PDA

View Full Version : Polygamy: Your views



Jane Wallace-Knight
04-24-2013, 07:07 PM
Hi.

My name is Jane and I am writing an article about polyamorous relationships in literature.

As a ménage writer with Siren I tend to come at it from a romantic POV so it would be helpful to get some other people's opinions and thoughts on the matter.

Thank you :)

veinglory
04-24-2013, 07:11 PM
My view are... indifference. Whatever arrangement consenting adults make in their lives are fully up to them. And a loving relationship is always worth celebrating.

Voyager
04-24-2013, 07:17 PM
Yeah, same here. This probably isn't very helpful, but I just don't feel like it's any of my damn business.

Fran
04-24-2013, 07:21 PM
As long as everyone involved in a polygamous relationship is consenting and happy, it's nobody else's business. They're not doing anyone any harm.

thehairymob
04-24-2013, 07:33 PM
:hi::hooray:

Griffin Hayes
04-24-2013, 07:33 PM
Welcome to AW!

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-24-2013, 08:38 PM
Welcome to AW!

Thank you :hi:

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-24-2013, 08:42 PM
:hi::hooray:


:hi::)

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-24-2013, 08:46 PM
Yeah, same here. This probably isn't very helpful, but I just don't feel like it's any of my damn business.

I think that's a good way to feel about most things.

I feel the same that if it doesn't directly involve you, and no one is getting hurt, then stay out of it.

However, as a writer it is sometimes your job to get involved. I'm hoping to write a well-informed article that shows all points of views on the subject.

Thanks for your reply :)

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-24-2013, 08:48 PM
As long as everyone involved in a polygamous relationship is consenting and happy, it's nobody else's business. They're not doing anyone any harm.

I agree. To be honest there isn't very much on the subject of monogamous triads, which is what I was researching, and I suppose I hoped that someone would help shed some light from experiences of their own.

Thank you for your input :)

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-24-2013, 08:49 PM
And a loving relationship is always worth celebrating.

I very much agree with that.

Thanks for responding :)

regdog
04-24-2013, 09:49 PM
I'm going to port this Story Research

Medievalist
04-24-2013, 09:54 PM
I agree. To be honest there isn't very much on the subject of monogamous triads, which is what I was researching, and I suppose I hoped that someone would help shed some light from experiences of their own.

Thank you for your input :)

There's lots of information.

http://www.poly-nyc.com/resources.html

Please don't confuse polygamy, polygyny, androgyny and polyamorous. These are not true synonyms in many cases.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-24-2013, 10:00 PM
Thank you, I'll check it out. As in my book I don't actually label the relationship the characters have, I am learning, and making sure I get all the terms right for the article.

Chasing the Horizon
04-24-2013, 10:17 PM
I have a lot of respect for people in committed poly relationships. It takes tremendous maturity, communication skills, and understanding to maintain harmony and love in the face of such a complex relationship (not to mention against the judgements of society). Gods know I can't balance the needs of *one* other person, much less two or more.

There are also certain sociological advantages to having more than two people in the marriage/committed relationship. In the 21st Century we often lack close ties with our extended families and communities, so couples are on their own to raise their children with little relief. And if a spouse gets sick, the entire burden for their care and the household's financial survival falls on the remaining partner. I think it's pretty obvious how a three or four way marriage would ease these burdens.

And yes, I think polygamous marriage should be legal. All consenting adults should be able to marry in any combination they wish.

srgalactica
04-24-2013, 10:29 PM
As long as it's between consenting adults, I don't care.

slhuang
04-24-2013, 10:37 PM
Whatever arrangement consenting adults make in their lives are fully up to them. And a loving relationship is always worth celebrating.

Agreed on both points. Consenting adults? Well, then live and let live. And yay for all loving, healthy relationships, no matter what form they take.



Please don't confuse polygamy, polygyny, androgyny and polyamorous. These are not true synonyms in many cases.

^^ Yup.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-24-2013, 11:51 PM
And yes, I think polygamous marriage should be legal. All consenting adults should be able to marry in any combination they wish.

I agree. I guess the problem is that some people could abuse that law. For instance, how many football teams, here in the UK anyway where drunk men are idiots (or is that drunk people universally?), would think it was really funny if they all got married.

