Chris's article

The practice of marrying numerous spouses is known as polygamy (from the Late Greek o, polygamy, "state of many spouses"). Polygyny is the term used by sociologists to describe when a guy has more than one wife at the same time. Polyandry is the practice of a woman marrying multiple husbands at the same time. Group marriage is defined as a marriage that involves multiple husbands and wives.

Monogamy, on the other hand, is defined as a marriage between just two people. Like "monogamy," the term "polygamy" is frequently used in a de facto meaning, regardless of whether the state recognizes the relationship. Polygamy is a wide term used by academics in sociobiology and zoology to describe any multiple mating.


Polygamy is either encouraged, accepted, or outlawed in many civilizations across the world. Polygyny is acceptable in the great majority of societies that allow or tolerate polygamy. According to the Ethnographic Atlas (1998), 588 of the 1,231 cultures studied had frequent polygyny, 453 had occasional polygyny, 186 were monogamous, and 4 had polyandry; nevertheless, new research shows polyandry is more prevalent than previously assumed. "The Bible mentions over 36 identified males who had more than one wife," says a religious scholar. Polygamy is typically linked to class and social position in societies where it is practiced.

In many nations, while marriage is officially monogamous (a person can only have one spouse, and bigamy is prohibited), adultery is not, resulting in a scenario where de facto polygamy is permitted but without legal recognition. For non-official "spouses."

Based on surveys of world populations and features of human reproductive physiology, scientific research has shown that the human mating system is fairly polygynous.


Forms

There are three kinds of polygamy:

Polygyny is a condition in which a guy has several wives at once.

Polyandry is a type of polygamy in which a woman has several spouses at the same time.

Multiple men and wives create a family unit in a group marriage.

Some species, such as the common fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, are polygamous.


Polygyny

Incidence

The most frequent type of polygamy is polygyny, which is when a man has many wives at the same time. Polygyny is allowed in many Muslim-majority and Muslim-majority nations and some secular ones to various degrees.

Polygyny is more common in Africa than in any other continent, particularly in West Africa. Some historians believe that the slave trade's influence on the male-to-female sex ratio was a significant role in the rise and strengthening of polygynous behaviors in African countries.


In most Sub-Saharan African civilizations, anthropologist Jack Goody's comparative study of marriage using the Ethnographic Atlas revealed a historical link between widespread shifting horticulture and polygamy. Goody adds that the gender distribution of labor differs between male-dominated intense plow-agriculture in Eurasia and widespread shifting horticulture in Sub-Saharan Africa, citing the work of Ester Boserup. Women perform the majority of the struggle in parts of Africa's sparsely inhabited shifting agriculture areas. It encourages polygamous marriages, in this male seek to dominate the production on the women "that are valued both as laborers and as child bearers." Goody, on the other hand, points out that the correlation is imperfect and varied and discusses more traditionally male-dominated but relatively extensive farming systems like those found in much of West Africa, particularly in the West African savanna, where polygyny is desired more for the creation of male offspring whose labor is valued.


In their book "Causes of Polygyny: Ecology, Economy, Kinship, and Warfare," anthropologists Douglas R. White and Michael L. Burton examine and defend Jack Goody's findings of African male farming systems, writing, "Goody (1973) speaks against the female contributions theory." He refers to Dorjahn's (1959) comparison of East and West Africa, which shows higher female agricultural contributions in East Africa and higher polygyny rates in West Africa, particularly in the West African savanna, where male agricultural subsidies are particularly strong. "The motivations for polygyny are sexual and reproductive rather than economic and productive," writes Goody (1973:189), claiming that men marry polygonally to maximize their fertility and establish huge families with many young dependent males.


Polygyny’s types

There are two forms of polygynous marriages: sororal polygyny, in which the co-wives are sisters, and non-sororal polygyny, in which the co-wives are not related. Polygyny permits men to have more offspring, may supply them with a bigger number of productive employees (where those workers are family), and helps them to have politically beneficial relationships with a wider number of kin groupings. Senior women may also profit from the addition of younger wives to the household since it reduces their workload. Spouses' standing in society might arise with the arrival of additional wives who contribute to the family's riches or signify ostentatious expenditure (much as a large house, domestic help, and expensive vacations operate in a western country). For these reasons, senior women may occasionally work longer hours or donate money from their own pockets to help their husbands save enough for the bride price of a second wife.


Levirate marriage can potentially result in polygyny. In such circumstances, the deceased man's heirs may inherit his possessions and wife, or his brothers may marry the widow, which is more common. It offers assistance for the widow and her children (general members of the brothers' kin group) while also keeping the husbands' and wives' kin groups together. A widower must marry his late wife's sister in the sorority, similar to the levirate. In other words, the late wife's relatives must find someone to replace her to keep the marriage together. A guy can have numerous wives through both levirate and sororate.


In monogamous civilizations, affluent and powerful men maintained long-term relationships with many female companions and set up separate households for them, in addition to their lawful spouses; this practice was allowed in Imperial China until the Qing Dynasty (1636-1912). It is known as concubinage, which is a type of de facto polygyny.


Household organization


Marriage is the beginning of a new home; however, depending on the type of marriage, different arrangements may arise, and some polygamous marriages do not establish a single household. In many polygynous marriages, the husband's wives may reside in separate houses, sometimes far apart. As a result, they may be defined as a "collection of connected nuclear families that share a father."


Polyandry


Incidence

Polyandry, or having many husbands simultaneously, is far less common than polygyny and is currently banned in almost every country on the planet. Only isolated communities are affected.

Polyandry is thought to be more common in civilizations with limited natural resources because it is believed to decrease the human population increase and improve infant survival. It is an uncommon type of marriage found not just among the impoverished but also the wealthy. Polyandry, for example, is linked to the land shortage in the Himalayan Mountains; marrying all of a family's brothers to the same bride permits family land to stay intact and undivided. [Required citation] Family land would be divided into unsustainable tiny parcels if each brother married and produced children independently.


Types


Nomadic Tibetans in Nepal, portions of China, and northern India used to practice fraternal polyandry, in which two or more brothers married the same lady. It is particularly prevalent in civilizations with a high male death rate. It's linked to partible paternity, the notion that a kid can have many fathers.


Non-fraternal polyandry occurs when the wives' husbands are unrelated. In the Nayar tribe of India, females marry before puberty, and their first husbands are recognized as a father for all their offspring. On the other hand, the lady is forbidden from cohabiting with that guy and must instead take several lovers; these men must pay the midwife to certify the paternity of their children (and so establish that no caste rules have been broken). The ladies live with their brothers in their maternal house, and property is passed down through the generations. Walking marriage, a matrilineal, de facto polyandry practiced by the Mosuo tribe of China, is a comparable form of matrilineal, de facto polyandry.


Serial monogamy


Serial monogamy refers to remarriage after a monogamous marriage ends in divorce or death of one of the spouses, i.e., numerous marriages but only one legal spouse at a time (a series of monogamous relationships).

Serial monogamy, which includes divorce and remarriage, is considered a type of polygamy by anthropologists since it may create a succession of houses connected by shared fatherhood and shared wealth, according to Danish academic Miriam K. Zeiten. As a result, they resemble the family structures that result from divorce and serial monogamy.


The "ex-" is a new type of relative created by serial monogamy. For example, the "ex-wife" can remain an active participant in her "ex- husband's" life since they may be[according to whom?] linked by legally or informally required economic assistance, such as alimony, child support, and joint custody, which can endure for years. Bob Simpson[who?] points out that in the case of the United Kingdom, it forms an "extended family," or a group of homes linked together in this way, including mobile children, noting that Britons may have ex-wives or ex-brothers-in-law, but not ex-children. These "unclear families," he claims, do not conform to the monogamous nuclear family model.


Group marriage


Group marriage is one in which the family unit consists of more than two spouses. Each of them shares parental responsibility for any children born as a result of the union. Non-monogamy and polyamory are both forms of group marriage.


Attitudes about polygamy in today's religions


Hinduism


According to the Rig Veda, a man may have more than one wife during the Vedic time. Epics like the Ramayana and Mahabharata include references to the practice. The Dharmashastras allow a man to marry a woman from a lower caste if his first wife is also from a lower caste. Even though it existed, it was most commonly performed by males of higher castes and positions. Only if the first wife was unable to bear a son was a second marriage permitted.

The number of spouses is related to the caste system, according to Vishnu Smriti:

In the direct sequence of the (four) castes, a Brāhmaṇa may now have four wives.


A Kshatriya, three;

A Vaishya, two

A Shudra, one only


Baudhayana Dharmasutra and Paraskara Grihyasutra establish this relationship between the number of permissible spouses and the caste system.

If the first wife cannot fulfill her religious obligations or bear a son, the Apastamba Dharmasutra and Manusmriti allow for a second wife.

