Discussion in 'Civil Rights' started by modernpaladin, Nov 11, 2019.
So you don't think Warren Jeffs was the extreme? He wasn't arrested for polygamy.
Pointless comment noted.
Define what you mean by a problem. We encounter all sorts of problems, most of which are the same ones as monogamous people have. Issues over finance, someone not rinsing their plates and putting them into the dishwasher but just tossing them in the sink (was that a little too specific?), things like that. And yes jealousy does arise. But jealousy usually isn't an issue itself but the symptom of another issue. We try to work to the reason behind the jealousy, and address that. Usually it's some form of not getting needs met, particularly if another partner is getting those same needs met. We also try to determine if we are jealous of the person, or of the situation. I know I am jealous of some people who are not even anywhere near our poly/open marriage. So jealousy isn't even always within the marriage.
Does that answer your question? Not intended sarcastically, but as an open invitation to ask more if needed.
When looking at poly relationships you cannot discount the overall relationship. It must be included along with the diads. So as more people join, the number of relationships grow exponentially. And yeah it can get complicated. I only know one successful poly with 5 people, but I've heard of a few larger one. Now not everyone is intimate with everyone else. I'm not intimate with my husband.
Why is a personal question to me a lack of critical thinking? I personally find it a very legitimate question when learning about poly.
Correlation/causation fallacy. Somehow I doubt Jeff's would be any less of a child molester for being monogamous. Using something as an excuse, doesn't mean that thing itself is wrong. Right now, there are hundreds, probably thousands, of poly units out there, that are not molesting kids or even espousing religious views as their reasoning. I know poly units that are atheist, and others that are mixed religions. My husband and one wife are Wiccan, while my other wife and I are Christians. There are always going to be extremists in all things.
A problem is a matter of a situation that is harmful or unwelcome.
Well, I do likely have more. I'm in a relationship with one partner and it's hard for me to give him all the attention he wants. That seems to be the root cause of jealousy in my experience. People don't want to bed second banana to something or someone else.
It's just the idea is so foreign to me, I could certainly see benefits, greater household income, more people to help out, but such a relationship I'm not sure I could live with.
I think it's wrong to marry multiple child brides.
It's wrong to marry child grooms or child brides period. Number doesn't matter. The correlation/causation fallacy comes into play when assuming that polygamy encourages or requires child spouses.
Even if they were of age there would be problems with having that many spouses especially in a tiny community lake Colorado City. That's one of the reasons why it used to be illegal.
Why? Are you using an unbased assumption that any offspring would be staying there for the assumption that inbreeding would occur? I mean I can see that if we were talking religious cult, but that inbreeding would still occur even with a monogamous religious cult.
Inbreeding would occur it's inevitable.
It's far less likely good inbreeding would occur among monogamous couples.
If one man has 36 wives and has three children with each that's a hundred and eight children. it's more likely that between 108 children you have inbreeding, than it is having inbreeding between the three children of your one wife.
It's simple statistics.
That still leaves an assumption of the children staying in an area, and/or no outside people being available. If the community is a closed community it will eventually begin inbreeding.
Furthermore, the Westermarck Effect, which shows a high probability that children raised together will not be sexually attracted to each other, needs to be factored in. It has even been noticed in children not blood related, but raised together. This would further reduce the probability of incest of related offspring of a poly marriage.
I didn't get to this yesterday due to time factors. I'll look and see if I did my Ask A Poly Anything thread here or in a different forum/site. But as a starter, open and poly are two different things, and not all poly needs to go as far as marriage. And there are indeed poly/mono relationships that work.
At no point will you ever hear me claim that all can practice poly. All are capable of loving more than one person intimately at the same time, but that doesn't mean they can hold down the multiple relationships. Being monogamous and being poly are akin to being heterosexual and homosexual respectively. These are natural states for most people, and the former if the more statistically probable one. Those who can be happy either in a mono or a poly relationship are akin to bisexuals, and run about the same frequency in my experience.
That's a safe assumption to make
Does the westermarck effect take into account if the half the entire town is your sibling?
No actually it is not. If the community is small enough that most people are within 2 degrees of relations, the safer assumption, religious cult aside, is that one would leave to seek better odds. Do you have any statistics that show it more likely a person would stay in such a situation?
A good question. While it has been show, to my knowledge, to remain in effect in large families (8 to 10) and across large age gaps (my sister in law at one point was watching both her own daughter and her half brother as infants, who were about 6 months apart), we also have accounts of blood siblings who grew up never knowing the other existed falling in love, at least one of which I know of had a perfectly healthy little girl together. So who knows how well siblings in your hypothetical would pan out? However, given your numbers I do think you are well into the appeal to extremism fallacy. Largest "kitchen table" poly group I have ever heard of was 6 (don't know how many if any kids), and longest chain was around 20, but few were cohabitors and were not looking at any kind of legal benefits due to the non cohabitating.
Something I just thought of. If you are limiting your view of polygamy to only polygyny or polyandry, then, under your assumptions, we have a higher probability of inbreeding occuring. However, with that many people as in your hypothetical, I somehow doubt that we would have only polygyny or polyandry. So statistically speaking we would have a whole pool of non blood related siblings. A lot would depend on how many men were having sex with how many women.
I disagree it seems like a safe assumption to me.
In this case the extremes of the reason for the rule
By all means, explain your logic. Why is it a safe assumption that simply because they are children of a polygamist marriage, that they would not go off and seek their lives in other areas? Let's dismiss cult communities for this as not going off to other areas would be a trait of both monogamous and polygamist cults.
That is not how law works. If we are to go by the extremes, then we need to ban all weapons, not just guns, because of the extreme people who go on shooting or stabbing sprees.
Separate names with a comma.