Orianna2000
04-24-2013, 11:52 PM
Are you talking about a three-way relationship, where everyone is equal? Or a marriage where the husband takes on several wives and sleeps with each of them separately?

The latter has always bothered me. At least in the novels I've read (which, admittedly, are fiction and therefore may not bear much resemblance to reality), the situation seems very unfair to the other wives, who are left alone, knowing their husband is in another woman's arms and there's nothing they can do about it. If they're lucky, they get along with the other wives, and if not, they're stuck with rivalry and smoldering hatred for each other. Maybe it's different in reality--like I said, all I know about it, I read in novels which may have been biased by the author's own prejudices.

My personal opinion is, I could never share my husband with another woman. It would shatter me. But then, I'm extremely selfish.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-25-2013, 12:11 AM
Are you talking about a three-way relationship, where everyone is equal? Or a marriage where the husband takes on several wives and sleeps with each of them separately?

Three, or more, people in a monogamous relationship with each other. I have written a book about three men in a relationship and was asked to write an article for publicity purposes. So I thought I would delve into the concept or a triad.

Chasing the Horizon
04-25-2013, 12:19 AM
I agree. I guess the problem is that some people could abuse that law. For instance, how many football teams, here in the UK anyway where drunk men are idiots (or is that drunk people universally?), would think it was really funny if they all got married.
Well, people abuse the law as it is now too, marrying for all sorts of questionable reasons and often divorcing soon after. There would probably have to be an upper limit on how many people could enter into the same marriage contract, if only because there would be a point where it became too legally complex. But that limit could and should be a lot more than two.

As for men who take their own little harems and perhaps don't treat them very well, as long as they're all consenting adults, it's still their business. And only allowing couples to marry doesn't exactly stop abuse within relationships.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-25-2013, 12:26 AM
Well, people abuse the law as it is now too, marrying for all sorts of questionable reasons and often divorcing soon after.

You're very right there.


And only allowing couples to marry doesn't exactly stop abuse within relationships.

Another good point. I think that it should be legalised but with limitations. At least they should be given the same rights as couples.

slhuang
04-25-2013, 12:31 AM
I agree. I guess the problem is that some people could abuse that law. For instance, how many football teams, here in the UK anyway where drunk men are idiots (or is that drunk people universally?), would think it was really funny if they all got married.

Would they really, do you think? Marriage comes with all sorts of rights and benefits regarding family, health, and finances that I would never want to hand over to someone I didn't trust. I think most people feel the same, and the ones who don't abuse legal marriage already, like Chasing the Horizon said.

Some people argue same-sex marriage shouldn't be legalized because of the possibilities for abuse: "But what if two roommates want to give each other health insurance even though they're only just friends?? If same-sex marriage is legal they could get married and defraud the system!" But it's absurd; every scenario brought up is already possible for opposite-sex duos to do. I've had plenty of roommates who weren't my gender and had great health insurance; however did we stop ourselves from committing fraud??? We must've had superhuman willpower!

DancingMaenid
04-25-2013, 12:34 AM
Please don't confuse polygamy, polygyny, androgyny and polyamorous. These are not true synonyms in many cases.

Yep, this. I was going to point out the same thing.

In the U.S., polygamy is frequently conflated with polygyny, and gets a bad rap due to cases of abuse. And I also feel like there are some understandable criticisms of a system that allows men to have multiple wives without allowing women to have multiple husbands (or men to have multiple husbands, or women to have multiple wives).

I'm all for polyamory, when it involves consenting adults who are happy with the arrangement. It's not for everyone, but it can definitely work for some people. I wouldn't call myself polyamorous, but only because I haven't tried it. I'm definitely open to being in an open or poly relationship, and it's something I'd seriously consider. For me, an important thing would be that all genders are treated equally.