Only one wife may be the primary consort of a Brahmana, performing religious ceremonies (Dharma-Patni) alongside the husband. The primary consort had to be from the same caste as him. The eldest wife is the primary consort if a guy marries numerous women from the same caste. Hindu rulers frequently had more than one wife, and the texts often ascribe four wives to them. Mahisi, the primary consort, Parivrkti, who had no son, Vaivata, the favored wife, and Palagali, the daughter of the last of the court officials, were among them.

Polyandry, where a woman marries more than one guy, is another tradition that isn't extensively recorded. The Pandavas were five spouses for Draupadi in the Mahabharat epic.

If the first wife was unable to bear a son, Hindu tradition permitted polygamy.

Polygamy was declared illegal in India in 1955 by the Hindu Marriage Act, which the Indian Parliament adopted. Hindus were allowed to practice polygamy before 1955. The religion of the parties in issue determines the marriage rules in India.


Buddhism


Marriage is not a sacrament in Buddhism. It is entirely a secular affair in which monks do not participate. However, priests and monks do marry in some groups. As a result, it is not religiously sanctioned. As a result, marriage forms differ from country to country. "A man who is not happy with one lady and seeks out other ladies is on the path to decline," according to the Parabhava Sutta. Other bits of Buddhist scripture appear to be critical of polygamy, leading some scholars to conclude that Buddhism as a whole opposes it or that it is an accepted but inferior marriage arrangement.

Thailand acknowledged polygyny until 2010. Since 2015, Myanmar has made polygyny illegal. Polyandry was used in Sri Lanka until recently (albeit not widely). Others' concubines were added to the list of unsuitable spouses when Buddhist teachings were translated into Chinese. Polyandry, like polygyny, was prevalent in Tibet in the past, and having several wives or husbands was never seen as having sex with unsuitable people. In today's world, Tibet is home to the world's largest and most prosperous polyandrous society. Typically, fraternal polyandry is practiced, however in certain cases, father and son share a bride, creating a world-first family arrangement. There are also other types of marriage, such as group marriage and monogamy. In Bhutan, Ladakh, and other regions of the Indian subcontinent, polyandry (particularly fraternal polyandry) is also popular among Buddhists.


Celtic traditions


Although the Celtic peoples fluctuated between polygamy, monogamy, and polyandry depending on the period and region, certain pre-Christian Celtic pagans practiced it. The Brehon Laws of Gaelic Ireland, for example, clearly allowed for polygamy, especially among the aristocratic class, even after Christianization began. Polygamy is tolerated to different degrees in certain current Celtic pagan faiths. However, it is unknown how common the practice is.


Judaism


Exodus 21:10 says, "If he takes another wife for himself, her food, clothes, and the marital obligation must not be diminished." Deuteronomy 21:15–17 indicates that a man must give the inheritance owed to a first-born son to the son who was born first, even if he despises that boy's mother and prefers another woman. Deuteronomy 17:17 states that a king must not have too many wives.

With the prefix "to," the Torah may distinguish between concubines and "sub-standard" brides (e.g., lit. "took to wives"). Despite these variations in the biblical attitude on Polygamy, several prominent characters, such as Esau (Gen 26:34; 28:6-9), Jacob (Gen 29:15-28), Elkanah (1 Samuel 1:1-8), David (1 Samuel 25:39-44; 2 Samuel 3:2-5; 5:13-16), and Solomon (1 Samuel 25:39-44; 2 Samuel 3:2-5; 5:13-16), had multiple wives (1 Kings 11:1-3).

In the case of famine, widowhood, or female infertility, multiple marriages were regarded as a viable option, as in the practice of levirate marriage, in which a man was obligated to marry and support his deceased brother's widow as prescribed by Deuteronomy 25:5–10. Despite its presence in the Hebrew Bible, academics think that polygyny was not widely practiced throughout the ancient era since it necessitated a substantial amount of wealth. "Polygyny continued to be practiced long into the biblical period, and it is documented among Jews as late as the second century CE," according to Michael Coogan.

The Roman Empire's monogamy was the source of two explanatory remarks in Josephus' writings detailing how Herod the Great's polygamous marriages were permissible under Jewish law.

Polygamy was tolerated throughout the Rabbinical era, which started with the destruction of the second temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE. "Raba said: [If a man proclaims,] 'Be thou betrothed to half of me,' she is betrothed: 'half of thee be betrothed to me,' she is not betrothed," according to Kiddushin 7a of the Babylonian Talmud (BT). The BT appears to replicate the precedent set in Exodus 21:10 when discussing Levirate marriage in Yevamot 65a: "Raba said: a man may marry women in addition to the first wife; provided that he had the wherewithal to sustain them." Polygamy was outlawed in Judaism thanks to the Jewish Codices.

In his Mishneh Torah, Maimonides argued that polygamous marriages were legitimate, despite his personal beliefs to the contrary. While preserving the privilege of numerous weddings and the obligation to provide completely for each, the Mishneh Torah went even further: "He is not, however, permitted to compel his women to share a courtyard. Rather, each person has the right to their own house ",

The Talmud's lone example of a polygamous rabbi serves as an outstanding illustration: Rabbi Tarfon married 300 women throughout his lifetime. Why? There was a famine in the country. Rabbi Tarfon, on the other hand, had plenty of food since he was a kohen and got priestly tithes. A kohen's wife is likewise allowed to consume those tithes. Those 300 women were delighted that the Torah had made Polygamy legal.

The Shulchan Aruch adds further subtleties to all of the earlier works: "...however, in any case, our sages advise against marrying more than four women, unless he can fulfill their conjugal demands at least once a month. He is also not allowed to marry another woman over his current wife in a country where it is usual to marry just one wife." As can be seen, while the Rabbinic period's tradition began with establishing legal definitions for Polygamy that corresponded to precedents in the Tanakh, by the time of the Codices, the Rabbis had drastically curtailed or eradicated the practice.

The synod of Rabbeinu Gershom was the most significant in the Rabbinic period on Polygamy, albeit it was more especially for Ashkenazi Jews. Around 1000 CE, he summoned a synod to be deliberate on the following issues:

1.Ban of Polygamy.

2.Requirement of both partners' permission to divorce.

3.Revision of the regulations for people who were forced to become apostates.

4.Restriction of opening mail sent to another.

Polygamy is practically non-existent in Rabbinic Judaism nowadays. Since the 11th century, Ashkenazi Jews have followed Rabbenu Gershom's prohibition. Several Mizrahi Jewish groups abandoned polygyny (especially Yemenite and Persian Jews) once they emigrated to places where it was prohibited or outlawed. Polygamy is illegal in Israel. However, the legislation is only weakly implemented in reality, largely to avoid interfering with Bedouin culture, which practices polygyny. This Israel law does not apply to pre-existing polygynous marriage among Jews from Arab nations (or other places where the practice was not forbidden by their tradition and was not unlawful). In Israel, however, new polygamous marriages are not authorized for Mizrahi Jews. On the other hand, Polygamy may still exist in non-European Jewish communities that live in countries where it is not prohibited, such as in Yemen and the Arab world.

Polygamy is practically non-existent nowadays among Karaite Jews who do not follow Rabbinic interpretations of the Torah. Karaites, like other Jews, interpret Leviticus 18:18 to mean that a man can only take a second wife if his first wife consents (Keter Torah on Leviticus, pp. 96–97), and Karaites interpret Exodus 21:10 to mean that a man can only take a second wife if he can maintain the same level of marital duties due to his first wife; the marital responsibilities are 1) food, 2) clothing and 3) sexuation Because of these two scriptural limits, as well as the fact that it is illegal in most nations, Polygamy is seen to be impracticable, and there are just a few known examples of it among today's Karaite Jews.

Polygamy is prohibited in Israel. Existing polygamous households were granted permission to immigrate from countries where the practice was lawful. Furthermore, former head rabbi Ovadia Yosef has advocated for the Israeli government to legalize Polygamy and the method of pilegesh (concubine).

Tzvi Zohar, a professor at Bar-Ilan University, has argued that the notion of concubines might serve as a practical Halachic explanation for premarital or non-marital cohabitation, based on the opinions of prominent halachic scholars.


Christianity


The Old Testament makes no mention of polygamy. Even though the New Testament is mostly quiet on polygamy, others refer to Jesus repeating older passages, stating that a man and his wife "will become one flesh." Some, on the other hand, turn to Paul's letters to the Corinthians: "Do you realize that when a man marries a prostitute, he becomes one body with her? 'The two will become one flesh,' as it is written." Polygamists argue that this proves the term refers to a physical union rather than a spiritual one.


Some Christian theologians claim that Jesus indicates in Matthew 19:3-9, referencing to Genesis 2:24, that a man should only have one wife:


Have you not read that he who created them, in the beginning, formed them male and female, and said, for this reason, shall a man leave his father and mother.

Polygamy should not be practiced by some church leaders, according to the New Testament. "A bishop must be blameless from these, the spouse of one wife, sober, of good character, dedicated to hospitality, apt to teach," 1 Timothy says (chapter 3, verse 2; see also verse 12 regarding deacons having only one wife). In the first chapter of the Epistle to Titus, similar advice is given.


Periodically, Christian reform groups that have attempted to reconstruct Christian theology based only on the Bible (sola scriptura) have recognized polygyny as a Biblical practice, at least briefly. For example, during the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther granted Landgrave Philip of Hesse, who was living "constantly in a state of adultery and fornication" for many years, a dispensation to take a second wife in a document known simply as "Der Beichtrat" (or "The Confessional Advice"). However, to prevent public controversy, the double marriage had to be carried out in secret. Luther had previously said in a letter to the Saxon Chancellor Gregor Brück that he could not "forbid a person to marry numerous wives since it does not contradict Scripture," and that he could not "forbid a person to marry several wives, because it does not contradict Scripture." ("Ego sane factor, me non posse prohibited, if plures velit uxores ducere, nec repugnant sacris literis.")


There has long been a conflict in Sub-Saharan Africa between the Christian stress on monogamy and customary polygamy. Mswati III, the Christian monarch of Swaziland, for example, had 15 wives. There have been recent attempts for accommodation in certain cases; in others, churches have fought such moves vehemently. In justifying polygamy, African Independent Churches have resorted to sections of the Old Testament that mention the practice.


Roman Catholic Church


The Roman Catholic Church condemns polygamy; the Catechism of the Catholic Church mentions it under the heading "Other crimes against the dignity of marriage" in paragraph 2387 and declares that it "is not following the moral law." In addition, in paragraph 1645, under the heading "The oneness of marriage, clearly acknowledged by our Lord, is made evident in the equal personal dignity which must be granted to husband and wife in reciprocal and unreserved devotion," according to "The Goods and Requirements of Conjugal Love." Polygamy is incompatible with undivided and exclusive marital love."


Polygamy in the Old Testament was a source of contention for Saint Augustine. He abstained from passing judgment on the patriarchs, but he did not infer from their behavior that polygyny was still acceptable. On the contrary, he said that the Fathers' polygamy, which the Creator permitted because of its fecundity, was a deviation from His original purpose for human marriage. "The beneficial aim of marriage is better to serve by one husband with one wife, than by a husband with numerous wives, is demonstrated simply enough by the very first marriage pair, which was formed by the Divine Being Himself," Augustine said.


Augustine believed that patriarchs had numerous wives because they desired more offspring, not because of immorality. He backed up his claim by demonstrating that their marriages, in which the husband was the head, were structured according to management principles: those in charge (quae principantur) in their society were always single. At the same time, subordinates (subiecta) were many. He provided two examples: dominus-Servus - master-servant (in an earlier translation: slave) and God-soul. Worshiping many gods, often known as idolatry, is frequently equated with adultery in the Bible. "On this reason, there are no True Gods of souls, except One but one such," Augustine says.


Fertility was no longer an acceptable argument for polygamy as tribe populations grew: "I would not quickly declare whether it was lawful among the ancient ancestors, or if it is lawful now as well (utrum et nunc fas sit, non temere dixerim). Because there is no longer a need to have children, as there formerly was, when, even when spouses have children, it was permissible to marry several wives to have a larger posterity, which is no longer legal."


Augustine regarded marriage as an unbreakable commitment between one man and one woman. The Creator instituted monogamy: "Therefore, man and woman are the earliest natural bonds of human society." The Saviour's presence at the wedding at Cana (Matthew 19:9) and in the Gospel of Matthew (Matthew 19:9) verified such marriage (John 2:2). Marriage is a sacrament in the Church—the City of God—and may not and cannot be dissolved as long as the spouses live: "But a marriage once for all entered into in the City of our God, where, even from the first union of the two, the man and the woman, marriage bears a certain sacramental character, marriage can in no way be dissolved except by the death of one of the spouses." "For it is in a man's power to put away a barren wife, and marry one of whom to have children," Augustine pointed out in Chapter 7 that the Roman Empire forbade polygamy, even if the reason of fertility would support it: "For it is in a man's power to put away a barren wife, and marry one of whom to have children." But it is not permitted; and it is not allowed even now, in our days, and after the usage of Rome (nostris quidem iam temporibus ac more Romano), to marry in addition, to have more than one wife living." He goes on to say that the Church's position toward monogamy goes far further than the secular law: Remarrying is forbidden, as it is considered a kind of fornication: "Except in the City of our God, on His Holy Mount, the situation with the womb is different.


In recent years, a small group of Roman Catholic theologians has maintained that, while not ideal, polygamy can be a valid form of Christian marriage in certain areas, particularly in Africa. The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church says that


Polygamy is against the rule of morality. Polygamy fundamentally contradicts [conjugal] communion; in fact, it directly contradicts God's revealed purpose from the beginning, for it is incompatible with the equal personal dignity of men and women who, in matrimony, commit themselves to a whole and thus unique and exclusive love.


According to certain Bible texts, the illegality of polygamy in some regions adds to the grounds against it. "Submit to the authorities, not only for the sake of probable punishment, but also for the sake of conscience," Paul says in Romans 13:5, since "God has instituted the authorities that exist." (1 Corinthians 13:1) "Submit yourselves for the sake of the Lord to every authority created among men," writes St Peter, "whether to the king, as the ultimate authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good." ' (1 Peter 2:13,14) Pro-polygamists believe that no laws are broken as long as polygamists do not get formal marriage licenses or seek "common law marriage status" for extra spouses, just as monogamous couples do not cohabitate without a marriage license.


Movement of the Latter-day Saints

According to a revelation to Joseph Smith, the practice of plural marriage—the marriage of one man to two or more women—was introduced among members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the early 1840s. Despite Smith's revelation, polygamy was officially denounced in the 1835 version of the Concept and Covenants' 101st Section, published after the doctrine of plural marriage began to be practiced. In Liverpool, England, in 1850, John Taylor used this scripture to dispel Mormon polygamy allegations. Several senior Mormon leaders, including Smith, Brigham Young, and Heber C. Kimball, declared polygamy illegal in Illinois during the 1839–44 Nauvoo period. Kimball has several wives. Elders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who openly preached that all males were ordered to engage in multiple marriages were severely reprimanded. The Nauvoo Expositor chastised Smith for numerous weddings on June 7, 1844.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a religious organization dedicated to the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ to the world (LDS Church)

Following Joseph Smith's assassination by a mob on June 27, 1844, most Latter-day Saints fled Nauvoo and accompanied Brigham Young to Utah, where plural marriage was still practiced. In a speech delivered in 1852, Brigham Young, the second president of the LDS Church, openly recognized the practice of multiple marriages. Following that, senior Mormon leaders delivered more sermons on the benefits of polygamy. When polygamy became a societal concern, it sparked debate, and writers began to produce works criticizing the practice.


"To ban throughout the territories those twin remnants of barbarism, polygamy, and slavery," the Republican Party's platform said in 1856. In 1862, Congress passed the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act, making polygamy illegal in all US territories. The LDS Church believed that the United States Constitution protected their religiously based practice of plural marriage. Still, the unanimous 1878 Supreme Court decision Reynolds v. the United States declared that polygamy was not covered by the Constitution, based on the longstanding legal principle that "Laws are designed to govern activities, and while they cannot regulate religious beliefs and ideas, they may regulate behaviors."

Some Mormons emigrated to Canada and Mexico when anti-polygamy legislation became more severe in the United States. In 1890, LDS Church president Wilford Woodruff made a public statement (the Manifesto) declaring the end of new plural marriages. Anti-Mormon hatred, as well as resistance to Utah becoming a state, began to fade. The Smoot Hearings in 1904, which revealed that the LDS Church was still practicing polygamy, prompted the church to release a Second Manifesto, declaring that new plural marriages were no longer being performed. By 1910, people who entered into or executed multiple unique weddings were excommunicated by the LDS Church. Despite this, many spouses and wives continued to live together until the 1940s and 1950s, when they died.

Various breakaway organizations left the LDS Church to maintain the practice of multiple marriages after the year 1890 Manifesto was enforced. Polygamy is still practiced among these communities in Utah and adjacent states, and the spin-off colonies. Even though they are not affiliated with the LDS Church, polygamist congregations of Mormon heritage are sometimes referred to as "Mormon fundamentalists." Such fundamentalists sometimes cite a supposed 1886 revelation to John Taylor as justification for practicing multiple marriages. According to the Salt Lake Tribune, there were 37,000 fundamentalists in 2005, with less than half living in polygamous families.

In Brown v. Buhman, US Federal Judge Clark Waddoups found that sections of Utah's anti-polygamy statutes prohibiting repeated cohabitation were unconstitutional but that the state's prohibition on multiple marriage licenses was upheld. Since the 1882 Edmunds Act, the principal tactic used to prosecute polygamy in Utah has been unlawful cohabitation, in which prosecutors did not need to establish that a marriage ceremony had taken place (just that a couple had lived together).


Mormon fundamentalism


The Council of Friends (also known as the Woolley Group or the Priesthood Council) was one of the first manifestations of Mormon fundamentalism, with its roots in the teachings of Lorin C. Woolley. This dairy farmer was expelled from the LDS Church in 1924. The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS Church), the Apostolic United Brethren, the Centennial Park group, the Latter-Day Church of Christ, and the Righteous Branch of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints are just a few of the Mormon fundamentalist groups that claim lineage through the Council of Friends.

Community of Christ


Since its founding in 1860, the Community of Christ, formerly known as the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (RLDS Church), has never sanctioned polygamy. Following the Reorganization of the church, Joseph Smith III, the first Prophet-President of the RLDS Church, was an outspoken opponent of plural marriage throughout his life. For most of his career, Smith denied that his father was involved in the practice, insisting that Brigham Young was the one who started it. Smith went on several expeditions to the western United States, where he met and questioned acquaintances and ladies claiming to be his father's widows, who tried to persuade him otherwise. When confronted with such allegations, Smith would generally react by claiming that was "neither positive nor confident that [his father] was innocent" and that even if the older Smith was engaged, it was still a fraudulent practice. Many members of the Community of Christ and other previously affiliated groups do not believe that Joseph Smith practiced multiple marriages and believe that the evidence that he did is faulty.


Islam

Islam's polygyny

A Muslim man may have up to four wives simultaneously, given reasonable and justified conditions, according to Islamic marital doctrine. Under no circumstances is it permissible for a Muslim woman to have more than one spouse simultaneously.


The perfect relationship, according to Quran verse 30:21, is the comfort that a couple finds in each other's embrace:


And among His Signs is this: He chose for you mates from among yourself, so that you may live in peace with them, and He has placed love and kindness between your (hearts): indeed, in that are Signs for people who ponder.


Sura 30 (Ar-Rum), Ayah 21 of the Qur'an

Polygyny is permitted in the Koran only in exceptional circumstances. According to Islamic law, when a man marries more than one woman, he must treat them equally in terms of financial assistance and support provided to each wife. If a guy worries, he won't be able to treat his wives fairly, Islam recommends monogamy. It is based on Quran verse 4:3, which says:

If you are concerned that you will not be able to treat orphans fairly, Marry the woman you want, Two, three, or four; but if you are afraid that you will not be able to deal justly with them, then simply one, or one that is in your right hands, will enough to keep you from doing injustice.


— Qur'an, Sura 4 (An-Nisa), Ayah 3

Muslim women are not permitted to marry many husbands at the same time. However, if their spouses divorce them or die, women can remarry once Iddah is completed, as divorce is allowed under Islamic law. Because her marriage with her non-Muslim spouse is Islamically dissolved on her leaving, a non-Muslim woman who adopts Islam and escapes from her non-Muslim husband has the choice to remarry without having to divorce her prior husband. A non-Muslim woman taken by Muslims during a battle can remarry since her marriage to her non-Muslim husband is Islamically dissolved at the time of captivity. This permission is granted to such ladies in Quranic verse 4:24. In contrast to prostitution, the poem also emphasizes transparency, mutual consent, and financial remuneration as criteria for marital relationships; it says:

Women previously married, except those in your right hands, are also prohibited: (Prohibitions) have been established by Allah against you as follows: Except for these, all others are legal if you seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property, desiring chastity rather than lust, and seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if you agree Mutually (to vary a dower after it has been specified), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing and All-wise.


— Qur'an, Sura 4 (An-Nisa), Ayah 24

Muhammad's first wife, Khadija, was his monogamous wife for 25 years until she died. For social and political reasons, he married a number of women after she died. The majority of them were widows. According to reports from his lifetime, he had nine wives in all, but not all at the same time. The Qur'an makes no distinction between husbands who have more than one wife. One argument for polygyny is that it permits a guy to provide financial security to several women who might otherwise be alone (e.g., widows). The wife, on the other hand, might stipulate in the marriage contract that the husband cannot marry another woman while they are married. In this situation, the husband is prohibited from marrying another lady while still married to his wife. Each of those wives, according to traditional Islamic law, retains her property and assets separate and is given Mahar and maintenance separately by her husband. The women usually have little to no contact with one another and live separate lives in their own homes, sometimes in different cities, despite the fact that they all have the same spouse.


Polygyny is permitted in most Muslim-majority nations, with Kuwait being the only one that does not have any limitations. In Muslim-majority Turkey, Tunisia, Albania, Kosovo, and Central Asian nations, the practice is prohibited.

Polygyny is often permitted in countries that require a man to get permission from his prior wives before marrying another, as well as proving that he can financially support several women. A man must justify taking an additional wife during a court hearing in Malaysia and Morocco before being allowed to do so. In order to expand the population in Sudan, the government-supported polygyny in 2001.


Legalization


International law


The United Nations Human Rights Committee has formed in the year 2000 that polygamy violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), citing concerns that were lack of "equality of treatment concerning the right to marry" meant that polygamy, limited to polygyny in practice, violated women's dignity and should be outlawed. Reports to UN Committees have specifically identified breaches of the ICCPR due to these disparities, and information to the UN General Assembly have urged that it be prohibited. Many Muslim nations, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Malaysia, Brunei, Oman, and South Sudan, are not signatories to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Therefore, the UN treaty does not apply to them.


United Kingdom


In the United Kingdom, bigamy is prohibited. De facto Polygamy (having many partners simultaneously) is not a crime as long as the person does not register more than one marriage. Adultery is not a crime in the United Kingdom (it is only a ground for divorce). In a written response to a question from the House of Commons, "Polygamy is only recognized as legal in the United Kingdom if the marriage ceremony took place in a nation where Polygamy is legal, and the parties to the marriage were domiciled there at the time. Furthermore, since 1988, immigration laws have largely prohibited the creation of polygamous families in the United States."

The UK government's Universal Credit (UC) will not recognize Polygamous marriages, which will replace means-tested benefits and tax credits for working-age individuals and will not be fully implemented until 2021. "Treating second and subsequent partners in polygamous relationships as distinct claimants might mean that polygamous families get more under Universal Credit than they do under the existing regulations for means-tested benefits and tax credits," according to the House of Commons Briefing Paper. As previously stated, the amounts that must be paid for additional spouses are smaller than those that apply to single claimants. Official statistics on cohabiting polygamous couples who have married in religious ceremonies are presently unavailable.

In October 2017, a dating service providing Muslim men the option to find second or third spouses received media attention in the United Kingdom. The website had 100 000 users, 25 000 of which were from the United Kingdom. When website founder Azad Chaiwala was looking for a second wife, he developed the website.


United States


In the United States, Polygamy is prohibited. Despite religious concerns from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons), the Supreme Court upheld federal legislation banning the practice in Reynolds v. the United States in 1878.


On December 13, 2013, a federal court threw down portions of Utah's bigamy statute that criminalized cohabitation, but admitting that the state may still enforce restrictions on possessing multiple marriage licenses, thanks to the American Civil Liberties Union and other organizations.


Individualist feminism and proponents like Wendy McElroy and journalist Jillian Keenan[who?] believe that adults should willingly engage in polygamous relationships.


Authors like Alyssa Rower and Samantha Slark argue that there was a case of legalizing Polygamy based on regulation and monitoring practice, legally protecting polygamous partners, and allowing them to participate in mainstream society rather than being forced to hide from it when a public situation arises.


Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, claimed in an op-ed for USA Today in October 2004 that Polygamy should be allowed it is a question of equal treatment under the law. Although Turley acknowledged that teenage girls are occasionally forced into polygamous marriages, he responded that "prohibiting polygamy is no more a remedy to child abuse than banning marriage is a solution to spousal abuse."



Polygamy should neither be decriminalized nor legalized, according to Stanley Kurtz, a Conservative fellow at the Hudson Institute. He explained:


Marriage is about selecting one's spouse and freedom in a culture that cherishes freedom, as its ultramodern opponents would have it. But it isn't the only aspect of it. Marriage is also about preserving the conditions in which space may thrive, as the Supreme Court justices who unanimously decided Reynolds in 1878 recognized. In all of its manifestations, Polygamy creates societal institutions that stifle and eventually destroy social freedom and democracy. True democratic self-rule begins at the heart of the monogamous family, as Western history has shown us.


Pastor Neil Patrick Carrick of Detroit, Michigan, filed a lawsuit against Michigan in January 2015, alleging that the state's ban on Polygamy violates the US Constitution's Free Exercise and Equal Protection Clauses.

What's The Difference Between A Polyamorous And An Open Relationship?

Inquiring minds would like to know...


Being in an open relationship is totally the same thing as being polyamorous, right? (Asking for a friend...)
Actually, while the two share some similar characteristics, they’re very different. “An open relationship is one where one or both partners have a desire for sexual relationships outside of each other, and polyamory is about having intimate, loving relationships with multiple people,” says Renee Divine, L.M.F.T., a sex and relationships therapist in Minneapolis, MN.
Both open and poly relationships are forms of consensual non-monogamy, and technically, polyamory can be a type of open relationship, but expectations tend to be different when it comes to these relationship styles.


ARE YOU LOOKING FOR MORE LOVE OR MORE SEX?


Open relationships typically start with one partner or both partners wanting to be able to seek outside sexual relationships and satisfaction, while still having sex with and sharing an emotional connection with their partner.
“People are looking for different experiences and want to meet the needs that aren’t being met in the relationship,” says Divine. But there’s never an intention for feelings to get involved.


In polyamory, the whole point is to fall in love with multiple people, and there’s not necessarily any relationship hierarchy, says Divine. For example, someone could be solo poly (meaning they want and seek poly relationships whether or not they’re dating anyone), and they may enter into two separate relationships at the same time and view each as equal.
In their nature, poly relationships are open, since they involve more than two people. But not all poly groups are looking to add more people to the dynamic, and aren’t always actively dating. This is called closed poly, meaning the group includes multiple relationships, but there’s an expectation that no one involved is expanding the group.


WHAT KIND OF BOUNDARIES DO YOU WANT TO SET?


In open relationships, couples may talk with their primary partner about their outside relationships, or they might decide together that it’s best to keep those exploits to themselves, says Divine. They may have sexual encounters together, in the instance of swinging, or they may go out with other people on their own.


In polyamory, there tends to be more sharing between partners about other relationships as there are emotions involved. A poly group might consider themselves “kitchen-table poly,” which means the whole group could hang out together comfortably. Two poly people might also date the same person, or have a triad-style relationship, and that typically doesn’t happen in open relationships, says Divine.


SHOULD YOU GO FOR IT?


If monogamy feels a bit restrictive to you, and you crave flexibility, open relationships or polyamory could be a good option. Which path you follow depends on what you want out of the additional relationships.
“Open relationships tend to be more focused on having sex outside a main relationship, but keeping that primary, dyadic relationship as the first priority,” says Divine. “I have run into couples where one wants a poly relationship and one wants an open relationship, but that person was not comfortable with their partner having an emotional connection with anyone but them.”
People might go into this because they’ve developed different needs over a long-term relationship, or because their looking to add excitement and interest to their lives. “But it revolves around a two-way love,” says Divine.


People who want to be poly, “believe you can love multiple people,” says Divine. “They’re open to additional people in that way, and they want that emotional attachment. Plural love is the main focus.”
In either case, expectations need to be clear with any partners who are making a change with you. “In some couples, one wants to try something new, and the other is okay with that, without participating themselves,” says Divine. “The key is communication. These relationships styles are all about being upfront and honest about what you want and what your needs and boundaries are. The most successful ones are those where people are on the same page.”
SOURCE: womenshealthmag.com

“What I’ve learned about monogamous relationships from being polyamorous.”


The following advice is aimed at adults who have been dating for a good decade already. In my opinion, you should do whatever you want with dating in your twenties, within the bounds of treating people with feelings like you would want yourself to be treated, of course.


The proverb ‘All’s fair in love and war’ is never literally true, but is whimsically true when you’re dating in high school and becomes less true the older you get and the more you should expect of yourself and others. When you are young, too much about your core self is malleable, and that’s how it should be. Other than those occasional high school sweethearts who got lucky and have been together ever since, dating in your twenties should be viewed as an experiment to find out what you want out of a partner, and what you are prepared to offer yourself.


However, at a certain point you need to get your romantic shit together. In a sense, every romantic relationship you will ever have goes through a “high school” stage in the beginning, during which you’re just getting to know each other and it’s OK to find some unforgivable deal-breaker, and break up with caring, but without much else owed to the other person.


This ends after a couple of months. The longer things go on, the more you will “owe” the other person. If you’ve just ghosted someone you’ve been seeing regularly for six months, unless you did it because you fear for your personal safety or something, you’re not a kind person.


"Being poly was a wonderful thing, and taught me a great deal."


I was poly for about four years, and have been in a monogamous relationship for over two years. Being poly was a wonderful thing, and taught me a great deal about what I wanted and what I didn’t. It started after being burned out on a decade of serial monogamy.


Being poly taught me that all those years, I was essentially monogamous for the wrong reasons. Because polyamory is less accepted by society, friends, and family, people tend to enter into relationships with whoever they went on a few dates with merely because they’d like to continue seeing them. This is not enough of a reason.


Actively learning what I wanted out of a relationship taught me how to be monogamous for the right reasons. When I was poly, I used to joke that “it takes three or four men to make one good boyfriend these days” and I was right. I knew I was ready to give it up when I found someone who felt like three or four men put together. He was enough, and then some. But I’m not talking about heightened passion or otherworldly attraction. I’m talking about the more rational process of someone possessing 90 per cent of the traits I had always wanted in one person, and didn’t really think I’d ever find.


I’m writing this today because over the past few months several of my friends have gone through painful breakups. They had been together anywhere between six months and five years, yet all of them had lovers who said to them some dreaded version of “I love you, but I am not in love with you any more”, “there’s no spark any more”, etc.


Here’s the thing: ADULTS know that the in-love part fades, then ebbs and flows with work, attention, and active caring over the years. It may take months to fade, or it may take years. But it is the obvious eventual side effect of the very familiarity you seek. True monogamists are not afraid of the lack of spark or butterflies; that wonderful but ultimately transient and even shallow feeling of being in a state of love.


I say 'shallow' because everyone eventually has had that feeling — and strongly — for a person they know they have no business dating. Chemistry doesn’t give a fuck if you’re deeply attracted to a Republican who would make you incredibly miserable. Once you’ve had an experience like that, you don’t put a lot of stock in what your blood thinks is a good idea.


True monogamists are there for the benefit of adding a partner; a family member to your day-to-day life that a sister or a mum or a pet can’t possibly provide. That goal is ultimately antithetical to romance by nature; a fact that successful monogamists use as a starting point; they do not hide from it, nor do they leave it alone and hope it will spark itself from time to time without any work.


"True monogamists are there for the benefit of adding a partner."


People who are dumped because the other person “just wasn’t feeling it” after a couple years have a right to be angry, and a right to feel betrayed. If you are that person, who has ended a long-term relationship over not feeling the magic, then you owe it to yourself and others to become a polyamorist.


You’re either a spark-chaser, or a long-burner. There is no in-between. If you are trying to be a monogamist, yet insist on expressing that desire to “be in love” through serial monogamy, then you are not being honest with yourself or your needs, and are disrespecting the needs of people you care for.


Polyamorists have the EQ to know that being a spark-chaser is nothing to be ashamed of; that it’s natural for human beings to desire others throughout their lifetime. They’re right, and they have the courage to admit they want that. Monogamists understand the same thing, they’ve just made a conscious decision to overpower it for the sake of something they have built with another.


Yet for some crazy reason, it’s still seen as more moral to be a guy who has a new girlfriend every few years, than to be the open, honest, Ethical Slut. Our culture is dead wrong about this. If you are 30 or over and always looking for the person who will satisfy every need while making you feel like you are in love, you need to stop being in relationships. Period. Relationships quite simply don’t provide that.


There is also no evolutionary purpose to the in love feeling lasting longer than it takes to produce offspring. Sorry, but nature is far from romantic. Nature doesn’t give a fuck about making you feel endless butterflies for the same person over decades.


Madison Missina opens up about what it was like being polyamorous on The Prude and the Pornstar podcast. (Post continues after audio.)


Monogamists have the EQ to know that the “spark” is replaced by other things that are more valuable to them; a sense of family with the other person, a deep sense of belonging, a partner who is there for you when you get sick. This is why polyamorists often have a dedicated “primary” who serves that role, while their other lovers serve as adventure, romance, and variety.


That doesn’t mean that monogamists shouldn’t stay on their toes in a relationship and try, whenever possible, to spark things up. They should, and they do. They are comfortable doing so because they are rooted in where the relationship is and have the emotional depth to roll with the tide, to endure the plateaus, and to always seek the best in the other person.


If your idea of looking for The One is going from relationship to relationship, you are denying who you are, hurting others, and wasting people’s time. Are you interested in always being in and out of love? Admit that poly is best for you. If you want a family, companionship, and history with the other person, and most importantly — accept the effort and antiglamour that comes with it — you should be in a relationship and should not try to make things work with those who don’t see the same way.


Certainly, there are other reasons to end a relationship that are perfectly valid. But if you’re ending it because you’re not feeling it anymore, you never felt the desire for monogamy as it actually exists in the first place. Figure out who you are, what you want, and be that. The only people who can have both are those few who are very, very good at polyamory.


SOURCE: mamamia.com.au

The Upside of Polyamory, Does polyamory have social value?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------


At the start of the sexual revolution in the 1960s, many people thought that creating honest nonmonogamous relationships would be easy. Instead, half a century of false starts and painful discoveries has taught us that polyamory exacts a price. The fact is that most twenty-first-century humans have many contradictory impulses that pull us in the direction of inclusive love and simultaneously push us in the direction of jealousy and possessiveness.

These opposing forces must be reconciled before we are truly free to love and therein lies one of the biggest gifts polyamory has to offer. Polyamory places people in the center of the cyclone, with an abundance of opportunities to confront these opposing forces and to learn from their mistakes along the way. Learning theorists have found that the more mistakes you make, the faster you learn. In polyamory, it's possible to get the benefit of several lifetimes worth of mistakes in a relatively short time because you are engaging in more than one intimate relationship at a time.

Polyamorous relationships offer many means of accelerating personal growth. All intimate relationships at their best are a path to higher consciousness and greater self-knowledge, largely because of the valuable feedback-or mirroring effect-one receives from a beloved. Having more than one partner at a time not only increases the available quantity of feedback but also makes it harder to blame your partner for the problems you might be creating in the relationship. Of course, serial monogamy also offers the opportunity to see the same issues arise in one relationship after another, but not only does it take longer to get the lesson, but, if you're a fast talker, you may be able to convince one person at a time that it's not your fault, whereas two are less likely to be fooled.

Bill is an attractive man in his late forties who has never been married. Over the years, he'd had a series of monogamous relationships, each lasting about four years. "I'm not sure why none of these relationships lasted," he told me. "I always assumed it just wasn't a match and moved on to the next woman, but I'm getting older, and I really want to settle down." Bill decided he wanted to try polyamory and took my advice to start by dating women who weren't seeking a monogamous commitment. Soon he was dating three different women and was thrilled when it turned out that two of them knew and liked each other. After a few months, however, he found himself struggling. "Liz, Helen, and Angie are all mad at me," he complained. "They started comparing notes and found out I'd told some white lies. Now they're accusing me of manipulating them. I really don't understand what their problem is, but I'd like to find out. Can you help me?" Bill was reaping the benefits of polyamory in a different way than he'd expected, but his openness to taking a look at himself-once three women instead of one were insisting on it-was promising.

Because multiple-partner relationships are inherently more complex and demanding than monogamous ones and because they challenge the norms of our culture, they offer other valuable learning opportunities. Lessons about loving yourself, about tolerance for diversity, about speaking from the heart and communicating clearly, and about learning to trust an internal sense of rightness and to think for yourself rather than blindly relying on outside opinion are only a sampling of the lessons. These qualities are earmarks of an emotionally and spiritually mature person--the kind of person who makes a good parent and who can contribute to his or her community.

One of the most common concerns about polyamory is that it's harmful to children, but nothing could be farther from the truth. Multiple-adult families and committed intimate networks have the potential of providing dependent children with additional nurturing adults who can meet their material, intellectual, and emotional needs. While parents may end up focusing less attention on their children, children may gain new aunts, uncles, and adopted parents.

More adults sharing parenting can mean less stress and less burnoutwithout losing any of the rewards. In a larger group of men and women, it's more likely that one or two adults will be willing and able to stay home and care for the family or that each could be available one or two days a week. If one parent dies or becomes disabled, other family members can fill the gap. It's possible for children to have more role models, more playmates, and more love in a group environment. Of course, these advantages can be found in any community setting, but people sometimes avoid intimacy with other adults in a conscious or unconscious effort to safeguard a monogamous commitment.

Polyamory has the potential to create stable and nurturing families where children develop in an atmosphere of love and security. With the traditional nuclear family well on its way to extinction, we are faced with a question of critical importance: who will mind the children? Neither two-career nor single-parent families offer children full-time, loving caretakers, and quality day care is both scarce and expensive. Even at its best, full-time institutional care (including public schooling) cannot provide the individual attention, intimacy, flexibility, and opportunity for solitude that children need to realize their potential. Serial monogamy presents children as well as parents with a stressfully discontinuous family life. Meanwhile, an entire generation is at risk, as divorce is increasingly common fact of life.

We don't yet know how polyamory impacts the rate of divorce; the little data we have suggest that it doesn't. That is, divorce rates appear to be about the same in monogamous and non-monogamous marriages. Some people have begun to joke about "serial polyamory," and it may turn out that any kind of lasting relationship is simply less likely in the twenty-first century. We do know that practicing polyamory can help prepare parents to maintain family ties after a divorce because the issue of becoming jealous when confronted with a former mate's new partner has usually been dealt with already.

Polyamory can mean a higher standard of living while consuming fewer resources. Sexualoving partners are more likely than friends or neighbors to feel comfortable sharing housing, transportation, appliances, and other resources. Even if partners don't live communally, they frequently share meals, help each other with household repairs and projects, and vacation together. This kind of cooperation helps provide a higher quality of life while reducing individual consumption as well as keeping people too busy to overconsume. Multiple partners also help in the renewal of our devastated human ecology by creating a sense of bonded community.

Polyamory can help parents and children alike adapt to an ever more complex and quickly changing world. One of the greatest challenges facing humans at the dawn of the twenty-first century is coping with the increasingly fast pace of life. We're constantly being inundated with more information than we can absorb and more choices than we can evaluate. New technologies are becoming obsolete almost before we can implement them. Trying to keep up can be stressful if not impossible for a single person or a couple. But a small group of loving and well-coordinated partners can divide up tasks that would overwhelm one or two people. Multiple-partner relationships can be an antidote to future shock.

One of the most difficult challenges confronting men and women in the twenty-first century is making the transition from the rigid and well-defined gender identities prevalent in the twentieth century to the more fluid and androgynous roles preferred by many individuals. Diverse opinions as to the healthiest, most natural, and most functional approach to gender roles are still being debated by social scientists, psychotherapists, and spiritualteachers. Most people would agree, however, that both John Wayne-style masculinity and the classic 1950s housewife version of femininity, as well as any identity based solely on gender, are prescriptions for unhappiness. While the extreme versions of these old stereotypes are increasingly rare, many people are still struggling with the more subtle effects of generations of gender-based tyranny.

Marriage as we know it today is based on patterns established in biblical times governing men's ownership of women. Polyamory can help men and women break out of dysfunctional sex roles and achieve more equal, sexually gratifying, and respectful relationships simply because of its novelty. Most of us have unconsciously absorbed our culture's messages about proper demeanor for husbands and wives. We may think our modern society has left this legacy behind, but remember that women in the United States have had the right to vote for less than 100 years. Polyamory leads us to confront the sex role conditioning of our ancestors and demands that we transcend it. It requires that men and women alike overcome our competitive programming and that we invent new ways of relating since we can no longer fall back on simply doing it the way Mom and Dad or Grandma and Grandpa did it.

Deep ecologists suggest that the ancient wisdom of indigenous peoples may offer some important clues to our survival as a species. Deep-ecology advocate Dolores LaChapelle was one of the first twentieth-century writers to discuss sex and intimate relationships in an ecological context. She views the breakdowns in so many modern relationships as a direct result of placing too much emphasis on the romance between two people and losing sight of the larger whole in which we are all embedded. In her encyclopedic Sacred Land, Sacred Sex, she draws on indigenous wisdom the world over to paint a vivid picture of the ways in which multipartner sex has traditionally served to bond the group, diffuse potential conflict, and strengthen the connection to the land. She cites many examples of both ancient and modern native peoples whose customs and rituals incorporate sex as "natural, inevitable, and sacred because it's part of the whole inter-relationship of humans and nature in that place."

One account is from a woman anthropologist who was traveling through the jungle with a woman friend from the tribe and the woman's husband. When they stopped to camp for the night, her friend was making love with her husband and asked if she wanted to join in. She describes the experience as natural, playful, tender, and bonding for the two women.

In many of these cultures, as in the lovestyle now called polyamory, pair bonding is one option among many, and couples expect to include others in their intimacy or relax their boundaries when the situation arises. Couples as well as other grouping and singles all participate in seasonal festivals involving ritual sex to "increase the energy not only between man and woman but within the group as a whole and between the humans and their land." 

Dr. James Prescott's research revealed that cultures like these are significantly less violent than those that disallow extramarital sex. While modern Western thinking generally regards fertility rites as merely superstitious, if not immoral, LaChapelle describes a biological basis for their positive effects.
LaChapelle explains it this way: "In ritualized sex, which is not confined to the genital area, the entire body and the brain receive repetitive stimuli over a considerable period of time. This leads to ‘central nervous system tuning.' To briefly summarize, if either the parasympathetic nervous system or the sympathetic nervous system is stimulated, the other system is inhibited. Tuning occurs . . . when there is such strong, prolonged activation of one system that it becomes supersaturated and spills over into the other system so that it, in turn, becomes activated. If stimulated long enough the next stage of tuning is reached where the simultaneous strong discharge of both autonomic systems creates a state of stimulation of the median forebrain bundle, generating not only pleasurable sensations but . . . a sense of union or oneness with all. This stage of tuning permits right hemisphere dominance; thus solving problems deemed insoluble by the rational hemisphere. Furthermore, the strong rhythm of repetitive action as done in sexual rituals produces positive limbic discharge, resulting in increased social cohesion; thus contributing to the success of such rituals as bonding mechanisms."

Of course, polyamory does not necessarily involve such exotic activities, but as a philosophy of love, it provides a context in which erotic ritual is possible without prohibitions based on a belief in entitlement to sexual exclusivity as proof of commitment or fidelity. What polyamory does require is a more altruistic, unconditional type of love than is common in monogamous unions and that naturally arises from a felt sense of oneness. While monogamy, of course, also thrives on unselfish love, monogamy can survive more easily than polyamory in its absence.

Source: psychologytoday.com

Polygamy In The Black Community: Why Do We Really Opt For It?

Since childhood, I’ve known that African-Americans are as eclectic as we wanna be. We are literally assorted chocolates and you never know what you’re going to get when you open the box. But when did Black polygamy become a “the thing” for some of us? And when I say some of us, I’m asking about African-American women in particular.

Last year, I had no clue that it was a “thing” — outside of some Muslims engaging in the practice — until a guy I met at a business lunch sent me a link to check out the lifestyle. First of all, let me say that there was no warning or disclaimer that came with the link he sent. It was just a link sent to my email address from his. We met through a mutual client so I assumed he was sending something that I could actually use in my work life, like a better scheduling app or a code for Uber discounts—something! But it wasn’t. Just a link that lead to me asking who, what, when, why?

Some other ladies from the business lunch told me that they received the link as well and that they were outraged! One older lady in her late 40s felt particularly disrespected, saying how dare he think she’d be remotely interested in that sort of lifestyle. I kind of felt where she was coming from but I later had to side eye her because prior to the invitation  to join”Poly Phi Poly,” she tried to tell me ol’ boy was a great catch for someone like me. Not! Luckily for me, I never follow up on dating leads that are thrown in my lap. But I did at least think dude was cool and ultra professional when I met him at the lunch, which is why my reaction to the link wasn’t oh no this negro didn’t but more like, what in the Iceberg Slim hell? And so, my inquisitive self clicked on the link.

What I found was a group for brothers and sisters who are actually living polygamous lifestyles or trying to find folks to join them so they start building their polygamous families. But what really made my small eyes pop out the sockets like a cartoon character was the influx of African-American women who were down for the cause to share one man with several women. Now, what I gathered from reading people’s posts on the site is the biggest reason why Black people should get with the polygamy program is to build families that are economically untouchable… Okay, so what’s up with all the well-to-do women on the site who were RNs, college grads, and business owners? I would think that since they’re already bringing home the bacon that they’d be cool with one faithful man who could match or exceed what they currently make on the job. A beautiful Black couple who loves God, each other, and can afford to splurge on the finer things sounds legit to me! But the more I scrolled through the site,  I saw women hardcore using their best sales pitch to get someone to move them into their homes as a sister wife. Some were even offering couples to come live with them!

I don’t think cooperative economics had a rat’s butt to do with anything for these women. It seemed to me that these ladies were opting for this lifestyle because it’s easier to let a dog roam than to expect him to behave. They would rather come into a situation knowing that their man has multiple women who all know that they are just one of multiple women. That way, they don’t have to face any surprise heartache as a result of being cheated on. That’s my belief and I’m sticking to it. Now, I will say that some other interesting points were made in defense of Black polygamy, such as one sister-wife homeschooling all the children in the unit because Black kids should be taught by people who look like them. That’s an awesome principle that I’m all for. But uh… there’s plenty of schools, both private and public, that have already done this. And if I want to homeschool my baby I can simply find a Black teacher who home schools. I don’t need to move my husband’s flavor of the month in to help me do that or anything else.

What’s polygamy really about in your opinion?

Source: madamenoire.com

‘Decriminalize’ Polygamy! Kody Brown Fights For Plural Marriages
Miserable looking Meri and the Sister Wives march in protest!

View Gallery


Meri Brown Celebrates ‘Anniversary’ With Kody Even Though They’re Divorced!


'Sister Wives' stars look cozy in Chicago despite long-troubled relationship.


Meri and Kody Brown celebrated their “anniversary” even though the Sister Wives patriarch legally divorced her to marry another spouse, Robyn.

Kody’s first wife, Meri, shared an Instagram selfie photo this weekend of herself and Kody smiling at the camera together on a city street.

She wrote as a caption, “Kody flew out to Chicago on my last day of #LuLaRoe leadership so we could spend our anniversary together yesterday. How sweet was that?! ♡♡♡ 28 years and still here!

#LivingMyWhy #28Years #Anniversary #Chicago #Happiness.”

PHOTOS: Guns, Whiskey & Whips! ‘Sister Wives’ Son Gets Wild

Meri, who was referring to the LuLaRoe clothing line she’s been plugging, appeared to be thrilled that her multi-married husband showed up to honor their big day.

But the situation is a real head-scratcher as Kody divorced Meri a few years ago to make Robyn his legal wife. Although Kody considers Robyn his “fourth” wife, he never legally wed his other so-called spouses, Janelle and Christine.

Also, Meri later got catfished on the internet, falling for someone she believed was a man —only to find out it was a woman named Jackie Overton who had deceived her in a six-month relationship.

PHOTOS: ‘Decriminalize’ Polygamy! Kody Brown Fights For Plural Marriages

On a recent Sister Wives episode, Kody admitted that he doesn’t want to be intimate with Meri.

That hurt Meri’s feelings and she had a meltdown during the finale of the Sister Wives Tell All special.

Meri cried while the other wives discussed how she and Kody were under strain.

“We dug this hole for 25 years. It’s not something we’re going to fix with a weekend getaway,” Kody told the TV cameras about his “marriage” to Meri.

Source: Radar Online


Do the intense feelings in polyamory ever end?


I’m writing to you because I’ve come to what feels like a breaking point in one of my polyamorous relationships. I’m relatively new to non-monogamy — I began seeing another person for the first time in September 2017. So since then I have been with both my partner with whom I live, and this new person — neither of them are seeing anyone else, but they would if they wanted to. I don’t know how to explain how I feel in a short email, but in a few words: I feel torn in two., I feel like my heart can’t handle how much I feel for both these people, and that I almost feel too much. I want to give everything to both of them and still have some part of me to give all the other people in my life.
I am writing this after a horrendous night where they were both present at the same evening, andwhere I ended up getting really drunk and bawling my eyes out. I felt like I had to choose between them, and couldn’t. This morning I think I have made the decision to end my new relationship because it is too difficult. I wanted to ask you: how do you manage these intense feelings without feeling like you’re relegating people to small boxed off spaces?
Does it have to do with my own mental health at all? Is it that I just simply am not a strong enough and whole enough person to be able to do this? (this is how it feels).
Sorry for the intense email, but if you do have any thoughts on my situation, I’d be glad to hear them.

You can’t really change your feelings but this isn’t necessarily a problem with your feelings, it’s a problem with your expectations and thought processes which is allowing certain feelings to crop up.

The way you manage that is through two things I’ll talk about here:

  • Changing your expectations
  • Reframing your perspective
Changing your expectations

Within your letter, you don’t really explain what you mean by wanting to give “everything” to them. What does that mean? Do you mean all of your time? All of your emotional energy? The first thing I think you need to do is challenge the assumption that loving someone means giving them every aspect of your emotional energy and time, or rather that in order to love someone, you have to give them your emotional energy and time.

Because that’s an idea which monogamy encourages and especially reinforces of the cases of people who are feminine, read as women or raised as women. Specifically, it encourages these people to see their value as a person as what they have to offer others in the form of beauty, emotional labour, and pretty much anything else. I feel like there might be a lot more going on here with you expecting that you need to give “everything” to all of these people — and that you need to give things to people at all.

A relationship is an exchange and a compromise, but that goes both ways and has to go both ways. But it’s not all about you giving something to someone else. And believing a relationship involves you giving ‘everything’ to one person, I think, is one of the harmful things which monogamous-centric culture teaches you which is harmful to anyone in any type of relationship. It sounds romantic and sweet, but this is the kind of outlook which abusive people use to entrap people, so I would encourage you to rethink this and reframe your perspective on this.

To recap, the first problem that I think you’re having is your expectation of yourself and what is involved in a relationship. I think you need to look at realistically what you want in a relationship. Think about it in terms of tangibles. What time are you spending where? And what are your needs rather than your assumptions on what you’re supposed to give to whom? And what do you expect from the people you’re in relationships with? What is the lifestyle you want to have with your partner(s)? When you begin with the tangible stuff and you start from the standpoint of what you need rather than what you’re giving, it’s a lot easier to manage.

Reframing your perspective

The second thing I think you need to do is reframe your perspective and also accept your own boundaries. It worries me a bit that you assume that having these feelings means you are not “strong enough”. This is another really destructive idea that our society encourages, the idea that having or expressing emotions makes you weak or not strong. You can’t control the feelings you have. You can only control how you choose to respond to them and the framing your mind has that encourages different types of feelings.

In changing your expectations, you definitely may reframe your mind but I think you also need to furthermore reframe your feelings as fewer problems and more of signs that your body and your mind are trying to tell you something. Whenever we start a new relationship or whenever things are seemingly unstable, our feelings are going to run on high alert. You might be fighting a lot of internal conditioning of how ‘wrong’ it is for you to have more than one partner. There might be other things your brain is telling you that is keeping your emotions running on high, but the easiest way to cope with your emotions is to begin by not blaming yourself for having them. It’s a lot easier for you to cope with something if you’re not beginning the coping already injured from beating yourself up.

Regardless of what you choose in terms of your relationship style, you will not be able to avoid uncertainty and instability. For as much as we would like to be able to control all aspects of our life, we don’t. Life is ultimately outside of our control and the only thing constant is change. So you will have to be able to deal with a lot of different types of instability and change in your life. The way to deal with that is to have boundaries in place. What you want are things that ground you — but don’t restrain you or prevent you from moving where you need to move.

It might be that you just don’t like the emotions that being with both of your partners on the same evening in the same place brings. And that’s okay. One of the things I don’t like about many polyamory communities and especially the word ‘compersion’ is it puts forth this idea that the ideal for any polyamorous person is feeling no jealousy and only happiness when you see your partners with other people — but that’s sometimes not the reality for a lot of us and that’s okay. It doesn’t make us less ‘strong’ than people who do no more than anything else does. I know personally, I would rarely enjoy being with two of my partners in the same evening and in the same place — just because I’d feel nervous about my own feelings and that anxiety would defeat the entire purpose.

Does that mean I’m weak? Well, maybe some people might think so, but that doesn’t really matter. I’m not doing my relationship style as some sort of gladiator decathlon tryout. When I die, it’s not like I get a gold encrusted plaque on my burial mound that says “World’s Most Emotionally Hardcore Badass”. My loved ones won’t get some type of monetary prize if I prove my strength in some type of emotional arena. Ask yourself what you’re trying to prove? And to whom? And for what? You don’t have to be someone who is fine with them both being present at the same evening.

Listen to yourself and your feelings and instead of trying to fight an emotional battle in your own head of your own creation that has absolutely no prize for winning, give yourself permission to be yourself. And set up boundaries around that which make it easier. Hopefully, none of your partners are forcing you to do any of this, but you’re allowed to say that it just makes you feel uncomfortable. That’s okay. It doesn’t make you weak and it doesn’t make you un-whole. You are as much “whole” as any other human being who is in any other type of relationship.

Reframe your perspective and allow yourself the freedom to feel. Allow yourself permission to have feelings without assuming that is a failure. It might be a lot easier to manage your intense emotions if you’re not beating yourself up for having them or trying to suppress them. And this isn’t necessarily about mental health. People with mental health challenges can sometimes find it hard to cope with new things or changes, but it’s not impossible. I would suggest getting a polyamory friendly therapist who can help you work through your feelings, but definitely, don’t suppress them.

In summation

Allow yourself to feel your feelings and set up boundaries. Just keep in mind that when you set up boundaries, you’re doing so in order to manage feelings, not prevent them. The problem people have with boundaries and rules is that they so often create rules that are designed to prevent emotions when rules will not do that. Setting up these boundaries will not change your emotions, but in trying out polyamory, you’re in a way learning how you do these relationships. And just like you did when you were probably trying out monogamy, you had to learn over time how it worked and what you wanted out of them.

In trying something new, you’re inevitably going to feel anxious, nervous and you’re going to make mistakes. Rather than expecting ‘perfection’ from yourself, which really does not exist here, give yourself a bit of permission to learn something new. Challenge your assumptions and expectations and reframe your perspective and you might find this a lot easier in the future.

I hope this helps and good luck!

Sorry to Spread around this bit of Fake News from in Touch Weekly. From our Research here at Sister Wives Dating, TLC did not Cancel Sister Wives the TV Show


The Primer for Sister Wives the TV Show will be Jan 20th 2019 and for Seeking Sister Wife it will be Jan 14th 2019!

We here at Sister Wives Dating are all Very Very Excited to seen them Both!

Congrats to TLC for making these amazing TV Shows!












Published By: Christopher Alesich

Matchmakers, Inc - Sisterwives.com



‘Sister Wives’ family makes home in inclusive Arizona city


By Brady McCombs and Felicia Fonseca | AP August 25


FLAGSTAFF, Ariz. — The patriarch of the polygamous family from TV’s “Sister Wives” drove around his new hometown in northern Arizona, admiring the mountain views but still thinking about the heap of boxes that needed sorting at the homes he rented for his four wives and 18 children.


“We moved to heaven, but we’re in living hell right now,” Kody Brown said, laughing, during a recent phone interview with The Associated Press.


Packing up four moving trucks in Las Vegas during triple-digit July heat and taking his family to Flagstaff, a liberal college city in largely conservative Arizona, was no easy task.


But the Browns said they needed a new place to call home — and film their TLC reality show — after realizing they didn’t want to grow old in Las Vegas. They said they lived there in “exile” after fleeing Utah in 2011 under the threat of prosecution following the premiere of their groundbreaking show.


Flagstaff residents have a “live and let live” attitude, and the City Council has passed resolutions promoting diversity and inclusion. The city has snowy winter seasons and is a popular destination for desert dwellers to cool off.


That open-mindedness and beauty attracted the Browns after they ruled out returning to Utah, where they feel discrimination persists against plural families.


“Let’s just say there’s a lot of hippies in Flagstaff, and they’re awesome,” Brown said.


Being married to more than one person, or bigamy, is illegal across the United States. The law in Mormon-heavy Utah is considered stricter because of a unique provision that bars married people from living with a second “spiritual spouse.”


The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints abandoned polygamy in 1890 and strictly prohibits it today. The Browns consider themselves fundamentalist Mormons.


In a memo addressing legal questions about the family, Flagstaff police said Brown could not be charged with bigamy because he is legally married to one woman, Robyn Brown. The patriarch says he’s “spiritually married” to the other three women.


The Browns bought four lots totaling almost 15 acres a few miles from downtown Flagstaff for $820,000 in June, according to property records. They said they eventually plan to build a home or homes but are now living in four rentals scattered throughout the community.


Producers told city officials the TV show will do most of the filming at the homes and in a commercial building space the Browns rented. Season eight of “Sister Wives” is set to debut on TLC in January 2019.


Flagstaff has been abuzz about the move, with residents sharing sightings of the family on social media.


Pete Page lives across the street from the Browns in a quiet neighborhood where homes are spread out amid a meadow and surrounded by ponderosa pine trees. 


He doesn’t object to the family’s lifestyle but doesn’t want to see environmental damage, streets blocked off for filming, more traffic and noise, or fans driving around trying to get a glimpse.


“Everyone has the same concern: ‘Is this going to turn into a circus?’” fellow neighbor Michael Reidy said. “Most of us don’t think it will, but that will be the fear.”


Jessie Luckey, who lives in east Flagstaff with her husband and two children, said she enjoyed watching “Sister Wives” and would be courteous to the family, but views their lifestyle as patriarchal and sexist.


“This is not a culture I want here,” she said, “normalizing a behavior that I don’t think should be normalized.”


The Browns initially imagined returning to Utah despite suing over its unique cohabitation law, alleging it violated their religious freedom. They scored an early legal victory, but an appeals court ruled they couldn’t sue because they had not been charged under the law.


“Utah is hostile toward polygamists,” Kody Brown said. “There is a very natural and subtle discrimination from the public because of those anti-polygamy laws.”


The family doesn’t regret its time in Nevada, where the kids blossomed because they could be normal and not singled out as polygamous kids like in Utah, the wives said. They now range in age from 2 to 24.


Three of the Browns’ children are married, and two others are in serious relationships — including one daughter who is a lesbian. None plans to practice polygamy.


“I am very comfortable with their choices regardless of what they are,” Brown said.

___

McCombs reported from Salt Lake City.



Pages: « Previous ... 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Password protected photo
Password protected photo
Password protected photo