Time to Allow Polyamorous Marraiges

luchog said:
Neither of those difficulties are unique to poly groups. They apply equally well to monogamous relationships as well. When my dad and mom married, all his family members were taking the exact same tack as in your second example, substituting "American" for "polyamourous relationship". I've seen friends go through similar grief from their relatives and social circles for interracial and inter-religious marriages. Some survived, some thrived despite the stress, some failed. The only problem unique to poly relationships is issues of "scheduling" relationship time with all partners involved.
Click to expand...

That and that instead of having a single relationship in the group, you get many many more, that all need to be functioning for the total to work.
 
ponderingturtle said:
It all depends on how the marriage laws are rewritten to fit multi partner marriage. Gay marriage changes no laws or regulations that create and define the legal status of marriage. Multiple marriage does require rewriting them. So we can not say that there will not be changes in the legal status of binary marriage until we see the proposed rewritten laws.
Click to expand...

Imagine if one person were married to nine others who were each married to twenty others. How would that divorce law be written!?
 
BTMO said:
Hey - if everyone is happy in the relationship, who cares, and why is it any business of the states?
Click to expand...

Because there are points when people want state recognition of their relationship. There are many points when this recognition is important, often when the relationship has either internal or external problems.
 
Puppycow said:
But since we can kill animals and eat them, as well as own them as chattel, it seems odd to prohibit non-consensual sex with animals.
Click to expand...

You forget all the the non consensual sex involved in the farming of animals, but it is only wrong if you are enjoying it, if you are doing it for a check it is all good.
 
Typicallucas said:
=Just because the only polygamy you hear or read about in the news is associated with child abuse doesn't mean that they are the only polygamists out there. Regular old polygamy is boring and doesn't get the headlines like scandalous religious practices do, and regular people who are in polyamorous relationships don't get all married up because they don't want to go to jail.
Click to expand...

Wait you are suggesting that not all catholic priests molest children is it just that "Priest molests child" is a bigger story than "Priest doesn't molest child"?
 
slingblade said:
A 45-year-old woman...you're postulating she's not child-bearing, is that it?
Click to expand...

No, I'm postulating she's not hot.

, perhaps sex-appeal cuz lots of 45-year-olds are hella sexy thanks,
Click to expand...

Well....sort of. I think my wife is hella sexy, but when we were younger, guys hit on her a lot. Now, not so much.

Nature is cruel. It really does discriminate based on sex and age. Of course, there are plenty of 45, and 50, and for all I know 60 year old hot chicks, but I would still encourage people to gather their rosebuds while they may, if you take my meaning.

Moreover, there are plenty of not so sexy 45 year old women, and these are the women Skeptic is talking about. At some point, the middle aged man, who might be very attractive if he happens to be rich and thin, might be tempted to dump the more usual sort of 45 year old woman.

Or, maybe we can let that guy just add a new, younger, addition to the family. I'm sure his existing wife won't mind, and they will all exist as equal members of the family, in true love and trust, as a happy triad.

It could happen.
 
slingblade said:
Why can't there be households where some members are polyamorous, and others share the chores, finances, parenting, and so-forth? Why couldn't two gay gentlemen marry a hetero couple, donate sperm to their wife, and all share the children as co-parents? Or, of course, any other imaginable combination of sexual orientations, who get together to accomplish mutual goals?

Why can't marriage evolve?
Click to expand...

It can, but we would need to see legal changes to the laws that define marriage that would create that. Also by and large it can happen, it does have problems as it lacks legal recognition.
 
Meadmaker said:
I can't help but notice that so much of the discussion has been all about whether or not to give people what they want. Three people want to live together as a family. All are adults. Surely there's nothing wrong with giving people what they want, is there?
Click to expand...

I don't see many saying that they can't. The problem here is how to legally recognize it and how those changes will effect established marriages.
 
Symbol said:
To get back on track, this discussion is about polyamory, not polygamy. Polyamory also allows for a women to take on an additional partner, with her husband's consent.

That evens the playing fields a bit, doesn't it?

:)
Click to expand...

Polygamy does too, the term for male exclusive multiple marriage is polygyny.

No one is suggesting legalizing only polygyny and not polyandry.
 
Meadmaker said:
Which is why I go back and forth on this and similar issues. The problem is that the playing field is most definitely NOT level.

Just what is it that a typical 45 year old woman brings to the contract negotiations?
Click to expand...


Okay, I feel a need to comment here. What does the typical 45 year old woman bring to the negotiations? Well, in the world I live in, which, granted, is pretty small (semi-rural), the 45 year old woman brings as much as the 45 year old man...and sometimes more. Where I live, the 45 year old woman is MORE likely to have an education beyond high school and more likely to have been working in the same job for a longer number of years than a 45 year old man. Of the people I know, a 45 year old woman is just as likely to have health insurance and a retirement plan as a 45 year old man. In fact, a 45 year old woman is MORE likely to own her own home as opposed to a 45 year old man.

She is more likely to have an inheritance coming from her parents, by default, since she's more likely to have an education (which indicates that her parents encouraged education and so were probably more responsible with their own finances).

But that is just where I live. It may differ where you are, but...the typical 45 year old woman doesn't live the life I, at almost 40, live. I stay at home. Very, very few of my female friends do so, even if they can--and the ones who do generally only do so temporarily. The "housewife" everyone still talks about just isn't very common anymore. Most women that "stay home" are either for some reason unable to work or they have aging parents they care for, along with children, making it tough to both have a job and be available for the time required to effectively do both. To the typical 45 year old woman, her career is more than "just a job", it is something that she was told for years would ensure her ability to "take care of herself". She wasn't told to snag a man and hold on tight, like maybe her mother had been. She was told to get an education or training and be able to take care of herself.