I'm also in favor of granting poly relationships legal recognition. But I also think legalizing poly marriages might be challenging--not because there's anything wrong with it, but because there could be differences from two-person marriages that would need to be considered. For example, there would have to be special considerations about who inherits in case of a spouse's death. And since there are many different styles of poly relationships, I doubt that poly marriage would be able to be tailored well to everyone. But if we could make it work, that'd be great!

veinglory
04-25-2013, 12:40 AM
It would be a bureaucratic nightmare, but that has no direct bearing on whether it would be the right/fair thing to do.

evilrooster
04-25-2013, 12:41 AM
When I was a kid, we knew a few triads. I didn't think about them a lot, any more than I thought about any of my parents' friends. My parents had been in a four-marriage for a while; what was later called polyamory wasn't something surprising or novel to me.

Much later, I asked my dad about the breakup of the four-marriage in the context of the triads we knew: why had that not lasted? Was it particular to the circumstance, or structural?

"Well," he answered, "there were certainly particular circumstances. But I've always thought that a triad was inherently more stable than a larger group because it's harder to break up. If you leave a larger group, you can usually persuade someone to come with you. If you leave a triad, you leave alone."

shaldna
04-25-2013, 01:07 AM
Hi.

My name is Jane and I am writing an article about polyamorous relationships in literature.



I think each to their own, and, like any other relationship, so long as those involved are happy then it's none of my business or anyone elses.

I think that it's perfectly concievable that more than two people can be in a loving relationship and be healthy and happy. I don't feel that it's in any way wrong or immoral, and I don't see how it impacts on anyone else other than those in the relationship.

Incidently, since reading several books and watching some documentaries about polygamous relationships I'm very interested in them, especially from a child rearing POV - it's very similar to what occurs naturally in the animal kingdom - where females share child rearing duties without jealousy or competitiveness, and there is a sense of herdship almost - in humans they call it sisterhood or something. But it's that sense of group living, I mean, it certainly has it's advantages - added support, increased family circle, a friendship with others who are experiencing what you are.

I think that polygamy gets a bad rap in the media because it's primarily one man many woman reported and tend to focus on the male in that senario - usually they like to paint the male as domineering, smug, controlling etc etc etc. But they don't tend to focus too much on the women involved in those senarios, which I think is a shame as it would educate.

In short, so long as everyone involved is happy, safe and loved, then it's all good.

shaldna
04-25-2013, 01:17 AM
I agree. I guess the problem is that some people could abuse that law. For instance, how many football teams, here in the UK anyway where drunk men are idiots (or is that drunk people universally?), would think it was really funny if they all got married.

I don't see why this is a relevant point? After all, a man and a woman can already get married on whim without anyone questioning their motives, sobriety or love (I understand that in the US you can get married straight away if you get a licence, in teh UK it's two weeks) so why should a distinction be made for other non heteronormative relationships?

GeorgeK
04-25-2013, 02:20 AM
.
It takes tremendous maturity, communication skills, and understanding to maintain harmony and love in the face of such a complex relationship (not to mention against the judgements of society). Gods know I can't balance the needs of *one* other person, much less two or more.

I have to disagree. I think it's all about wiring. Some of us are swans and mate for life and when the spouse goes, we give up and die or at least wait until our kids are grown and then die. Some of us are coyotes. When the spouse goes we go on. Sometimes we go on before the spouse dies and still have pups to feed. Swans favor a society with a high infant mortality or are steeped in STD's where monogamy favors survival of your offspring or other factors that have a tendency to kill off offspring without extra parents to watch over the young. Coyotes favor genetic diversity.

Each genetically has their place. The problem is when a swan marries a coyote. If it is all honest and completely upfront I don't have a problem. It's when people lie about it that I have a problem.

.
There are also certain sociological advantages to having more than two people in the marriage/committed relationship. In the 21st Century we often lack close ties with our extended families and communities, so couples are on their own to raise their children with little relief. And if a spouse gets sick, the entire burden for their care and the household's financial survival falls on the remaining partner. I think it's pretty obvious how a three or four way marriage would ease these burdens.
the advantage of the coyote

.

And yes, I think polygamous marriage should be legal. All consenting adults should be able to marry in any combination they wish. as long as a coyote doesn't lie and say that they are a swan

Jaymz Connelly
04-25-2013, 03:01 AM
As many have said before, in real life, it's no one else's business but the people involved in the relationship. As long as everyone's happy, it's all good.

