+100

If you believe in gay marriage because it's a grouping of consenting adults that aren't ultimately hurting anyone, it's hypocritical to be anti-polygamy, because it's generally the same in terms of its impact on society, amirite?

75%Yeah You Are25%No Way
Vitaes avatar Philosophy
Share
3 37
The voters have decided that Vitae is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.

The relationships themselves aren't illegal, like Hugh Hefner can have as many girlfriends as he wants and even make a show about it, while his legal wife lived next door to him. The problem is that if someone is legally married to more than one person they can abuse tax laws and welfare etc... Another problem is that polygamous communities often break the law in other ways, such as not sending their kids to school, "marrying" off children below the age of consent and underage sex, and domestic abuse is common.

First, are you talking specifically about polygamy, which is one man with multiple wives, or polyamory, which is a relationship of more than two people, with any comination of genders?

Second, I personally have no problem with it, but I disagree that poly relationships have the same effect on society - in that same-sex relationships are generally similar to opposite-sex ones, while legalising poly relationships/marriage would have a buttload more legislation and new laws, especially concerning children the people may raise. This isn't an argument against people being in a polyamorous relationship, just saying that same-sex couples are far more comparable to opposite-sex couples than of a more-than-two-person relationship.

@Simon First, are you talking specifically about polygamy, which is one man with multiple wives, or polyamory, which is a...

I'm referring to polyamorous marriage.

And it really wouldn't be much different for children imo. They have one mom, one dad, and a few housemates. It's like having a few relatives who are down on their luck living in your parent's house, except they're all fucking your dad.

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are +9Reply
@Vitae I'm referring to polyamorous marriage. And it really wouldn't be much different for children imo. They have one...

Polygamy actually has a provably negative effect on the economy, unlike same-sex marriage. It's not the same thing. As for the family dynamic, why do you think they would all live together??

@YouveJustBeenTrolled Polygamy actually has a provably negative effect on the economy, unlike same-sex marriage. It's not the same thing...

New laws could be passed.

They would all be living together because multiple people are married. Married people tend to live with each other.

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are 0Reply
@Vitae New laws could be passed. They would all be living together because multiple people are married. Married people...

New laws to do what?
Hm... I, personally would not want to live with that person's other partners. It just seems weird. But, that's me.

@Vitae New laws to prevent abuse of money/welfare, etc. Why not? They're family.

There is that. But, no matter how many laws are passed, people are always going to find ways to cheat the system. Besides, I was more referring to the overall effect on society. If polygamy becomes a social norm and the men marry several women at once than, the overall marriage rate will go way down. A few of the richer, higher class men will end up having the vast majority of the women. Besides, in polygynous societies, the crime rates skyrockets.
And no, the wife and the husband are family. The wife and the other wife are two women who almost inevitably are going to end up having to compete for the husband's attention.

@YouveJustBeenTrolled There is that. But, no matter how many laws are passed, people are always going to find ways to cheat the system...

Bear in mind that when I say "polygamy" I refer to polyamorous marriage. Women may marry multiple men and 3+ people may marry each other.

And I doubt many women would objectify themselves so.

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are +1Reply
@Vitae Bear in mind that when I say "polygamy" I refer to polyamorous marriage. Women may marry multiple men and 3+ people...

Polygamy has been a very common practice throughout history, however polyandry is exceedingly rare. In any case, the same still holds true.Objectify themselves? I don't know what you mean by that.

@YouveJustBeenTrolled Polygamy has been a very common practice throughout history, however polyandry is exceedingly rare. In any case...

Competing for a man that's married to both of them... that sounds like objectification to me.

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are +1Reply
@Vitae Competing for a man that's married to both of them... that sounds like objectification to me.

No, the objectification would be the fact that the woman (or man), in the first place, objectifies themselves to polygamy. It is an institution that is completely devoid of romanticism. No little kid thinks, "oh, when I grow up, I want to be married to somebody that already has a partner." Frankly, I just think it is greedy. Just be happy with what you already have.

@YouveJustBeenTrolled No, the objectification would be the fact that the woman (or man), in the first place, objectifies themselves to...

hmm smilie

I feel as though if i used the term "polyamorous marriage" there wouldn't be such a misunderstanding.

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are 0Reply
@Vitae I feel as though if i used the term "polyamorous marriage" there wouldn't be such a misunderstanding.

No, it wouldn't. When I say "completely devoid of romanticism," I don't mean the fact that the people involved aren't in love, I mean the fact that it is a selfish institution in which one greedy individual is not satisfied with what they have and must therefore,take other partners. And It is not fair to the other partners.

@YouveJustBeenTrolled No, it wouldn't. When I say "completely devoid of romanticism," I don't mean the fact that the people involved...

Polyamory is 3+ people in a relationship with each other. It's totally fair. Person A spends time with person B, and then spends time with person C so they don't feel left out, who then spends time with person B, ad infinitum.

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are 0Reply
@Vitae Then someone requests a divorce.

Then, there will be a shitload of people asking for a divorce. And, something to point out, there have been many polygamous societies, but none of them were democracies. As individual freedoms were increased, monogamy became the social norm.

@YouveJustBeenTrolled Then, there will be a shitload of people asking for a divorce. And, something to point out, there have been many...

There are shitloads of people asking for a divorce right now.

And what types of marriages are allowed are irrelevant to government types.

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are 0Reply
@Vitae There are shitloads of people asking for a divorce right now. And what types of marriages are allowed are...

