TV Show: Sister Wives

I like this so far....It's nice to see a polygamous FLDS MORMON family that's not the prairie dress wearing closed up in their own little compound away from the world family.
 
I'm confused about what you mean.

They didn't come right out and say it, but with the religious motivation, I wondered if the women were not allowed other partners, and with as many kids as they had, I almost wondered if they did it mainly to have so many kids.

But none of this was ever explicitly stated, and I could be making assumptions. Although even if that's the case, they all seem to be happy about it. And if they're happy, it's not for me to judge.

If they are FLDS then NO the women are not allowed to take other husbands. But so what? If the women involved in that relationship are ok with that then who are we to judge what their family structure is? Those women don't seem submissive to me.

As far as the bigamy charge. Not sure if they could even charge him with anything at all because FLDS only marry their first wife legally and just do religious ceremonies for the rest and I was under the impression that common law didn't apply in the state of Utah. I could be wrong though.
 
It's nice that they all seem to be loving, and that it isn't forced for anyone. I did get a feel of "we're having as many kids as we possibly can because religion wants us to" but the kids seem happy so I can't say I find it horrible or anything like that.
I do agree that the main difference with polyamory is how one-way it is. None of the wives are allowed other men in their lives, I definitely couldn't be a sister wife if I knew I wasn't allowed the same treatment. It might work if all the females are mono, but it seems that it's more that they're not given the option, which is a bit sad.
Of course, I can see how they wouldn't have much time for other relationships, they seem busy enough as it is.

All in all, as far as religious polygamy is concerned, I think it's a very positive show. I do think it's different from polyamory though. I also think the law should leave them alone.
 
As far as the bigamy charge. Not sure if they could even charge him with anything at all because FLDS only marry their first wife legally and just do religious ceremonies for the rest and I was under the impression that common law didn't apply in the state of Utah. I could be wrong though.

Unfortunately, the charge of bigamy in most states, including Utah, doesn't depend on the registration of the 2nd, 3rd marriages, etc. The Utah statute criminalizes anyone who is married from merely "purporting to marry" or "cohabitating" with anyone else. If he legally married wife #1, then he could potentially be convicted of bigamy for #2 and #3, even if it was just a personal or religious ceremony with no civil papers or registration.

I do agree that the main difference with polyamory is how one-way it is. None of the wives are allowed other men in their lives... I do think it's different from polyamory though.

How? Because they have different rules? None of the poly families I know have the exact same boundaries as each other. It seems to me that they are dealing with issues of time management, jealousy management, open communication, and ethics that are essentially equivalent to those in more familiar poly relationships. Why pick out this particular boundary difference as making it Not-Poly, if everyone in the relationship is happy and consenting?
 
How? Because they have different rules? None of the poly families I know have the exact same boundaries as each other. It seems to me that they are dealing with issues of time management, jealousy management, open communication, and ethics that are essentially equivalent to those in more familiar poly relationships. Why pick out this particular boundary difference as making it Not-Poly, if everyone in the relationship is happy and consenting?

Mmmm, I think its more about a lack of options under which they decide their own boundaries. Its like having a relationship where one partner is an astronaut and and they become poly because the astronaut wants to have zero gravity sex and a relationship with another astronaut and their primary partner "chooses" remains monogamous because they are not an astronaut and therefore cannot have zero gravity sex. These women decide their boundaries based on what their religion affords them - not necessarily what they would desire to choose. And they have to find a comfort level with it because their religion affords their husband this option as his god given right. Its a bit different than someone with a full spectrum of choice, choosing to remain monogamous because it is exactly what they want instead of the only option available to choose from.
 
How? Because they have different rules?

What I meant is that they're not exactly the same. The husband is polyamorous, mind you, I agree with that. But this is a subcategory that revolves around marriage and is one-way. There is more to polyamory than just this situation.
And there is polygamy that isn't polyamorous, too, when it's just about marrying as many wives as possible and having as many kids as possible, without being in love with them.

So polygamy and polyamory are different, since there can be one without the other. But I agree that they overlap.
 
Its like having a relationship where one partner is an astronaut and and they become poly because the astronaut wants to have zero gravity sex and a relationship with another astronaut and their primary partner "chooses" remains monogamous because they are not an astronaut and therefore cannot have zero gravity sex.

But that's still a choice that the earthbound partner makes, to open the relationship in that particular way. That partner still has the option to say, "No, I'd prefer you didn't have zero-gravity sex, because I can never have that. Let's do something we can both enjoy." Personally, I think it would be a bit silly to say that (if my partner had that kind of opportunity, I'd be cheering her on! Wooo! Space sex!! Even if I never got to go to space myself!) but it's still an option.

How about "indecent proposals," where some celebrity or billionaire offers to sleep with the wife of a mono couple, let's say. Would it be less than a full choice for the couple to decide to accept the proposal, since the husband has no opportunity of his own?

I think these things are choices that the partners can discuss together and agree on. I don't think that lack of opportunity for one partner invalidates consent.

These women decide their boundaries based on what their religion affords them - not necessarily what they would desire to choose.

So they're not allowed to base their choices or preferences on religion? Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of sympathy with that position ;) but religion is super important to a lot of people, and plays an enormous role in individuals' choices in all aspects of life, not just in this one.

What would your position be on people who marry monogamously because that is the only option their religion affords them, even if it's not necessarily what they would desire to choose otherwise? I suspect that probably describes a good 20-30% of the western world.

As long as there's consent, and no abuse, I really don't think we can analyze the legitimacy of relationships based on how someone came to the decision to consent. That's entirely up to the individual and no one else.

So polygamy and polyamory are different, since there can be one without the other. But I agree that they overlap.

Agreed. I thought you were arguing that this particular family, who apparently do love each other, could not be considered polyamory.
 
Agreed. I thought you were arguing that this particular family, who apparently do love each other, could not be considered polyamory.

Oh, no, the husband is definitely very loving and respectful of all of his wives and treats them as individuals. I have much more of a problem when a man has, 20, 30 or 60 wives and it seems to me he wouldn't even have the time to say "good morning" and "good night" to all of them individually, let alone spend quality time with them. And considering they each have only one husband, it makes me sad that the one husband they have has no time for them, and doesn't individually give them the love and respect they deserve.

I think my only problem when it's religious is that I wonder, do the women raised into it even consider the option of it being the other way around? Or is it to them like peeing standing, something that's a "guy thing", and even if they wish they could have someone else, it's just not possible.
When it's not religious, it seems easier for me to think the person made their own choice. When it is, it's hard to know where the personal choice starts, and when the choice that has been made for you ends.

Ultimately, I really only care that they're happy and treated well, but I always wonder if they are aware that there are other options. To some extent, I wonder the same for people in monogamous relationships. Sometimes, they had to choose between two people, and think they made the best choice, and I wonder, do they know they could have made the choice to have both? See what I mean?

Anyways, I think the law has no business in relationships that are between loving and consensual adults, and that's obviously the case here. I understand when the marriages were forced, or happened so early that there is a strong doubt, or even so early that the women were still girls, but I wish the law could be about preventing abuse. There is abuse in non-polygamous unions, too. The problem is the abuse, not the polygamy.
 
I always wonder if they are aware that there are other options. To some extent, I wonder the same for people in monogamous relationships. Sometimes, they had to choose between two people, and think they made the best choice, and I wonder, do they know they could have made the choice to have both? See what I mean?

Totally! I'm so saddened when someone in the monogamous world loves two people and feels compelled to decide between them. (Sometimes people even will tell them that it's impossible to love two people, and so they must not really love either, and should therefore dump both. Ugh!) I think in a lot of cases, if the three of them knew there was another option, that they would happily take it. I discovered poly by making just such a decision and immediately recognizing what a devastating thing it was to do, both to me and my unfairly dumped lover.