BUT, having said that, in books it's something I just don't and won't read. I just can't help but feeling that at some point, someone's going to feel 'left out', which would lead to resentment, anger, etc. I'm sure that's just me and I'm extrapolating how I would feel in that situation. Three (or more) in a bed just doesn't work at all for me. And if it's a 'take turns' sort of relationship, well, someone's always being 'left out' aren't they?

Captcha
04-25-2013, 04:22 AM
Three, or more, people in a monogamous relationship with each other. I have written a book about three men in a relationship and was asked to write an article for publicity purposes. So I thought I would delve into the concept or a triad.

Am I missing something here? How can a polygamous relationship be monogamous? Aren't the terms mutually exclusive?

Are you trying to say that the relationship is stable? That the members don't get romantically involved with anyone outside the relationship? I'm not sure if there's a word for this, but I'm pretty sure the word "monogamous" doesn't work!

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-25-2013, 08:36 AM
I agree. Those who would abuse it, and make a mockery out of it, would be few and far between.

It's good to hear multiple people's views on the subject.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-25-2013, 08:38 AM
Am I missing something here? How can a polygamous relationship be monogamous? Aren't the terms mutually exclusive?


It's called PolyMono. Where three people are in an exclusive relationship with each other and no others.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-25-2013, 08:41 AM
Yeah, it's not for everyone, that's for sure. For some people it can develop naturally, where three of you find yourselves falling in love with each other. With others, they search that kind of relationship out, feeling as though they aren't truly content without there being three of them. In a triad it isn't about sex, but love.

Thank you for your input.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-25-2013, 08:45 AM
If you leave a larger group, you can usually persuade someone to come with you. If you leave a triad, you leave alone.


Thank you for that insight, it was something that I hadn't considered yet :)

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-25-2013, 08:48 AM
The article is actually, specifically about MonoPoly (monogamous polyamory) but I have to also mention the other kinds of polygamy and give a well rounded view of the various different lifestyles involving it.

Thanks for your input.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-25-2013, 08:49 AM
Thank you for your input, I hadn't considered looking into, and making comparisons, to the animal kingdom. That's certainly something to consider when I write it up.

Captcha
04-25-2013, 09:58 AM
It's called PolyMono. Where three people are in an exclusive relationship with each other and no others.

By WHOM is it called PolyMono? I googled that and the first page of links were using that term to refer to monogamously inclined people who are in relationships with polygamously inclined people. That is, one partner wants to be in a relationship with just one person while the other partner wants to be in a relationship with multiple people. That's not what you're looking at, obviously.

Do you have links to sites where the form of relationship you're looking at is called PolyMono?

shaldna
04-25-2013, 10:53 AM
Am I missing something here? How can a polygamous relationship be monogamous? Aren't the terms mutually exclusive?

I think it's possible to be faithful to the relationship you are in, and the people who are in it. Monogamy is probably not the right term by definition, perhaps faithful would be a better choice of words. Faithful to the relationship.

Chasing the Horizon
04-25-2013, 10:53 AM
Some people argue same-sex marriage shouldn't be legalized because of the possibilities for abuse: "But what if two roommates want to give each other health insurance even though they're only just friends?? If same-sex marriage is legal they could get married and defraud the system!" But it's absurd; every scenario brought up is already possible for opposite-sex duos to do. I've had plenty of roommates who weren't my gender and had great health insurance; however did we stop ourselves from committing fraud??? We must've had superhuman willpower!
How would two friends marrying so they can have benefits be fraud? There's no law stating you have to love someone to marry them. There's no law stating you have to have sex to marry (otherwise people who can't have sexual intercourse for health reasons would be unable to marry). There's no law saying you can't have sex with other people while married (see: open marriage). I've known two elderly couples who married for benefits of the non-sexual, monetary kind.

Our society likes to make marriage out to be something sacred and special, but at its core it's a legal contract. Nothing more. A powerful contract, to be sure, with lots of rights and responsibilities, but in the end it's still much more similar to the purchase contracts I used to write out every day at work than the magical ritual some people make it out to be. It's been used to transfer property, status, and other monetary benefits since long before America existed, and continues to be used that way.

RichardGarfinkle
04-25-2013, 12:59 PM
I'm a little unclear on the OP.