You're clearly haven't researched this fully, otherwise you wouldn't have written this question, in the first place nor would you have written that comment because everything is relevant.
Before you keep talking nonsense, you should read these. Oh, and if you want more there are plenty more articles and a lot of books on it. http://reason.com/archives/2006...es-big-problem
http://www.oprah.com/oprahradio...amy-in-Society
http://www.childbrides.org/sex_..._business.html

@YouveJustBeenTrolled You're clearly haven't researched this fully, otherwise you wouldn't have written this question, in the first place...

Link 1 was basically repeating the same two statements over and over, and both are invalid. The lack of polygamous democratic societies is a coincidence. There is not a perfectly split population between men and women, and not every man is going to marry a woman, and vice versa.

Link 2 is describing polygamy and polygamy only. It doesn't discuss polyandry or, as I meant to say in my post, polyamory.

Link 3 just lists various polygamists that do horrible things to children.

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are 0Reply
@Vitae Link 1 was basically repeating the same two statements over and over, and both are invalid. The lack of polygamous...

I don't believe in coincedence. Yes, but the fact is that if polygamy became a social norm than the ratio would become incredibly unbalanced.

I have said this before, but polyandry is exceedingly, exceedingly rare. I challenge you to find 3 great instances of polyandry. And second of all, you keep throwing "polyamory" around, but I don't think there is a difference between polyamorous and polygamous marriages.

And that was just to point out that alot of the polygamous sects that do exist today can be quite disgusting.

And I'm just curious, why are you so gung-ho in favor of polygamy?

@YouveJustBeenTrolled I don't believe in coincedence. Yes, but the fact is that if polygamy became a social norm than the ratio would...

Firstly, I am not gung-ho. I'm just very stubborn. smirk smilie

Not everyone would exactly be on board for polyamorous relationships. I know I wouldn't.

Polygamy = a man married to multiple women; what the women think of each other isn't relevant.
Polyamory = all persons involved are in a relationship with each other.

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are 0Reply

Not if you also believe that true love is contained between two people.

Anonymous +16Reply
@Not if you also believe that true love is contained between two people.

Why ruin their fun? It's not like they'd run around criticizing everyone's low number of romantic partners just because their idea of love could be pursued.

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are +2Reply
@Vitae Why ruin their fun? It's not like they'd run around criticizing everyone's low number of romantic partners just...

Idk, I just believe in that.

It's no different than those who believe marriages should stay between a man and a woman.

Anonymous +2Reply
@Idk, I just believe in that. It's no different than those who believe marriages should stay between a man and a woman.

It's unjustified though. It's like going up to someone and saying "I don't understand why you love this person/these people, so I won't let you marry them."

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are 0Reply
@Vitae It's unjustified though. It's like going up to someone and saying "I don't understand why you love this...

Who said I wasn't going to let them married?

Just because I feel it isn't right, it doesn't I'm gonna be a fucking douchebag and sign a petition to ban polygamy. I honestly don't care enough.

Anonymous +5Reply
@Who said I wasn't going to let them married? Just because I feel it isn't right, it doesn't I'm gonna be a fucking...

Ah I see.

I should have said "are tolerant of" instead of "believe in". Me and my odd wording of things ono smilie

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are +1Reply

Like anonymous said, I don't care if they get married but I don't understand how you can love 2+ people enough to marry them all. I feel as though it belittles marriage in a way.

waits to be voted down

Shugahs avatar Shugah Yeah You Are +13Reply
@Shugah Like anonymous said, I don't care if they get married but I don't understand how you can love 2+ people enough to...

Even though I personally wouldn't be in a relationship with more than one person, I can kinda understand how you could love more than one person. Like, considering that there are many types of love, and like, for the love you have for your parents, if you had a step parent that you loved equally as much, it wouldn't mean that the quality or quantity of love you had for your bio parents would decrease. Or something.

But, I do think it would be really difficult to maintain, and it would increase the likelyhood of relationship problems (considering the divorce rate in the US is around 40%, I imagine having 3 or 4 people instead of 2 would be far more likely to dissolve a relationship).

Sorry about the rambling, I'm just trying to make up my mind about this, because on one hand I think that it could work and is possible for more than 2 people to be in a relationship just like a 2 person one, but at the same time there's like 50 different things that I can think of that would ruin it, plus I've never met a long-term polyamorous relationship (which doesn't mean they don't exist, but does raise questions of whether it can work.)

This comment was deleted by its author.
@1448136

Well, I get what you're saying, but if you can marry any amount of people then what's the point? Picking one person is like saying "I pick you above everyone else" but with polygamy it's like "I love you and you and you and I'm not going to choose"

Shugahs avatar Shugah Yeah You Are 0Reply

I've never understood why people get so upset over polygamy. If a group of consenting adults want to make their own family, I don't care. It's not my life and it's not my business.

fEMMAnists avatar fEMMAnist Yeah You Are +4Reply

If you believe in little white lies because they may be small small falsehoods that aren't ultimately hurting anyone, it's hypocritical to be anti-perjury, because it's generally the same in terms of its impact on society <--- False.

Anonymous +1Reply
@If you believe in little white lies because they may be small small falsehoods that aren't ultimately hurting...

tell me how polygamy is just so terrible that it can be compared to perjury.

Vitaes avatar Vitae Yeah You Are +2Reply

Personally, I'm not going to marry someone and share him. However, if it's consenting adults (as in, every party involved should have to agree), then what's the problem?

Anonymous