Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: ragnar ( )
Date: November 05, 2015 11:35AM

A story about a polygamous/polyamorous family (for non-religious reasons) being accepted by those around them.

http://hellogiggles.com/polyamorous-and-pregnant/

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: icedtea ( )
Date: November 05, 2015 12:55PM

Consenting, consciously-chosen polyamory and patriarchal, religiously-based polygamy are very, very different. This article portrays the former.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Tevai ( )
Date: November 05, 2015 01:48PM

This is a really good introduction to polyamory for anyone who is unfamiliar with either the concept, or the way it actually works in real life.

The configurations of partners is up to each poly relationship---for example, it could be three adult males...or three adult females...one woman and two men...two [often] started-out-as-couples who decide to become a "quad" of four people...

...every poly family, and who is included in that family, depends on the people involved and what THEY want. (Poly families tend to be very egalitarian, with everyone having a voice and every voice being heard and included in any consensus...and this also, when appropriate, includes the children in the family, whose voice is ALSO heard and included when possible, depending on the circumstances and the age, etc., of the child.)

The poly family in the article is a good example of poly life and a three-adult-person family.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/05/2015 01:49PM by tevai.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Loyalexmo ( )
Date: November 05, 2015 02:22PM

I don't think Mormon polygamy and consensual polamory have anything in common except more than two partners being involved. Polyamorists are all about consent and women's/individual rights. Also lots of different gender configurations and no religiosity. Polar opposites really.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/05/2015 02:23PM by woodsmoke.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Tevai ( )
Date: November 05, 2015 02:35PM

woodsmoke Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think Mormon polygamy and consensual
> polamory have anything in common except more than
> two partners being involved. Polyamorists are all
> about consent and women's/individual rights. Also
> lots of different gender configurations and no
> religiosity. Polar opposites really.

I agree!!!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: TDM ( )
Date: November 05, 2015 03:03PM

There's nothing wrong with polygamy imo. Marrying an extra woman and not telling your existing wives is a problem.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Tevai ( )
Date: November 05, 2015 03:13PM

TDM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There's nothing wrong with polygamy imo. Marrying
> an extra woman and not telling your existing wives
> is a problem.

My perspective is that "marrying an extra woman" without the WILLING, FULLY KNOWLEDGEABLE, and GENUINELY VOLUNTARY PERMISSION of [each of] your already-existing partners is the problem...

Every person in a committed relationship is (certainly in my own opinion!!!) equal to any (or all) other persons in that relationship...

This is one of the most important differences between patriarchal relationships (in real life, mostly "polygamy" in its most widely understood forms), and polyamorous relationships (which, overwhelmingly, tend to be egalitarian philosophically, and in actual real life).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/05/2015 03:14PM by tevai.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Heidi GWOTR ( )
Date: November 05, 2015 06:33PM

Oh, man! That was beautiful! Thanks for sharing it.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: ragnar ( )
Date: November 06, 2015 09:45AM

Yes, I thought it was a well-reasoned and well-written account of their lifestyle choice.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: fool ( )
Date: November 05, 2015 06:50PM

As I read this I couldn't help hoping that Kevin gets his too.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Hikergrl ( )
Date: November 06, 2015 06:09PM

I definitely felt like there was in imbalance of power. The gal with the baby and two in-house sexual partners seemed to have more benefits. Of course, that may not be the case, but at the surface it seemed like the family revolved around her.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: fool ( )
Date: November 25, 2015 10:47AM

Now that I think of it, it seems even worse for the other woman, who doesn't share the baby, and wasn't there for the test.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: SusieQ#1 ( )
Date: November 06, 2015 10:38PM

The recent TV shows on the different types of polygamous families has been very informative, in my view.
It has given them the opportunity to come out of the shadows and live honestly with persecution.
I suppose it will always appeal to some folks.
Never had any appeal to me, though.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Cheryl ( )
Date: November 25, 2015 10:51AM

I'm Opposed to them mainly because of the children who have no choice about who gives birth and rears them. If these "adults" remained childless, I'd have no objection.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: KiNeverMo ( )
Date: November 25, 2015 01:28PM

No babies have that choice, though. Many young children with parents who remarry have no choice, either. Maybe I am missing something, but I don't see a difference.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: SL Cabbie ( )
Date: November 25, 2015 12:42PM

Wake me when the Supreme Court legalizes it...

To indulge in some "process analysis," this one is simply a variation on "Wedge Theory" practices by the so-called Discovery Institute and other anti-evolution groups who insist there is a controversy when there is none.

Or to Godwinize the debate, I'll point to Josef Goebbels who noted if you tell a big enough lie long enough...

The Supreme Court ruled slavery is inherently unequal; similarly polygamy is inherently abusive.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Cheryl ( )
Date: November 25, 2015 12:45PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: SL Cabbie ( )
Date: November 25, 2015 01:06PM

A note to the newer sorts on the board (including ADMIN): There are a number of us here, Cheryl and myself included, who have extensive familiarity with the subject and actual individuals (unsought on my part, honest, including the "accident of birth" element of having polygamist ancestors. Perhaps I should repeat my one-liner about how the happiest day of my g-g-grandmother's life was the day her husband's first wife died). What we've seen is miles apart from the "idealistic libertarianism" of those who insist it is a viable alternative lifestyle.

Never mind that these claims are "off-topic" as well and rare enough that it's reasonable to criticize them as straw man arguments; as a number of objective sorts I've known who reported on this subject pointed out, the males in polygamist relationships spend countless hours "putting out the fires of jealousy," and that element of human nature is not going to disappear despite the façades of denial that insist it doesn't exist. It's clear those dynamics would also exist in and M-M-F, F-F-F, M-M-M-?, relationships as well, and children deserve better protection from their parents' hormone-fueled follies.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/25/2015 03:48PM by SL Cabbie.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Cheryl ( )
Date: November 25, 2015 03:21PM

The imbalance and built in abusiveness is in the numbers with little or no connection to religious beliefs.

These "families" are rife with power struggles, psychological game playing and almost always a revolving door of mates coming and going because their needs can't be met and the situation is more complicated than tiptoeing through a poisonous snake pit.

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Screen Name: 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 ********   ********  ********  **    **  ********  
 **     **     **        **      **  **   **     ** 
 **     **     **        **       ****    **     ** 
 **     **     **        **        **     **     ** 
 **     **     **        **        **     **     ** 
 **     **     **        **        **     **     ** 
 ********      **        **        **     ********