Are you asking our views of polygamy as people or for references or discussion of how it appears in literature?

And are you asking specifically about polygamy (one man, many women) or more generally?

Captcha
04-25-2013, 02:32 PM
I think it's possible to be faithful to the relationship you are in, and the people who are in it. Monogamy is probably not the right term by definition, perhaps faithful would be a better choice of words. Faithful to the relationship.

Oh, I'm not arguing against the concept or the value of the relationships or anything. Just the terminology.

When words are so clearly linked to their latin roots it's hard to pretend they mean something else. Poly (many) and mono (single) seem mutually contradictory. It's like calling someone a heterosexual homosexual. You don't have to dig real deep into the etymology to see the problem!

JimmyB27
04-25-2013, 08:04 PM
This (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/apr/20/greatest-sexual-taboo-polyamorous-transgender) might be of interest.

CrastersBabies
04-25-2013, 08:05 PM
I honestly don't care as long as there is no abuse or damage occurring willfully.

I knew a woman who was very proud of her "multiple partner relationship," and it ended up undoing her mentally. She was vocal about how "GREAT" it was, but when things went sour, she confessed that it was the worst experience of her life, that she felt pressured to do it by her boyfriend, and that she pretty much suffered in silence every day. She loved her man, would have done anything for him, and he manipulated her soundly. It was pretty awful. Took her years to recover from that.

On the other hand, I've known an "open" couple who invite other women and men into their marriage and they seem really cool with it all. Very open. Very loving. They seem to be doing great.

I think of shows like Big Love and Sister Wives, and I can see what appears to be a well-functioning family unit.

Regardless of my opinions or such, I think that the government should stay out of it unless there is suspected abuse (spousal or child). Otherwise, I think the idea that marriage = 1 man + 1 woman is pure hogwash. If that's what you need and want in a relationship, great, but don't legislate it for others.

storygirl99
04-26-2013, 03:35 AM
I have a friend who was involved in a triad relationship for a while (she and her husband plus one) and she summed up the trouble this way: if 2 people are in a relationship, there is one relationship to maintain. If 3 people are in a relationship there are 4 relationships to maintain (person 1+p2, P2+P3, P3+P1 and the whole group together). She felt that it was not workable for them, and in the end, all of the relationships fell apart, including the legal marriage.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-26-2013, 11:48 AM
Do you have links to sites where the form of relationship you're looking at is called PolyMono?

That's strange, when I google it, loads of sites come up.

Here are a few

groups.yahoo.com/group/PolyMono/


www.morethantwo.com/poly-mono.html

polytical.org/2012/06/ask-polly-a-poly-mono-combination/

http://www.practicalpolyamory.com/images/Lemons_and_Lemonade_-_Poly_Mono_Relationships.pdf

The last link is a pdf.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-26-2013, 11:50 AM
I have a friend who was involved in a triad relationship for a while (she and her husband plus one) and she summed up the trouble this way: if 2 people are in a relationship, there is one relationship to maintain. If 3 people are in a relationship there are 4 relationships to maintain (person 1+p2, P2+P3, P3+P1 and the whole group together). She felt that it was not workable for them, and in the end, all of the relationships fell apart, including the legal marriage.

Thank you for sharing that story. In fiction we do have a tendency to over-romanticise the concept of polyamory. As someone who writes it I have learned a lot about how they work in the 'real world' be researching the subject for my article.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-26-2013, 11:54 AM
She loved her man, would have done anything for him, and he manipulated her soundly. It was pretty awful. Took her years to recover from that.

That's awful. It's certainly not going to work unless everyone involved is there because it's what they genuinely want.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-26-2013, 11:56 AM
This (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/apr/20/greatest-sexual-taboo-polyamorous-transgender) might be of interest.


Thank you for that, I'll give it a read :)

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-26-2013, 12:00 PM
I'm a little unclear on the OP.

Are you asking our views of polygamy as people or for references or discussion of how it appears in literature?

And are you asking specifically about polygamy (one man, many women) or more generally?

The topic is open to anything people are willing to share, be it their own personal views, information they have gathered or just to start a conversation on the subject.