Of course these women grew up in a culture that tolerates/embraces polygamy, and that is certain to affect their choice. But all of our choices are affected somehow by our culture. None of us can fully divorce ourselves from outside influences on our choices: in fact, that would leave us with very little information on which to base the choice at all! I'm pretty sure, though, that in this case, the wives are aware of the monogamy option. :)
 
Last edited:
What I meant wasn't "they might not be aware of the monogamy option!" but "they don't seem to be aware that poly can go both ways, that there are ways other than OPP".
 
But that's still a choice that the earthbound partner makes, to open the relationship in that particular way. That partner still has the option to say, "No, I'd prefer you didn't have zero-gravity sex, because I can never have that. Let's do something we can both enjoy."
As long as there's consent, and no abuse, I really don't think we can analyze the legitimacy of relationships based on how someone came to the decision to consent. That's entirely up to the individual and no one else.

Having never seen the show, I have no idea how each person came to agree to it. I have a great many of very fundamental relatives. They are not of the sect to take on many wives, but the choices they make are heavily influenced by the information their church and pastor decides is "godly and true" and very little else gets considered. Right down to instances of whether or not public schooling ruins girls for marriage and deciding to educate them at home by their mother who didn't finish school either. Choices are made by what one thinks is their pool of options. Perhaps this extremism isn't present in the show being discussed, but I've seen first had how a religious instruction can make some people make a decision, not because its what they want but what id expected of them. Knowing that, I just wonder if it truly qualifies as free choice.

Such as a "honey, God made zero gravity sex for me; not you. Would you second guess god and deny me that which he intends?"

Having not seen the show, I don't speak for it, but recognize the darker spectrum of this possible.
 
So I watched 3 episodes as that was what was available in the OnDemand listing.

All three of the women had conditioning prior to these marriages by being raised in polygamist families and following a religion that promotes polygamy.

So what is known about Mormonism?

That a woman is brought to salvation through marriage and he earns her passage to heaven. There is more to it than that. Heaven is your own planet to populate.

Bring raised to believe this, denying another woman from marrying your husband mean you're maybe causing her to never see heaven. And leaving him if he goes ahead and takes another wife means you give up your passage to heaven. This faith also instructs that a woman's teen sons are right to spiritually counsel their mothers by the age of 13. The women are for instructing only their female children and sons under 13. One of the things I noticed in the womens' interactions with their daughters was quite a bit of "honey are you SURE that's what you want to do? Are you SURE? What about doing this instead?" This instilling of doubt in one's own decision making. Never once did I see this approach used on the boys. If one of the boys began to cut up and get rowdy, dad was called in.

What I did find to be positive in this is that the women relied on each other and did truly care for and value each other. They wanted their sisters. And in this family, the husband said he wouldn't marry anyone if the others were not on board with it. At times they didn't seem to want the fourth, and grew very upset. I did not see how he assures them or what they do to negotiate the fourth. All he said was that he'd never dealt with the intense emotions with the others like what he was feeling for this fourth. He did not say this in front of his wives, but it was obvious enough that even the older daughters said something about it. I was also pleased to see another difference between them and the norm for the very large Mormon community 5 miles from where I live. It was one of the older sons who made breakfast almost every morning - albeit only for his full siblings.

They had mini interviews with them and they spoke of pain and uncertainty - how this was addressed or attended to was not shared. They just went on with the process. It was also touched on that none of the three were wanting a fourth being added but that the husband's actions leading up to the decision clued them in that something was going on. He did not discuss it much prior to courting this woman. I think maybe the first wife was more aware of it than the other two. There seemed to be a chain of command thing going on where he confides mostly with the first wife and the others hear what is going on through her.

I did like how the wives looked for the positives of this arrangement, but one disturbed me. I couldn't put my finger on it till this morning. The fear that something would happen to one of them (death) and that they were blessed that there would be other wives to care for the children. It was such a point of anxiety for one she began to tear up. All I could wonder is "well if I die, my husband is there to care for our kid. Why is this not a consideration in this family?" I get that for them, there is a whole pack of kids involved, but the one who vocalized this the most only had one child. It made me wonder why her husband was not considered a candidate for this with her 14 year old daughter?

Three incomes in this house with a potential that the fourth wife will bring another; and this is not all that unusual in LDS Mormonism. Perhaps it is more unusual in Fundamental Mormonism? I don't know well enough to guess at what is common in that arena. But the one with the least amount of education had been home schooling the kids until five years ago. And now that they are in an external school, it is one that promotes Fundamental Mormonism and polygamy.

This is what I mean when I ask is a choice in such a saturation of ideals really qualified to be truly a free choice when the options you are presented with all point you in one direction?
I was given hope by the one daughter who said she would not choose this for herself. It isn't that I find the choices made in this show to be WRONG, just that I was glad to see indication of acceptance for different views on some level.
 
So I watched 3 episodes as that was what was available in the OnDemand listing.

All three of the women had conditioning prior to these marriages by being raised in polygamist families and following a religion that promotes polygamy.

So what is known about Mormonism?

That a woman is brought to salvation through marriage and he earns her passage to heaven. There is more to it than that. Heaven is your own planet to populate.

While I don't disagree with what you have said or the conclusion implied.

The same could in fact be said for monogamy. :)...essentially the same type of religious brainwashing has been in affect for far longer on almost everyone who has been brought up with monogamy to be the end goal. Of course, is it brainwashing when "everyone" embraces the religious norm? ;)

Am I justifying the polygamy or trying to say this is a good situation to be advertising and which in the end will represent polyamory...no its not really. Just looking at it from another POV, which the general public would inherently disagree with me on anyways.

This is always brought up - but how do you give someone the ability to make truly unbiased decisions in their choices for religion, relationships etc. I have my opinions but its obviously not the place of this thread.

Great breakdown Vinc.

_______________________________

My personal take, its cool to see on tv, but I think a polygamist view based in a situation as described by vinc is a very poor way to represent polyamory. In the end anything who is poly will be compared to that. I have done this fight with friends and family now. They just cannot seperate the two, which I imagine is fairly common in the mainstream.
 
Just to be clear, "LDS Mormonism" is mainstream mormonism where polygamy is completely unacceptable. It's one man and one woman made very clear by Boyd K. Packer's rant against homosexuality @ the recent general conference. Fundamentalist Mormonism or the FLDS church is the more radical offshoot where polygamy is accepted and encouraged and in some cases forced.

Oh and one of the wives was not raised in a polygamist family.
 
I think we're starting to debate about religion more than polygamy here.
Which I guess makes sense... But I think it's a different debate.
I'm not religious, and religious can make me uneasy and uncomfortable on many levels. But I would say, as far as religious polygamy goes, they're doing it the way it should be done: with love and respect.
So that's definitely a good representation of polygamy for the general public, to cause them to think about it a bit more.

However, I would also love a show focusing on a polyamorous family, without the religious context, and with a situation that would seem more "balanced" and "fair". Or reversed, as in, a woman with several men. I get annoyed that people seem to think of polygyny as the only form of polygamy, and I wish there was more awareness or the broad range and variety of intimate network possibilities.
 
Small steps, Tonberry. I'm old enough to remember when homosexuality was listed as a sexual perversion by the psychiatrists. Getting people to accept a different kind of relationship from the ones they commonly encounter (and most probably were raised in) is a slow process.
 
the difference being...

homosexuality is not a sexual perversion

polygamy can easily be tied to religious groups and in turn so can polyamory. Very different fight.

I am trying to look at it from the outside in, or trying to, and you have a tough sell to separate religious based polygamy from non-religious based polygamy. Not discussing the religious implications of that, in regards to such a show like this, is like burying our heads in the sand :)
 
There is a short film (it's about 10 minutes long) called Sister Wife that offers a completely different look at Mormon polygamy. It focuses on one woman who shares her husband with her biological sister. She talks about how horribly painful the jealousy can be, but says that ultimately being able to share her husband makes her feel like a goddess. I cried and cried while watching it. I certainly don't have much in common with Mormons but the emotional issues are exactly the same as what I'm going through now (trying to learn to share my husband). The woman is so strong and beautiful and I came away from it inspired. If anyone wants to see it, it's included in issue 9 of the short film collection Wholphin, which is available on Netflix.
 
Back
Top