polygamy is not polyfidelity

Ravenscroft

Banned
Last year, someone on Wikipedia edited the Polyamory article to include a statement (under Cultural diversity :rolleyes:) that began
... polygamy advocacy groups and activists and egalitarian polyamory advocacy groups and activists can and do work together cooperatively. In addition, the two sub-communities have many common issues (poly parenting, dealing with jealousy, legal and social discrimination, etc.), the discussion and resolution of which are of equal interest to both sub-communities, regardless of any cultural differences that may exist. Moreover, there is considerable cultural diversity within both sub-communities.
The piece went on to claim that since both polygamy & polyamory were "egalitarian" -- well, at least insofar as "all women are equals" -- they were pretty much the same thing.

I got the impression that this was propaganda, put up by one of those (unnamed) "polygamy advocacy groups and activists." When that stuff went away, I certainly didn't miss it.
________________

A couple of years ago, someone showed up here, claiming to be casting for a TV program: "A major Cable Production Company is currently seeking Polygamist couples seeking a new wife/wives."

Someone asked why this was met with a fair bit of virtual eye-rolling, since
polygamy is simply a lopsided form of polyamory ... it is in fact polyamory
& we were being a bunch of judgmental prejudiced meanies for not welcoming the equation. This got a few responses, & I'll stand by mine, which follows:
________________

Personally, I'm waaay tired of people defending polygamy with sweeping airheaded statements about peace/love/understanding & moral high grounds & "it's all pretty much the same thing." Well, :p

For the advancement of such (nothing personal) nimrods, I hear there's this Interwebs thing where you can look at some sorta searching engine or like that, & get all kinds of information, much of it an accurate representation of general consensus reality. But here's a brief summary.

It's not the gender proportions that bug us -- there's plenty of FMF triads & vees about.

It's not the crypto-slavery attitude that bugs us -- quite a few of us have friends who are to some degree happy in their master/slave kinkiness. Maybe there's women of sound mind who simply enjoy that sense of security that most of us would quickly find stifling & outright maddening... but my kinks aren't your kinks & c'est la vie.

What bugs ME is that institutional polygamy is creepy mind-control cultism, like Monogamism gone cancerous. Women are indoctrinated from birth into needing this sort of structure. Deprogramming them would be like taking a 19th-century Paiute tribesman & dropping him in the middle of today's Times Square.

And so we make it entertainment.

:confused:

And shows are produced that show some of the hassles but generally whitewash the fundamental assumptions -- that would be Big Love.

And people assume that's what polyamory is all about. And they show up here demanding the secrets of how to get THEIR assorted HBB sister-wives.

IMNSHO, anyone who wants to say ANYTHING nice about polygamy ought FIRST to read up a little on the FLDS.

I've yet to meet an apologist who independently realised that, with females a tightly controlled commodity within that community, most boys are surplusage, useful for the work you can get out of them, but needing to be dumped before they can be competition with Dad's church buddies. Imagine being a (for lack of a better term) mother who's so brainwashed that she will readily exile her own son. They even have a word for it --
"Lost boys" is a term used for young men who have been excommunicated or pressured to leave polygamous Mormon fundamentalism groups... by adult men to reduce competition for wives within such sects, usually when they are between the ages of 13 and 21.

It has been reported by former members that the FLDS Church has excommunicated more than 400 teenage boys for offenses such as dating or listening to rock music.

Some former members claim that the real reason for these excommunications is that there are not enough women for each male to receive three or more wives. Six men, aged 18 to 22, filed a conspiracy lawsuit against Jeffs and Sam Barlow, a former Mohave County deputy sheriff and close associate of Jeffs, for the "systematic excommunication" of young men to reduce competition for wives.

While some boys leave by their own choice, many are ostensibly banished for conduct such as watching a movie, watching television, playing football, or talking to a girl. Some boys are told not to return unless they can return with a wife. One estimate is that between 400 and 1,000 boys and young men have been pressured to leave for such reasons.