Polygamy has so many sub-cultures, and I am covering a few of them, but mostly I am looking to hear about any combination of men and women that are involved in a relationship with each other.

Captcha
04-26-2013, 03:00 PM
That's strange, when I google it, loads of sites come up.

Here are a few

groups.yahoo.com/group/PolyMono/


www.morethantwo.com/ (http://www.morethantwo.com/)poly-mono.html

polytical.org/2012/06/ask-polly-a-poly-mono-combination/

http://www.practicalpolyamory.com/images/Lemons_and_Lemonade_-_Poly_Mono_Relationships.pdf

The last link is a pdf.

But did you READ the links? They're not about the sort of relationship you're using the term to describe. They're about relationships between people where one person is monogamously inclined and the other is polygamously inclined.

From the sites:

"Welcome to PolyMono, a list for monogamous people in a committed relationship with someone who is polyamorous...This list is open to anyone, but its primary purpose is support for monogamists dealing with polyamory."
groups.yahoo.com/group/PolyMono/

"More Than Two is the new home of Franklin Veaux's pages about polyamory and ethical non-monogamy."
www.morethantwo.com/ (http://www.morethantwo.com/)poly-mono.html

[this page wouldn't open for me]
polytical.org/2012/06/ask-polly-a-poly-mono-combination/

"Goals of Presentation... To validate and legitimize the feelings and concerns of both [my bold] partners" - not ALL partners. BOTH.
It goes on to outline "Common challenges in Poly/Mono Relationships" which includes lists "For both partners", "For the poly partner", and "For the mono partner".
http://www.practicalpolyamory.com/images/Lemons_and_Lemonade_-_Poly_Mono_Relationships.pdf

So, yes, people are using the word PolyMono, but the word doesn't mean what you think it means.

If you're writing this article for anything approaching a reputable source, you need to get the terms straight. I think you might want to use "faithfully polygamous" or "in a committed, exclusive polygamous relationship," or something like that. But "monogamous" means one partner. You can't use it as a shortcut for the words you really mean.

Crayonz
04-27-2013, 12:06 AM
Coming from someone who's parents praticed a four person set-up, if that's what floats a person's boat, then I don't give a hoot. I would just ask that they never speak to me about it. Ever. :)

My father did once compare it to "juggling three angry badgers," if that gives any indication how stressful such arrangements can be. :Shrug:

Dragonwings
04-27-2013, 12:23 AM
As long as everyone's happy in the relationship then it's fine. It's none of my business to dictate what others relationships should be if everyone's on the same page.

Jane Wallace-Knight
04-27-2013, 12:38 PM
If you're writing this article for anything approaching a reputable source, you need to get the terms straight. I think you might want to use "faithfully polygamous" or "in a committed, exclusive polygamous relationship," or something like that. But "monogamous" means one partner. You can't use it as a shortcut for the words you really mean.

Thank you for letting me know. I hadn't read those sites, no. I got the word from a real life triad who referred to themselves that way.

I am very concious of accidental offending someone or getting it wrong so I plan to do a whole heap of fact checking before I send it off.

wendymarlowe
05-07-2013, 09:57 AM
Totally personal opinion here:

I'm happy for consenting adults to love whomever they please, in whatever gender combinations they please. However, I wish we could decouple marriage-the-legal-institution from marriage-the-religious-institution from marriage-the-social-contract. There's no reason that I should pay less in taxes than someone else with the same income just because I'm married, and the old "it's for the children" routine doesn't really apply anymore now that nearly half of children in the US live in single-parent households. (The paper I got that from didn't say specifically, but I suspect that number includes actual single parents, co-custody divorced parents, LGBT parent couples who can't legally marry, parents with a live-in romantic partner whom they are not legally married to, etc.)

In my ideal world :-) the concept of a social unit would be totally self-identified. Hell, go by Facebook status if you want to. If you want to consider your boyfriend of three weeks your partner, fine - and if you want to consider the three people you love all as partners, that's fine too. In contrast, the religious definition of "marriage" could continue to vary depending on the religion in question, and the legal definition of "marriage" would disappear completely to be replaced by a more accurate list of legal rights - who do you want to inherit your stuff when you die? Who do you want to be able to visit you in the hospital? Who do you want to get the last word if your multiple loved ones disagree? Hopefully if that were the case, more people would actually treat marriage as the legal contract it is instead of just the byproduct of getting the Big White Wedding.

