Be Back Soon

There is so much news to discuss, but I may not have the time for a couple of days.

A Bigot Speaks Against the Freedom to Marry

Rosie DiManno draws from the Canadian poly trial to make it clear that she doesn't want adults to have the freedom to marry and she doesn't think much of the FLDS religion, either. She also takes swipes at the polyamorous in general and  Muslims. I only quote some of the hate below.

Teenage girls transported over the border for the purpose of sex and breeding: That’s human trafficking.

Underage girls, below the age of consent, conscripted into conjugal relationships: That’s sexual assault.

Lifelong marriage is a little different than human trafficking for prostitution, wouldn't you say?

Adolescent boys driven from their homes by men middle-aged and older — fathers, church and community leaders — as perceived rivals in the competition for nubile mates: That’s societal engineering and a different kind of abuse.

I know of adolescent boys who have been "driven" from home because they wanted personal freedom, rather than familial or peer pressure to adhere to certain rules and expectations. In monogamous homes. Or because their "monogamous" parents divorced each other and married new spouses.

Sec. 293 of the Criminal Code is as clear as arch legalese will allow, forbidding conjugal union with more than one partner at the same time, “whether or not it is by law recognized as a binding form of marriage."

That law should be overturned in the interest of marriage equality.

But polygamous marriage within the rubric of religion — the coercion and sexual exploitation of girls, whether agreeable to those females or nor, and the trafficking required to sustain a polygamous community — is rightly a crime.

Prosecute child abuse. Don't prosecute people for consenting to marriage.

The law doesn’t force monogamy on married people. And the law does not render illegal the cohabitation of however many people choose to live as a family nor dictate their sleeping arrangements.

It can also be said that ten years ago, the law didn't force heterosexuality on anyone, but same-sex marriage was banned. It is time to increase the freedom to marry again and move towards full marriage equality.

Whether brainwashed or culturally kneaded to it, the obedient daughters of one daddy and multiple moms, their embracing of polygamy can’t possibly be used to justify a legal accommodation for plural marriages.

No, I guess nothing can match her bigotry, right?

This isn’t just about the individuals directly involved. It’s about all of us because we, too, have an ethical stake in acceptance or rejection of polygamy.

That's what the bigots said about interracial marriage and same-sex marriage, too.

The FLDS is not a benign religious sect, like the gentle Amish.

She makes it clear throughout this essay that she dislikes the FLDS and considers the religion invalid, as though they shouldn't even have the freedom of religion. I'm not FLDS or any kind of "LDS," but I respect the freedom of religion, and I stand for the rights of all adults to love, sex, and marriage. Prosecute domestic violence, kidnapping, rape, and molestation, but do not deny marriage equality.

A Feminist Supports the Freedom to Polygamous Marriage

Over at Finding My Feminism, Not Guilty wrote in regards to the Canadian poly trial and the community of Bountiful…

As I have stated before, I am wholly supportive of adult women making the decision to enter into a polygamous marriage. I believe that making polygamy illegal is simply the government seeking to make decisions for women that men believe women are incapable of making for themselves. There is a case in the British Columbia courts involving the polygamous communities in Bountiful, BC. The case is challenging Canada's polygamy laws as unconstitutional on the basis that they are a Charter violation of religious freedom. While I personally don't enjoy supporting ridiculous religious beliefs, the reality is that a polygamous relationship affects nobody else and it thus none of our damn business.

Very well said. She goes on to write that she is against teenage women marrying much older men, and gives a suggestion for revisions in the law.

She links to an earlier message she wrote that references “Sister Wives.”

My gut reaction to polygamy is that it is wrong and I am glad it is illegal. I also wish it were enforced more strictly. Unfortunately, I never let myself just go off my gut reaction; I always think more deeply about issues.

That’s a good thing. My gut reaction when seeing open-heart surgery is “gross!” but it doesn’t mean it should be illegal. It saves lives.

My reasons for disagreeing with polygamy include the manifestation of the patriarchy since it is always men with multiple wives and never, as far as I know, women with multiple husbands; oppression of women; and the effect on the children.

That isn’t true, of course. There are polyandrous families. I link to some of them on this very blog.

She mulls over how things are for the children in polygynous familes….

Except when you delve a little deeper, this is no different from children raised by same-sex couples. There is no evidence kids are harmed by having same-sex parents and any harm that does befall them is due to prejudices in society. If this is the same with children of polygamous families, I really don't have a leg to stand on. Unless there is clear evidence that these children are somehow damaged by being children of a polygamous family, I don’t feel comfortable declaring polygamy wrong.