Boys in these sects are commonly raised not to trust the outside world, and may be taught that leaving their communities is a sin worse than murder. These boys are usually left with little education or skills applicable to life outside of their community of birth, and must learn to live in a society about which they know little, while dealing with the consequences of being shunned by their families, and believing they are beyond spiritual redemption. The families of banished boys are told that the boys are now dead to them.

Warren Jeffs has repeatedly alluded to the 19th-century teaching of "blood atonement" in church sermons. Under the doctrine, certain serious sins, such as murder, can only be atoned for by the sinner's death. There was concern that one of the sins requiring blood atonement is apostasy.
Hint: "lost boys" are apostate.
Apostasy is the formal disaffiliation from, or abandonment or renunciation of a religion by a person.
They are sinners left to die -- rather literally.

So, no, I will not roll over & "play nice" with defenders of polygamy.
 
For the advancement of such (nothing personal) nimrods,

So, no, I will not roll over & "play nice" with defenders of polygamy.

You complain about mixed terms and getting things strait, yet use nimrod as an insult.

very ironic :)

(Nimrod is a biblical charactor that was a great hunter, this was used as an ironic insult by bugs bunny; the audience was not smart enough to get the comparison and thus we have this miss-used insult today).

So, see how easily confusion over 1 word can cause HUGE emotional responses?

I think it's always good to play nice until you are absolutely sure of the intent (which is a very hard thing to be sure of with out great communication, which most people don't have).


we could branch into how this is the education systems fault and that we are not taught the Trivium and Quadrivium... but that's a bit off topic
;)
 
This is where consent falls into a gray area, and the notion of "informed consent" becomes important. I would argue that "brainwashed consent" is not really consent, as it is not really informed.
 
I know that my perspective is a definite minority on this issue, but here it is. When people think of “polygamy” they go to Mormonism, cults, Warren Jeffs, Lost Boys, etc… It is popular to think of it that way. But believe it or not, there are women such as myself who were not raised around plural marriage but who have chosen it.

I go with the dictionary definition: “the philosophy or state of being in love or romantically involved with more than one person at the same time.” Thus, polygamy or plural marriage is a subset of polyamory, like it or not. We can debate the health and practice of it all day long, but I think the definition of polyamory includes it. Plural marriage is my flavor, and I like the security of it. Not everybody wants or needs more than one male partner around….having a home with lots of female energy is rather pleasant, I think. If others prefer something different, my style shouldn’t affect them and theirs doesn’t affect me.

Institutionalizing polygamy/plural marriage or really any form of relationship tends to go against free will. In my faith, plural marriage is accepted and in some cases is encouraged as a solution to social problems…but it is not institutionalized. In fact, religious leaders (bishops) are limited to one wife only. Having more than four partners is pretty uncommon…no Brigham Young here, thanks.

Of course, if you have females as a “tightly controlled commodity” you will end up with surplus sons. So what’s the fix? You reduce the control. In my family, only one member (Reina) was originally from the faith. My husband joined because of her, and brought Swift and I along later on. In other families, the sons often get one wife from the community, but find a second or third wife outside and bring her in. Plural marriage is encouraged for making new converts. Since the community of faith is likely to stay small, this draws resources from society at large. We also observe religious freedom….we may be somewhat separated from the rest of society, but we’re not Amish nor are we a dangerous cult. If someone doesn’t want to keep the faith, they aren’t shunned.

If you really want to go down the road with the idea of surplus boys, there’s another solution….preferentially have daughters! Since it is medically possible to select the sex of your child, it is always an option. My faith tends to prefer having children naturally and in abundance, but there are a couple of families I know that have had daughters out of preference, with only one or two sons. Again, female energy in the home is pleasant. Personally, I wish that the human species had less of a 50/50 gender split and more of a 3 to 1 female to male ratio. The world would be a softer and more friendly place, I think.

To sum it up, I think that relationship styles are just like tools – put to good or bad ends by the people who use them. It is about making responsible choices…I wouldn’t want my choice to live in a plural relationship to be taken away for the sake of some strange cult people out west who chose poorly.
 
So, see how easily confusion over 1 word can cause HUGE emotional responses?