GeorgeK
05-07-2013, 04:49 PM
There's no reason that I should pay less in taxes than someone else with the same income just because I'm married, and the old "it's for the children" routine doesn't really apply anymore now that nearly half of children in the US live in single-parent households..Welcome Wendy,


That's an interesting point, but I'm not sure that the children are the real reason for the tax break. The children come into play as dependents whether single parent household or married. I think the reduction in taxes for married couples is two-fold.

1. Filing jointly cuts in half the papers to process for the IRS, so it reduces their workload.

2. The religion lobby wants to encourage marriage for a variety of reasons and they've managed to put that into the tax code with their campaign contributions

Alpha Echo
05-07-2013, 05:04 PM
First, my initial thoughts - I agree with all those who've said they don't care what others do, so long as no one is hurt or abused.

There definitely should be no law telling people how to marry or how to be together, and I've thought this forever. Whether two males, three males, two females and one male...or a man married to 10 women. Whatever. I don't get it. It's not for me. But as long as no one is hurt (psychologically, emotionally, physically), why the hell not? As veinglory said in post #2 - love is a reason to celebrate. Period. So love away.

For me? Absolutely not. I'm selfish and love my husband completely. He fills up my whole heart, and I have no need or desire to make room for anyone else. Plus the idea of him with someone...just the idea...breaks my heart. As someone else said, it would shatter me.


I have a lot of respect for people in committed poly relationships. It takes tremendous maturity, communication skills, and understanding to maintain harmony and love in the face of such a complex relationship (not to mention against the judgements of society). Gods know I can't balance the needs of *one* other person, much less two or more.


I never thought of it like that. I see what you're saying, though. You do have to have a certain kind of...personality and be pretty strong, I would think. And my husband says the same thing (teasing, of course) -that he has enough to handle with just me. No way he could handle another one.



I have to disagree. I think it's all about wiring. Some of us are swans and mate for life and when the spouse goes, we give up and die or at least wait until our kids are grown and then die. Some of us are coyotes. When the spouse goes we go on. Sometimes we go on before the spouse dies and still have pups to feed. Swans favor a society with a high infant mortality or are steeped in STD's where monogamy favors survival of your offspring or other factors that have a tendency to kill off offspring without extra parents to watch over the young. Coyotes favor genetic diversity.

Each genetically has their place. The problem is when a swan marries a coyote. If it is all honest and completely upfront I don't have a problem. It's when people lie about it that I have a problem.
the advantage of the coyote
as long as a coyote doesn't lie and say that they are a swan

I wonder if that's true. You hear so much about how men are wired to spread their seed to as many women as possible, but very little about women wired to be with as many men as possible. That came out wrong. I don't necessarily mean every man or woman as possible, but multiple.


I think it's possible to be faithful to the relationship you are in, and the people who are in it. Monogamy is probably not the right term by definition, perhaps faithful would be a better choice of words. Faithful to the relationship.

That was what I was thinking, in regards to the PolyMono thing.


Coming from someone who's parents praticed a four person set-up, if that's what floats a person's boat, then I don't give a hoot. I would just ask that they never speak to me about it. Ever. :)

My father did once compare it to "juggling three angry badgers," if that gives any indication how stressful such arrangements can be. :Shrug:

Wow...interesting. I'd be fascinated to have been a fly on the wall in your house!!!

GeorgeK
05-07-2013, 06:14 PM
I wonder if that's true. You hear so much about how men are wired to spread their seed to as many women as possible, but very little about women wired to be with as many men as possible. That came out wrong. I don't necessarily mean every man or woman as possible, but multiple. !!!Right, not every. The media finds men who are faithful and want to be faithful boring and so all you hear about are the coyotes. It's a sample error. There are female coyotes too. IT's not all that unusual to find a woman who has 3 kids all from different dads. They simply aren't celebrated in the media the way that the man-coyotes are.

Princess Marina
05-07-2013, 06:35 PM
Ignoring any religious issues that might approve or disapprove of polygamy, there are several legal issues which make legalising polygamy and polyandry difficult. At present under UK law, second marriages are bigamous. Children of a second wife would be illegitimate. In a polyandrous marriage, it would be difficult without DNA testing to confirm which husband had fathered a child and there is only the possibility of one father being included on a birth certificate.

I believe most Western governments disapprove of it not because of religious or moral outrage but because in polygamous marriages they are at risk of being made responsible for multiple offspring should the marriages break down. It is an avoidance of huge social welfare pay-outs which makes such relationships unlikely to be legalised.

However what people do in private or write about should be absolutely up to them, so long as no pressure is bought to bear on the individuals concerned and only adults are involved.

GeorgeK
05-07-2013, 07:15 PM
I believe most Western governments disapprove of it not because of religious or moral outrage but because in polygamous marriages they are at risk of being made responsible for multiple offspring should the marriages break down. It is an avoidance of huge social welfare pay-outs which makes such relationships unlikely to be legalised.
.
Here when there are minor children getting social security due to a parent getting disabled, it's a flat amount based on how much the disabled parent paid into the system, regardless of the number of children involved.

Princess Marina
05-07-2013, 07:22 PM
Sorry GeorgeK but that's not the case in UK, it adds to the ranting about polygamous ethnic religion marriages especially when huge sums in benefits are being expended on more than one wife and multiple offspring. In many of the cases they have contributed nothing whatsoever in either taxes or national insurance.

SophieB
05-10-2013, 04:32 PM
To add a slightly different view of things...

In my twenties I would have had problems with jealousy if I'd been one of multiple wives. Anytime after that, I'd have to say it's a great idea- share childrearing and household duties, NOT have to put up with my husband every night, but still be able to get laid on a regular basis.

As for having more than one husband- just kill me now, please. I won't even do that sequentially!

On an academic level, polyamory and polygamy make more sense to me than the orthodox Judeo-Christian notion of lifetime monogamy. On a biological level, humans aren't meant to be paired for life. (Before everyone starts yelling at me- please note the word "biological" in the previous sentence. Re: personal and spiritual growth, that's a whole new bundle of bananas.)

RichardGarfinkle
05-10-2013, 04:34 PM
On a biological level, humans aren't meant to be paired for life. (Before everyone starts yelling at me- please note the word "biological" in the previous sentence. Re: personal and spiritual growth, that's a whole new bundle of bananas.)

Biology does not produce meanings or have intents. Humans read intent into biology because we anthropomorphize things.

Some humans get along fine paired for life; others don't.

Paris Love
05-17-2013, 03:46 AM
It's all good. I really liked how Heinlein tackles the topic in Stranger In A Strange Land and Time Enough For Love. He did a pretty good job of pushing the limits of his reader's comfort but stayed clear from any M/M romance themes, which is kind of disappointing.

I doubt I could make it work in real life, as other posters have suggested, it takes a lot of work to keep a monogamous relationship together. I can't imagine trying to keep multiple partners happy with so many divergent needs to think about. I have a friend who is working on a poly-type relationship structure. The situation is more like commune living, where the adults have been sexuality involved with one another at some point or another.

I found this topic interesting as I'm writing a story now that address the potential problems and pitfalls of a polyamorous relationship of M/M/F trio.

In the non-fiction world, it is assumed that most polygamy is a singular male with multiple female partners. I have no issue with this, if everyone is happy with the arrangement. One would assume that some women may wish to have multiple husbands, but I've not encountered this is the non-fiction world.

ECathers
05-17-2013, 04:51 PM
I'm with everyone else who says so long as they're consenting adults, it's not my business. Should polys be able to marry in any combination they want? Sure.

That said, I've seen many poly relationships of various types and have never seen one that was functional or that lasted. Can it be done? I suppose.

Personally I have no intent of sharing my hubby, nor does he want to share or be shared.

As far as books go, it's not the kind of book I'd read. If the book happened to have a poly relationship in it but was about something else - a murder mystery etc - and was otherwise well written, the poly thing wouldn't stop me from reading it. But in a romance novel, I'd be completely uninterested in reading it. That's okay, I'm just not your target market.