guess it’s because it’s easier to yell at a sister wife–especially if you outrank her. It reminds me of the relationships between the female members of a household and a new wife (in places like India for example)–in many cases, the mother in law will make her son’s new wife do all the work and even physically abuse her if she doesn’t obey. Not THAT extreme here, but the general idea seems to be if you’re female and you’re young/new to the family, you’re on the bottom of the totem pole.
I don’t see a community as Stoid is talking about it, but rather a hierarchy. It’s bad for all the women, and especially the newer wives. They seem to be in an incredibly vulnerable position that really makes me scared for them.
I have to say much of the reaction here is similar to the reaction to prostitution. The majority of people think it’s a horrible, degrading thing that cannot possibly be a positive, even pleasant way for a woman to earn a living, for two primary reasons:
The vast majority of our exposure to the people who practice (plural marriage) (prostitution) is negative. (Crazy repressive compounds) (Pimpslapped, drug-addicted streetwalkers)
Personal revulsion at engaging in the practice leads to believing that everyone else must feel the same way.
Well, some people are capable of participating in plural marriage happily and successfully, and some people are capable of engaging in prostitution happily and successfully. I have a great deal of direct personal knowledge of the latter, so I know that what I say is absolutely true. As for the former, logic tells me it’s true, as does my personal observation of very happy, successful open relationships that didnt’ quite rise to the level of committed marriage, but lends credence to the idea that it’s certainly more than possible.
Whether the Browns are actually happy, successful, and healthy - they appear to be from what I’ve seen. If they aren’t, that still doesn’t serve to prove that plural marriage must automatically mean inequality, repression, misery, child rape, etc.
I was specific in my original assertion that I think plural marriage/polygamy is a great plan for adults who are personally comfortable with it. It’s a given that lots of people wouldn’t be… I’m not suggesting that we should require it.
Oh, and I’m also reminded of another parallel between prostitution and plural marriage: the insistence that any and all women who engage in it cannot possibly have freely chosen it, they must be brainwashed or stupid or self-loathing or coerced or otherwise incapable of making a reasoned choice that works for them.
Which, if you stop to think about it is incredibly insulting to the women involved, and in its own way is just another version of the same sort of disrespect towards women that’s being complained of. But that’s really so deeply ingrained in most human cultures we are blind to it.
“Here, dear, you are so precious let me protect you from your own weak, stupid femininity…”
But bogus feminism is a huge thread I don’t have time for…
Of course they are, but the ones that do so are not members of a repressive religious fanatic culture, like the Browns are. The females in that culture are incapable of making an informed choice, and often no one has any choice at all.
And, that repressive religious fanatic culture does “require” plural marriage/polygamy.
"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." emphasis mine.
There is no “personally comfortable”, there is the Law and you are required to do what the prophet sez.
And, you and I are also “required” to pay for it.
Outside the repressive religious fanatic culture, there are certainly happy and informed trios, etc. However, the show “Sister Wives” does not portray that lifestyle, but instead that of the repressive religious fanatic culture - in this case, attempts have been made to conceal or sugarcoat it, but the hidden dark truth is still there.
Oh, and I’m also reminded of another parallel between prostitution and plural marriage: the insistence that any and all women who engage in it cannot possibly have freely chosen it, they must be brainwashed or stupid or self-loathing or coerced or otherwise incapable of making a reasoned choice that works for them.
“Here, dear, you are so precious let me protect you from your own weak, stupid femininity…”
QUOTE]
I’m also reminded of another parallel regarding slavery- the insistence that any and all slaves who engage in it cannot possibly have freely chosen it, they must be brainwashed or stupid or self-loathing or coerced or otherwise incapable of making a reasoned choice that works for them.
“Here, dear, you are so precious let me protect you from your own weak, stupid slavery…”
I beleive many of those who support modern day slavery say something much like that. Those entering into slavery are making a choice.