The reason my gut reaction is that polygamy is wrong is because I don’t understand it and to an extent, the idea repulses me. But I don’t get to judge the lifestyle of other people just because I disagree with it; that isn’t my right. I despise people who judge LGBT, so I cannot in good conscience, without evidence of harm, judge polygamous families.

Yay for solidarity.

Dark Daughta on Polyamory

Dark Daughta writes that “It's actually quite hilarious being a polyamorist with radical feminist politics...” She has an introduction to an extensive essay espousing her theory.

I like sex and sleep with men. I've got two male partners. I engage with them on the daily about the issues they've brought to this relationship to mix with mine. I ask them questions about their privilege as men and about the space this affords them to behave in particular ways and still be constructed as, seen as absolutely perfect poly men.

She makes it clear that…

I'm not here to be accessed no strings attached by roving, wandering, lost, potentially addicted men who do not know how to see wimmin as anything but passageways to lost self esteem, lost personal power, lost sense of feeling attractive.

She is not lacking opinion or passion in her words. Be warned that she does not shy away from using the “f---“ word, if that bothers you.

From the Source

Polygamy in the Desert is a blog from “a polygamous Muslim family who tries to live by Qur'an and Sunnah. This blog tells about our family but also gives the readers an insight into Saudi culture and lifestyle.”

Indiana Man Gets Prison Time For Incest

Anthoney Sims, 23, or Terre Haute, had been found guilty of rape and incest charges. If I recall correctly from previous coverage, one of his parents caught Sims with his sister.

During his sentencing hearing, Sims' father testified for the defense asking for lenience in the sentencing because it's become a family tragedy. He also stated he's "not sure rape occurred."

Is the father in denial? Is his son a monster? Or do we have a situation here in which shock of the parent resulted in a call to the police, and once the police were involved the sister had the option of either admitting to what is still a serious crime (consensual incest) or covering her own rear by telling the police it wasn’t consensual (= rape)? It is easy to imagine someone being caught by a disapproving parent having sex with a sibling and affirming the parent's assumption that it must have been a sexual assault. It is easy to imagine someone would be reluctant to tell a police officer, a judge, or a jury that they were willingly engaging in a felony by having consensual sex with a sibling, especially given the social bigotry towards people who do such things, in addition to the law against it. Maybe this really was a rape, but given the situation, there is an opening for a false conviction.

This article clarifies the sentencing…

A Terre Haute man convicted by a jury of rape received a 16-year prison sentence Wednesday in Vigo Superior Court 6.

Anthony Sims, 23, also received a five-year sentence for the Dec. 1 incest conviction, but that sentence will be served at the same time as the rape sentence.

But there’s more…

Judge Michael Lewis also recommended that Sims receive counseling for anger management and sex crimes during his prison stay, and ordered Sims to register as a sex offender.

He should have to register if he did raped her. The incest charge is superfluous, and someone who has consensual sex with another adult is not a threat to anyone.

In announcing the sentence, Lewis noted that Sims has had numerous run-ins with the law both as an adult and a juvenile.

Sounds like a troubled guy. It also sounds like the police and district attorney would be more apts to press for charges even if this wasn’t really a rape.

During the trial, the jury heard a taped interview with police in which Sims admitted that he had sex with a female relative in April 2009, and that he knew it was incest. But Sims said he did not rape her, and claimed that the sex was consensual.

The victim submitted a written statement to the court on Wednesday requesting leniency for Sims. But she also noted that she fears retaliation from family members if Sims were to receive a long prison sentence.

Is she like one of those abused wives who stick up for their batterers? The verdict on the rape charge would indicate that.

Defense attorney Christopher Shema called the case “one of the most sad” cases he has ever dealt with.

Shema had argued that the convictions of rape and incest were a double jeopardy issue for Sims, but Judge Lewis ruled against that.

Since both charges are felony sex crimes, Sims must serve 85 percent of the prison sentence. However, he will receive credit for the 654 days he has spent in the Vigo County jail on the charges.

Incest is a felony sex crime, even when everyone consents and enjoys it. How messed up is that? If not technically double jeopardy, the incest charge is indeed superfluous. The act is the very same thing for which he was convicted of rape.

Whatever the truth is in this case, a rapist should get serious prison time for the crime of rape. Consensual incest, or consanguineous sex, should not be illegal. Indiana needs to change its laws.

More Testimony in Canadian Poly Trial

One of the wives from Bountiful testifying in the Canadian poly trial told the court that she has suffered bias and prejudice because of the ban on polygamous marriage.

The mother of nine told B.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Bauman that many people in mainstream society treat polygamists with bias and prejudice.

“That affects my everyday life. We’ve had to pay so much money to try and stay out of jail. It’s hard to come up with the money that we need,” she said.

People should not be persecuted because of their marriage. Their government should recognize their marriages and honor their choices.