I don't think the playing field is as unlevel as it is being portrayed. I think (though I may be wrong, and I'm sure I'll be corrected if so) that women actually file for divorce more often than men. Women are JUST AS LIKELY to trade in the old husband for a newer or improved model. In time, the old stereotypes will probably seem silly, as more and more women are in fact marrying men younger than themselves. So...it seems to me that the typical 45 year old woman has a lot to bring to the table. At least from where I'm sitting.
 
Skeptic said:
In THEORY both women and men would be allowed to do this. In PRACTICE it would be, nine times out of ten, the succesful career man who discards his aging housewife-of-a-spouse for a newer model... only now, he doesn't have to actually discard her, he can just pressure her into "consenting" to the newer model having the exact same rights as she does.
Click to expand...

And why can't she divorce him and take lots of his stuff?
 
Alt+F4 said:
Imagine if one person were married to nine others who were each married to twenty others. How would that divorce law be written!?
Click to expand...

I would like to see the answer.

In some comunities you might well end up with interconnected marriages. These are legal issues that do need to be addressed, and attempting to make it absurd does not change that.
 
sugarb said:
Okay, I feel a need to comment here. What does the typical 45 year old woman bring to the negotiations? Well, in the world I live in, which, granted, is pretty small (semi-rural), the 45 year old woman brings as much as the 45 year old man...and sometimes more. Where I live, the 45 year old woman is MORE likely to have an education beyond high school and more likely to have been working in the same job for a longer number of years than a 45 year old man. Of the people I know, a 45 year old woman is just as likely to have health insurance and a retirement plan as a 45 year old man. In fact, a 45 year old woman is MORE likely to own her own home as opposed to a 45 year old man.
Click to expand...

You are missing his point, women are only as useful as how hot they are.
 
ponderingturtle said:
You are missing his point, women are only as useful as how hot they are.
Click to expand...


Lol, okay, then, I'll approach it from the "hotness" perspective.

Where I live, 45 year old women are MORE likely to be WAY "hotter" than 45 year old men. They've been educated and therefore are less likely to have toiled away their "youthful rosebud" (or whatever) years working in factories, mines, and labor intensive jobs. They are major consumers of products designed to enhance attractiveness (which old men obviously like since they go after the young chicks that buy the same goop). They are also more likely to be healthier, which, by default, enhances the "hotness" factor, unlike the 45 year old "old" guys, with questionable endurance.

There. Is that better? :)
 
Meadmaker said:
Which is why I go back and forth on this and similar issues. The problem is that the playing field is most definitely NOT level.

Just what is it that a typical 45 year old woman brings to the contract negotiations?
Click to expand...

It is not as if this were on the legislative table, up for a vote this afternoon. I'd like to presume that by the time it may be, that we'll have squared away the implied problem of your hypothetical "typical 45 year old woman" with her implied weak position vis-a-vis marriage. After all, if she is that weak today, we have a much more pressing problem, don't we? Marriage as it is now constituted isn't going to solve that for her for long.

skeptic said:
But as I said, heck, *I'm* all for it. I'd love to have the option to pressume *my* wife into the super-maid role as I have fun with my young secretary -- all legal and recognized! No more divorce court! Cooooooool.
Click to expand...

What - we abolished all laws about marriage? Will no body think of the lawyers?

What have we postulated here (at least Slingblade and myself)? Replacement of existing marraige / civil entanglement with some sort of incorporation law. If you don't tow the line of the agreement, then your weak-kneed super-maid need only seek out a lawyer to cut you off at the ankles. If she can't muster up that amount of courage, then there is no hope for her, most particularly under the laws that exist for marriage today. Any other dumb assertions?

pondering turtle said:
It can, but we would need to see legal changes to the laws that define marriage that would create that. Also by and large it can happen, it does have problems as it lacks legal recognition.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are absolutely right. That is why we are here pleading this case.

pt said:
You are missing his point, women are only as useful as how hot they are.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but hottness is in the eyes of the beholder. I am no paragon of prime male; if I were "available" and had the option of joining with a "45 year old woman" who knew how to keep me comfortable while I stared at the monitor screen 16 hours a day, I'd probably be blissful, as long as I lasted. That would be hot enough for me. Different strokes for ...you get the idea. In my case, women are only as hot as to how useful thay are. Sex? Occasionally, if I can find the time.
 
Skeptic said:
Polygamy makes cheating on one's wife, not punished by law as it is today,
Click to expand...
Skeptic said:
Infidelity is punishable in the sense that if you want to give your younger girlfriend a legal status, you must first divorce your wife, which means you have to split the joint property with her... etc., etc.
Click to expand...
Why don't you just admit that you were wrong. Cheating isn't punished by law. Dissolution of a incorporation and the distribution of assets isn't a punishment, it is enforcement of the laws related to marriage. Just ask any woman who cheated on her husband and got half of her husband's property on the way out of the marriage.

Skeptic said:
If polygamy is allowed, all that goes out the window: you can eat your cake and have it, too. You can have the younger model as a trophy wife AND keep all the property AND the children AND no alimony to the older wife. And she'll still do the housework!
Click to expand...
Where do you live where women are mindless dopes who are manipulated by greedy evil men who force them into slavery? If a man is this cruel why would he wait until polygamy is legalized to abuse his wife? Either you know some seriously effed up people or you have a sick twisted mind filled with slippery slopes.

Alt+F4 said:
New York State still require fault.
Click to expand...
A spouse is still free to leave the marriage or kick their spouse out of the house. After a year they can get divorce if for no other reason.

If a man took a second wife without the consent of the first wife that would easily be considered cruel treatment. Forget forcing the first wife into sexual slavery and making her stay home and scrub the floors all day...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom