"Why not polygamous marriage?"

[Marduk]

You're talking about fantasy and I'm talking about reality. You're talking about some fantastic idea of what you imagine polygamy should be, I about what polygamy actually always is.

SNIPPED?

no, you're the one fantasizing, this thread is about why polyamourous groups arent allowed to marry in the western world, all you can do is cite very very very poor examples of something that you personally want to have happened far from that in examples where people generally have a different ethnicity than you

basically youre coming over as a racist bigot
thats the reality here
can I ask you, are you opposed to gay marriage and abortion as well ?

 

[crimresearch]

Yes, a mechanism for the increase in polygyny. You claimed polyandry wouldn't be affected, and I'm saying that doesn't matter to my argument.

I made no such claim, and never even used the word polyandry.

I've quoted your exact words, and merely asked for clarification.
You can't even begin to give a rational explanation, ergo you have no argument.

 

[KingMerv00]

whoa <----Keeanu Reeves voice. Deja vu

I really do wish someone would explain how legalizing polygamy in a culture in which women have rights will automatically negate those rights. I just can't figure out the mechanism.

Found it.

 

[bookitty]

You're talking about fantasy and I'm talking about reality. You're talking about some fantastic idea of what you imagine polygamy should be, I about what polygamy actually always is.

Polygamy is a tool of male domination, a way for older, powerful men to enhance their status by owning women (or do you really think the tribe's chief honestly falls madly in love with his 23rd wife before he decides to marry her?). This is what it is today wherever it is practiced, this is what it was in the past whenever it was practiced.

The laws would be fair? That's nice. Well, the laws about ownership of sports cars are fair, too: it is just as legal for one sports car to be shared fairly and equally by several rich old men as it is for one old man to own many sport cars. But for some curious reason the ownership relation always goes in one direction, doesn't it?

So you believe that women in the west are already objects and polygamy in the west would immediately translate to men "buying" women.

That is a fair point given the nature of media in the west, women are seen as objects. Funny how you haven't brought this up in any of the feminism threads.

 

[Weird Science]

....and a 25 year old (blonde attractive with a pert bottom) submissive...

Exactly the kind of woman who would be perfect for polygamy. If you WANT to be submissive to the older male's authority (sexually or otherwise), I admit that, with polygamy, you've found the perfect arrangement.

But some people also want to be slaves of a dominatrix, which is hardly a reason to legalize slavery. Hey, why shouldn't she have the right to legally own her willing slaves? What damage does it cause?

All with a "set of fair and balanced laws" that would take care to protect the slaves' rights, of course.

Right?

 

[bookitty]

no, you're the one fantasizing, this thread is about why polyamourous groups arent allowed to marry in the western world, all you can do is cite very very very poor examples of something that you personally want to have happened far from that in examples where people generally have a different ethnicity than you

basically youre coming over as a racist bigot
thats the reality here
can I ask you, are you opposed to gay marriage and abortion as well ?

Why, I do believe you've got it! (That voice was Henry Higgens, btw.)

 

[The Greater Fool]

You're talking about fantasy and I'm talking about reality. You're talking about some fantastic idea of what you imagine polygamy should be, I about what polygamy actually always is.

Polygamy is a tool of male domination, a way for older, powerful men to enhance their status by owning women (or do you really think the tribe's chief honestly falls madly in love with his 23rd wife before he decides to marry her?). This is what it is today wherever it is practiced, this is what it was in the past whenever it was practiced.

The laws would be fair? That's nice. Well, the laws about ownership of sports cars are fair, too: it is just as legal for one sports car to be shared fairly and equally by several rich old men as it is for one old man to own many sport cars. But for some curious reason the ownership relation always goes in one direction, doesn't it?

Aren't we already presuming that marriage is changing in a way it never has before? Gay Marriage? Can it not work, because everytime Gay people have joined in the past, they were stoned?

Aren't we living in a time and place where Human Rights are as close to equal as they've ever been? Is it necessarily so that women will lose those equal rights if polygomy is allowed. Particularly when they are equal partners to creating the rules?

You build straw men nicely. Laws about owning sports cars are fair, but they don't allow the sports cars to own the driver in an equal way.

Marriage doesn't involve owning women now. Why should it if 2 men can marry a woman or 2 women a man? You presume women are too stupid or weak to hold on to the rights they have garnered and will revert to victims unablee to protect themselves legally, That is bigotted thinking.

 

[bookitty]

Exactly the kind of woman who would be perfect for polygamy. If you WANT to be submissive to the older male's authority (sexually or otherwise), I admit that, with polygamy, you've found the perfect arrangement.

But some people also want to be slaves of a dominatrix, which is hardly a reason to legalize slavery. Hey, why shouldn't she have the right to legally own her willing slaves? What damage does it cause?

All with a "set of fair and balanced laws" that would take care to protect the slaves' rights, of course.

Right?

I have many, many friends in the BDSM crowd. In Los Angeles, female doms are in much greater demand then male. To the point where they have a greater amount of power within that community than the males, even the dominant males.

Consensual, safe "slavery" within that group is legal, or at least filed under sex between consenting adults. Were it to become more mainstream, there would be an equal amount of male and female "slaves."

Although that's not my scene I would like to see the BDSM community's guidelines for safe, respectful, sexual play become popular among the vanilla crowd.

 

[Marduk]

Exactly the kind of woman who would be perfect for polygamy. If you WANT to be submissive to the older male's authority (sexually or otherwise), I admit that, with polygamy, you've found the perfect arrangement.

no I just put that bit in for you as I knew you would latch onto it as if it was somehow meaningful. In reality she has a nice rounded bottom and is a brunette. Polyamory is derived from two words, the second of which is not about what people look like, but what you feel for them.

But some people also want to be slaves of a dominatrix, which is hardly a reason to legalize slavery.

Consensual slavery is already legal my friend, there are public events where slavery is recognised, they have their own nightclubs and the scene has leaders committed to furthering the rights of its followers, you can even have your wedding vows changed so that its recognised by the church, I even know a BDSM friendly vicar, seems pretty benevolent to me

Hey, why shouldn't she have the right to legally own her willing slaves? What damage does it cause?

she can easily arrange to have right of attorney over them, as do many people in society for various reasons, however that isn't usually needed as its "consensual", if they want to stop being a slave they can just leave

All with a "set of fair and balanced laws" that would take care to protect the slaves' rights, of course.
Right?

all the slaves I know are happy being referred to as such and have owners that love them. Can I ask you if you have any experience of the BDSM lifestyle at all, because its not coming through on your comments

 

[Ziggurat]

my point is that I asked you to name a polygamous society, instead I got your geographic bigotry and examples that don't support your claim.

Until you tell me how you think those examples fail, then I really don't know how to respond.

You are therefore wether you think it or not opposed to equal rights for everyone.

Nonsense. I have exactly the same rights you do. The difference is that you want to do something different than I want to do, not that we can't both do the same thing. But that's not actually question of unequal rights. And there's absolutely no cure for it except to abolish all laws.

And you still haven't actually stated that you want to marry two women.

 

[crimresearch]

Exactly the kind of woman who would be perfect for polygamy. If you WANT to be submissive to the older male's authority (sexually or otherwise), I admit that, with polygamy, you've found the perfect arrangement.

But some people also want to be slaves of a dominatrix, which is hardly a reason to legalize slavery. Hey, why shouldn't she have the right to legally own her willing slaves? What damage does it cause?

All with a "set of fair and balanced laws" that would take care to protect the slaves' rights, of course.

Right?

ROTFLMAO!!!

So now you are seriously claiming that consensual BDSM relationships are exactly the same as pre-Civil War slave trading?

In other words, for you women don't have the *capability* to consent, or make up their own minds, so equal rights are bad for them?


Thanks for the revealing insight.

 

[Marduk]

Until you tell me how you think those examples fail, then I really don't know how to respond..

your examples were not of polygamous societies, one of your examples was actually illegal in the society mentioned. They fail because you didn't bother to check the facts before pronouncing your blanket opinion on the unknown.

Nonsense. I have exactly the same rights you do. The difference is that you want to do something different than I want to do, not that we can't both do the same thing. But that's not actually question of unequal rights. And there's absolutely no cure for it except to abolish all laws..

I am doing something different to you, its not a want, all I have asked is that polyamourous groups are offered the same rights as monogamous couples, thats a pretty simple demand for equality, which you are opposed to,

And you still haven't actually stated that you want to marry two women.

I haven't ?
so whats this ?

I don't believe in any kind of marriage, but I feel very strongly that if three people want to dress up and be allowed to walk down an aisle and publically speak some vows then their right to do so should be enforced by law in the same way that it is for everyone else
:

if youre going to discuss things with people, understanding their position is an essential, my dislike of marriage I gained from having an abusive father who used marriage as a way of escaping prosecution and of furthering his own sadism. In this country, because of the religious component of marriage, abusers used to be protected by the police. Oddly because of that in my imagination, marriage is a trap which people enter into consensually. My F was already married and divorced and my f still has abandonment issues from her own father walking out when she was a child, the only advantage I ever saw in it was the tax break that they abolished in the uk quite some time ago, we're not the pro marriage lobby over here. tbh I still don't understand why two men would want the right to marry in a building owned by an organisation that has persecuted their sexuality all through history, but they should have the right to decide for themselves spared from the opinions of people like me who are ignorant of their feelings
I already imo have a perfect relationship, so yanno, if its not broken, don't fix it

 

[ponderingturtle]

And what if there were no available women for your son? What would you do then? What would he do then?

It's not the marriage itself which is the primary source of problems.

Did you miss the part about being husband 2 or 3?

 

[Ziggurat]

all I have asked is that polyamourous groups are offered the same rights as monogamous couples

No. You and I have the exact same rights. Whether or not we have all the rights we should have is a different question. But it's not a question of equality. Let me give you two examples to illustrate the point.

1) Person A wants to criticize the government, person B does not. The government permits no criticism. Person A may feel the restriction of his rights where person B does not, but they both have equal rights. They just don't have the rights they should have.

2) Person A likes to pet kittens, and person B likes to put them in blenders. The government does not permit putting kittens in blenders. Person A feels no restriction, and person B does, but they are both equally prohibited from putting kittens in blenders. They are both denied a right which I think neither should have.

You can argue that polygamy is like example 1 and not example 2, but that's got nothing to do with equality.

thats a pretty simple demand for equality, which you are opposed to, most likely your own insecurity about women is putting ideas in your head

You know, I really had hoped this thread wouldn't deteriorate into personal insults. I'm sorry to find out that my hope was in vain.

I already imo have a perfect relationship, so yanno, if its not broken, don't fix it

So why do you care if polygamy is legalized if you wouldn't use it and it would make no difference to you?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Yes. Unless we are going to start allowing parents to force their daughters into being wife #2 or 3, I just don't see there being a lot of takers.

Haven't you been paying attention, all women must be fundamentally whores willing to marry the richest guy then can get to marry them. That is the fundamental argument that it is only monogamous marriage that curbs women's whorish impulses.

Or something like that, people seem to be reluctant to phrase it that bluntly.

 

[iknownothing]

I really do wish someone would explain how legalizing polygamy in a culture in which women have rights will automatically negate those rights. I just can't figure out the mechanism.

Still wondering this myself.

 

[ponderingturtle]

What happens in actual polygamous societies. They're always dominated by single male/multiple female relationships, not the other way around or even balanced. That's not a coincidence.

And all those societies women were not the legal equal of men. Rape was a fundamental part of marriage and legally sanctioned in the US as recently as 25 years ago. Now it is not. Why would such a different society have the same results?

 

[Marduk]

No. You and I have the exact same rights. Whether or not we have all the rights we should have is a different question. But it's not a question of equality. Let me give you two examples to illustrate the point..

your examples are not relevant to the discussion in any way, try to stay engaged in the subject

You can argue that polygamy is like example 1 and not example 2, but that's got nothing to do with equality.

so you can marry the person you love whereas I cannot and you think thats equality ?

You know, I really had hoped this thread wouldn't deteriorate into personal insults. I'm sorry to find out that my hope was in vain.

I apologise, if you scroll up you'll see that I went back and removed that comment some time before you replied. What have you been doing eating dinner ?

So why do you care if polygamy is legalized if you wouldn't use it and it would make no difference to you?

because I care that people are afforded equal rights in marriage, currently that is not the case, Living with two women is always an object lesson in fairness, provided you make it work

 

[ponderingturtle]

You're talking about fantasy and I'm talking about reality. You're talking about some fantastic idea of what you imagine polygamy should be, I about what polygamy actually always is.

Rather like the fools who thought marriage could be reformed into something between equals rather than the bastion of ownership and abuse it always was. Kind of funny that they seemed to be right isn't it?

 

[ponderingturtle]

whoa <----Keeanu Reeves voice. Deja vu

I really do wish someone would explain how legalizing polygamy in a culture in which women have rights will automatically negate those rights. I just can't figure out the mechanism.

You are failing to see the fundamental sexism in his argument. All women care about is a successful man, ergo they will choose to share a successful man instead of having a less successful man to themselves. That is the fundamentals of his position.