Interesting how word usages change over time. Calling one of the good old boys that I grew up with "gay" to describe his lighthearted and carefree ways would most likely result in a bare knuckle brawl - especially on the back forty.

And there's the recently discussed term "cuckold" - archaically referring to a man whose wife had humiliated him by being unfaithful - and now almost always relating to a femdom fetish.

Then there's the word "bad" - which now sometimes means "good" - go figure....

And now the great hunter Nimrod is reduced to a dimwit - courtesy of my personal favorite cartoon character, the esteemed Bugs Bunny (I once heard Bugs described as very "Zen", not altogether accurately, of course) - the point being that regardless of the original etymology, current usage differs (as do many words).

Just a passing thought... Hope everyone has a great weekend! Al
 
we could branch into how this is the education systems fault and that we are not taught the Trivium and Quadrivium... ;)
Or you could look into the definition of needless nit-picking.

:rolleyes:

Here; I'll help you out, because this Interwebs thing is clearly a bit beyond your abilities --
Hypercriticism (pathology)
Nitpickers engage in minute, trivial, and unjustified faultfinding to excess.
(Please feel free to exempt yourself from anything uncomfortable. :D)
 
Or you could look into the definition of needless nit-picking.

:rolleyes:

Here; I'll help you out, because this Interwebs thing is clearly a bit beyond your abilities --
Hypercriticism (pathology)

(Please feel free to exempt yourself from anything uncomfortable. :D)

could that not apply to this entire thread?

I'm sorry you found my response aggressive and felt like you had to stab back; that wasn't my intent. It was more like "thinking out loud" except... via text... haha I visit a few too many forums I suppose.
 
So, in other words, spawn bargaining tokens for the benefit of the real people -- a.k.a. men.

Correct?

I would think that in a system where there are more women than men, the men would be the bargaining tokens... But then, men might find the idea of a female-majority system a bit threatening. Your statement also discounts the increasing number of women who are choosing same-sex relationships.

To go even further, a 50/50 male to female ratio in our species is not only biologically unnecessary, but actually undesirable. We could make do quite well with less than a quarter of the men we have on the earth...
 
I would think that in a system where there are more women than men, the men would be the bargaining tokens... But then, men might find the idea of a female-majority system a bit threatening. Your statement also discounts the increasing number of women who are choosing same-sex relationships.

To go even further, a 50/50 male to female ratio in our species is not only biologically unnecessary, but actually undesirable. We could make do quite well with less than a quarter of the men we have on the earth...

You are not understanding the context here. They are talking about a system where only men can have multiple partners and homosexual relations are not allowed. Men compete for the few females in the group. The men don't fear having too many women in the group because the men have all the power.
 
I'd have to say some, but not all, polygamy is poly.

I am reminded of a conversation Cat and I had with a co-worker once. He was a conservative and we were liberals so we would have some interesting debates. The subject of marriage came up and he stated that men should be allowed to have as many wives as they wanted. Cat said yes, and women should be able to have as many husbands (polyandry) as they want. He disagreed vehemently, though the only explanation he could give was "it just wouldn't be right". Obviously not the polyamorous way of thinking.
 
You are not understanding the context here. They are talking about a system where only men can have multiple partners and homosexual relations are not allowed. Men compete for the few females in the group. The men don't fear having too many women in the group because the men have all the power.

I doubt that such a system is possible today. Maybe in an isolated place somewhere, but not in a modern society. Even in the FLDS, women have had same-sex relations. Women's sex drive for each other can be pretty strong....
 
FLDS (okay, sometimes Fuldies) are looking into recruitment of women due to problem with multi-generational in-breeding --
The Colorado City/Hildale area has the world's highest incidence of fumarase deficiency, an extremely rare genetic condition.

Geneticists attribute this to the prevalence of cousin marriage between descendants of two of the town's founders, Joseph Smith Jessop and John Yeates Barlow.

It causes encephalopathy, severe intellectual disability, unusual facial features, brain malformation, and epileptic seizures.
Hey, anyone's free to join...

...but (personally) I would rather that "poly-oriented" women had some idea what they are being recruited into.
 
FWIW, this came up because I got into an argument with a Trumpanista. One of The Donald's promises is that he would defend religious rights -- which he obviously means "Christian" rights above other beliefs (or lack thereof) because THEY (squealing sheep that they often are) helped to put him into office & -- for all his many faults -- Trump WILL eventually respond.

Nobody unimpaired expects him to support overall freedoms, which might include Ickies like Buddhist or Atheist or Wiccan or Other.

But "Mormon" has lots of flavors. Of those, FLDS -- & similar tight-border polygamous cults, with barbed wire & sandbags -- probably belong.

I fully expect that "polyamory" will be a route for mainstreaming cultist male-centric polygamy. They will allow their women :)rolleyes:) to venture forth into polyamory-friendly communities (like, say, Loving More) in hopes of expanding their gene pool. If you're okay with OPP Gone Wild...
________________

The concern is recent. Four days :)eek:) ago --
Ex-polygamist details his flight from half-brother Warren Jeffs and the FLDS
https://www.sltrib.com/religion/201...flds-to-his-new-home-in-mainstream-mormonism/
The men who got plural wives were basically the ones that had a lot of money.

The leaders use plural marriage as a way to control you. They came to me and said they had a girl for me to marry, and if I refused, I would lose everything. If you have a current wife and children and refuse a plural wife, you lose your first wife and children to the community.

She was the daughter of one of my half-sisters, so a half-niece. I questioned that very deeply at the time, and I asked my father if he was sure. He said yes, that’s correct, the Lord revealed that this is what you’re supposed to do.

I started pushing back in early 2011 after I discovered that he had married an 11-year-old girl. The way I found out was that I was walking through a truck stop and saw a newspaper picture of Warren hugging and kissing this little girl.

Courting became a very interesting thing for me, because it’s forbidden in the FLDS — the prophet tells you who you’re going to marry.

I’m not the only one. There were thousands of men who lived in that church and didn’t want to be there, but stayed out of fear.
 
Last edited:
homosexual relations are not allowed.
Disagree. To my (intuitive) understanding, F/F sex is not only allowed but encouraged.

After all, if one's wife (of many) could use sex/emotion to ensnare another woman (perhaps more), she (they?) can eventually be worn down & convinced to become another wife.

Naturally, their interaction is nothing more than childish dalliance, nothing so important as being held down & gang-raped & impregnated by ordained "seed bearers" sent from the Elders who have tea with God every elevenses. :rolleyes:
 
Oh, yeh; about this --
They will allow their women to venture forth into polyamory-friendly communities in hopes of expanding their gene pool.
The concept of flirty fishing may be unfamiliar to some:
...a form of evangelistic religious prostitution practiced by female members of the Children of God ... from around 1974 to 1987. ...hundreds of thousands of men were "fished" before the practice was discontinued.

Women who objected to being what the cult itself bluntly described as "God's whores" or "hookers for Jesus" were admonished not to "let self and pride enter in", and reminded that their body did not really belong to them as according to 1 Corinthians 6:19–20 it had been "bought" (by Jesus through his crucifixion) "with a price".
Kerista went a similar route of using women as recruitment bait --
There was also a "seduction squad": attractive girls who recruited new members at parties. Men were invited to sleep with them, but only if they first joined the commune, which meant having a vasectomy.
 
The concept of flirty fishing may be unfamiliar to some:

Quote:
...a form of evangelistic religious prostitution practiced by female members of the Children of God ... from around 1974 to 1987. ...hundreds of thousands of men were "fished" before the practice was discontinued

True. And that's not all the Children of God/The Family were guilty of according to many who got out of the sect, and from the "church"-distributed literature I've seen.

They encouraged young children to watch adults have sex, and to engage in sex play with each other ("grooming"), though any supposed "spiritual" purpose for these practices is beyond me.
 
From Wikipedia: Brainwashing --> Human trafficking

Some of the techniques used by traffickers include feigning love and concern for the victims' well-being to gain trust before beginning to track, manipulate and control the entire life of the victim, including environment, relationships, access to information and daily activities, promises of lucrative employment or corrupt marriage proposals, debt bondage, kidnapping, induced drug dependency and fear tactics such as threats about law enforcement, deportation, and harm to friends or family members. Physical captivity, shame, Stockholm Syndrome, traumatic bonding and fear of arrest can contribute to victims’ inability to seek assistance.
When it reaches a point where there's violence or suicide, blame will be placed on one or more women. A woman forced to leave is not only cut off forever from the women she bonded with, possibly for many years. She will be booted out beyond the barricades, never again allowed to see or even contact any of her family. She has no cash, possibly no marketable skills, & is fearful (possibly clinically paranoid) of interaction with "outsiders." If she has given birth, she will never see her kids again.

All that, particularly the last, motivates women to keep their "little problems" out of sight of the men. One expulsion serves to put many remaining women in their places.

There is no "walk away." That would require strolling casually past armed sentries. Even breaking away on an excursion is unlikely, first because of the minute-by-minute relationships that must be utterly abandoned, but because "home" has law-enforcement officers & certified doctors who will be happy to issue a warrant for an escapee &/or pronounce them as being "under care" & needing safe return to proper care surrounded by friends & family.

There's no mention of what's going to happen to boy babies. The strange implication is that all births are female. Or maybe the excess males are culled at or before birth.
 
This supposed group is big enough to have its own community infrastructure (doctors, law enforcement, stores), and yet small enough that we have never heard of it.
Not surprising. There's many things that haven't attracted our gnat-like attention span ;) that are nevertheless factual.

There's an estimated 20,000-60,000 Mormon fundamentalists, dotted across the Western U.S. & Canada & northern Mexico. (They aren't Census-friendly.)

There are multiple sects, some forming a single community. I discuss FLDS because its repeated run ins with the law have made it well-documented; as with Lutheran sects, it's an easy dodge to say "we're not them!!" while avoiding "...but we're pretty much the same thing."

Some more prominent examples:
  • FLDS (6,000-8,000)
  • Apostolic United Brethren (5,000-9,000)
  • Church of Jesus Christ (Original Doctrine) Inc. (~700)
  • Latter Day Church of Christ, a.k.a. "the Kingston clan" (~1,200) "This co-operative runs several businesses including pawnshops and restaurant supply stores."
  • The Righteous Branch of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (100-200)
  • The True and Living Church of Jesus Christ of Saints of the Last Days (300-500)
  • The Work of Jesus Christ (~1,500)
  • The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Kingdom of God (~200)
  • misc. independent groups that don't follow a specific leader or prophet (<15,000)
Consider Eldorado, TX: not well-known, population ~2,000. Six miles out is the Yearning for Zion Ranch, the apparent headquarters of the FLDS. Over 400 children were temporarily removed from the compound in April 2008 by Texas Child Protective Services. Here's the quaint little church of this sleepy village --
800px-FLDS_Eldorado_hi.jpg


Then, you can easily look up Bountiful, BC, entirely founded by FLDS (1946), which split. "Most of the residents are descended from only half a dozen men." (There's that pesky in-breeding again.)

There's mainline Mormons in Minot (ND), but the city is also an urban center for FLDS.

The town of Pringle (SD) has only like 150 residents. It's surrounded by eight-foot wood fences, set further up on earth berms, with a guard tower at the gate. The entire "downtown" appears to be built over a tunnel network. They applied for a third water permit, which would give them access to enough water for about 10,000 residents. Neighbors are concerned this could someday turn into a Waco-like "end of days" siege.

Other FLDS towns include Hildale (UT); Colorado City (AZ); Westcliffe (CO); Mancos (CO); Creston (BC); Boise City (OK); Benjamín Hill (Sonora); & a newer one outside Ensenada (Baja California).

"But how could they possibly get enough money??" :eek: Well, aside from studiously keeping their cashflow within the community for almost a century, they do it like the old commercial said: they earn it. For instance,
Members of the FLDS Church have owned machine shops that have sold airplane components to the United States government, and from 1998 to 2007, the receipts of these components totaled more than $1.7 million.
Not vast wealth but, as with compound interest, also dealing primarily with other fundamentalist communities & businesses keeps the money from "leaking away."
 
Last edited:
Back
Top