She said she married at the age of 16 at her parents’ suggestion, in order to have someone help support her while she attended college.

Contrary to evidence that has been heard at trial that women have no choice in such arranged marriages, the witness said she chose to marry her husband.

“I felt good about him and I married him.”

These women are attending college. They aren’t being hidden away in a prison. They are choosing these marriages. Let them have that choice.

Rights Activist Murdered

A gay rights activist has been murdered in Uganda. He had been targeted by a newspaper; something I wrote about months ago.

David Kato, 43, was an activist with Sexual Minorities Uganda who was pictured and named by the anti-gay tabloid Rolling Stone -- no relation to the US magazine of the same name -- in a story that called on readers to "hang" gay rights advocates.

"This happened yesterday (Wednesday) at about 13:00," said lawyer John Francis Onyango, referring to Kato's killing.

Onyango said initial reports indicate a man entered Kato's home and struck him on the head before fleeing and that police were focusing on two potential suspects.

Human Rights Watch said in a statement that Kato died on his way to a local hospital.

As we struggle to get the freedom to same-sex marriage in more places, we’re still dealing with this sort of thing. How sad.

After being identified in the October 2010 tabloid article, which accused gay rights leaders of "recruiting" Uganda's youth into homosexuality, Kato and two others successfully sued the paper for damages and secured a high court injunction blocking all media from outing gays.

Kato was also a vocal critic of Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill, which, if enacted, would massively expand the list of prosecutable offences related to being gay and usher in the death sentence for acts of "aggravated homosexuality."

Currently, the country's penal code, like that of many African countries bans "carnal knowledge of any person against the order of nature." An attempt to commit a homosexual act can be punishable by seven years in jail. A conviction for actually committing such an act can bring a life sentence.

Uganda needs serious reform.

Solidarity From Multisexual Pride

Multisexual Pride asked “Should Polyamory be included in the queer community?”

I think it should. I mean it’s different and is actually looked down upon by a lot of people. Even our own community just pushes polyamory away like it’s nothing.

Yes, there are people who don’t exhibit solidarity. But thanks to all who do! Polyamory is attacked by the hetero-monogamist sex police in much the same way as the rest of the queer community. If one truly believes consenting adults should be able to love each other, then polyamory must be included.

I was pointed to Multisexual Pride by The Daily Twitch.

A Coming Out Account

Young single mother Kiwi comes out as lebian and polyamorous after earlier coming out as bisexual.

So I started speaking to a friend of mine who is married with an 8 month old son.To cut to the chase, her marriage is an open marriage on her part, since she is bisexual.

Perhaps “and” would have been better than “since,” beause there are bisexuals who are monogamous and married heterosexuals, gays, and lesbians who are polyamorous or engage in some other form of nonmonogamy. But I’m sure Kiwi didn’t mean that bisexuality always necessitates an open marriage.

Her husband has no problem with her dating (yes, having an actual emotional/sexual relationship) a girl. If anything, he supports it! And no strings involved, either. So after a while of her and I pondering the subject and opportunities, We decided to give it a go. This type of relationship is referred to as Polyamory…In a nutshell, she is a married woman with a girlfriend at the same time. No secrets in either relationship.

Kiwi can see the relationship lasting. Shouldn’t they be able to make it official, if that is what they want?

Then came coming out..and telling a select few family members about my relationship. Coming out went well. No negative comments (Yes, I did it through facebook. It was a quick, easy way to tell a lot of people at once) and a few people weren't surprised in the least.

Telling my family about my girlfriend didn't go nearly as well.

You can go read what she wrote about that.

Best wishes to Kiwi on her life as an out polyamorous lesbian.

Lasting Polyamory

Scarlet asked for opinions on polyamory. She got a good answer from Chances6...

I've been in a committed, triad polyamorous relationship for 17 years now. It's not at all that I have two "wives." It's more correct to say my wife has a husband and a wife.

It's certainly not for everyone (but then, neither is a monogamous relationship!), but we've all found it to be really wonderful and fulfilling and healthy and comforting.

17 years. That's longer than so many monogamous marriages these days. Shouldn't these people have the freedom to marry?

Uncle and Niece May Face Charges

An angry wife asked, “Can I press charges on my husband and his niece for incest in California?”

I caught my husband, 41 and his niece, 27 having an on going affair for quite some time. There are several witnesses to such disgusting act. The niece is my husband's brother's daughther. Can I press charges on them, since I read that incest is illegal in California and its a felony?

California does not criminalize adultery, but since California still criminalizes consensual sex between close relatives, it is left up to the local police and District Attorney. If this woman filed a police report, it could happen. Someone could be sent to jail for consensual sex. Hopefully, the authorities would do the reasonable thing and instead simply refer her to a divorce attorney, rather than wasting the criminal justice system's resources on consensual sex.

While I’m against cheating, I don’t think it should be a criminal matter and I don’t think any sex between consenting adults should be illegal. But certainly the law, as it is now, could come into play.

California also has no-fault divorce and community property. As such, if this woman’s husband earns more than she does, he would likely have to pay her if she divorced him, and see certainly should if she is so upset that she wants him criminally prosecuted.

She got some responses to her question, with some people mistakenly believing there was no law broken. Others clarified.

AFFA…

I wish to inform you that under California Code 285 your spouse may be held guilty of incest. In this regard you may file a complaint with law enforcement agencies. You will require evidence to be provided to police so that they may take necessary legal action.

Sunlover…

FC 2200 defines the relationships which are prohibited to marry and this, in turn, defines what would be considered incest.

2200. Marriages between parents and children, ancestors and descendants of every degree, and between brothers and sisters of the half as well as the whole blood, and between uncles and nieces or aunts and nephews, are incestuous, and void from the beginning, whether the relationship is legitimate or illegitimate.

As such, an uncle cannot marry his niece in CA and that such a sexual relationship (involving ONLY intercourse - not other sexual acts) would be incestuous and a crime per PC 285.

Can you believe such a law is on the books in California? Then again, so is Prop H8. Both should be scrapped.

Polygyny in Iraq

BBC News reports that Iraq has more than one million war widows and a shortage of young unmarried men, and that polygyny may offer a solution.

It's a practice that became less common in the 20th Century, but politicians put forward a proposal last year to offer married men financial incentives to take on a second wife.

Under current Iraqi law, polygamy is illegal unless authorised by a judge - though it is part of the country's Islamic tradition and has been backed in recent years by some religious groups.

In Iraq's largest province, Anbar, a charity called Angel of Mercy has been helping widows remarry for the last four years. Dozens of marriages have been completed, with the widows often marrying their husband's relatives.

If that is what is best for all of the spouses, why not encourage this?

Women in illegal second marriages are often "in an inferior situation where they are unprotected and prone to abuse by men", [chatity worker Hana Edwar] adds.

Legalize them and the women will have more power. Of course, I don’t support polygyny only; I support full marriage equality, which includes gender equality.

Another Witness Defends Polygyny

This newspaper columnist seems skeptical of Canadian poly trial testimony from a wife living in Bountiful.

How benign, how egalitarian, the polygamous wife from Bountiful makes it all sound.

A place where the wishes of girls and women are respected, their input on desired husbands and time of marriage considered, their views on religious dogma weighed and obedience not strictly required.

To hear “Witness 2’’ tell it, there’s no coercion, no banishment of maturing boys by elder males covetous of nubile females, and only discretionary tithing — a word she refused to accept — such that the community can pay legal bills for associated members who’ve been charged, even convicted, of sexual assault against minors in the United States.

Maybe she’s telling the truth? How exactly would DiManno know differently?

She is in her mid-40s, shares a husband with a “sister-wife” — her biological sister is married to the same man and, as first in on the nuptials, technically his only “legal’’ spouse — and together they mother their combined 19 children. Nine of them were borne by Witness 2 and are aged 7 to 26.

Why is it that anti-equality commentators also seem to be against having more than two children? Which came first, their misanthropic fixation or their fixation on the marriages of other people?

By her own description, Witness 2 is not a typical Bountiful plural wife. She has some post-secondary education, occasionally left her babies in the care of her sister-wife to attend classes outside the secretive community, and has for many years been working as a midwife.

Wait, you mean they aren’t kept chained to beds or stoves?

“My children feel like if they say the wrong thing to a dentist or doctor, their father could go to jail,’’ she states in her affidavit.

It is sad that children can’t speak of their parents’ marriages without fear of police action in response.

Institute full marriage equality. If you see child abuse or domestic violence, prosecute that. Don’t procesute consenting spouses for marrying each other.

When the Surrogate or Donor is Family

An anonymous comment alerted me to this article (thank you) about intrafamilial medically assisted reproduction (IMAR). It discusses a position paper published 20 January 2011 by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). The context framing this is when unrelated spouses use a close relative of one of the spouses to assist in reproduction, but the issues are also relevant to those involved in consanguineous spousal relationships (such as, say, first cousins or a mother and son or a sister and brother) who want to have children.

The group advises to evaluate each request for IMAR individually, based on four ethical principles in health care: the respect for autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence and justice.

That sounds reasonable.

The Task Force explains that the right for individual autonomy is elementary: any individual should have the principle of choice with whom to reproduce. It is understandable that couples wish to preserve some sort of genetic identity with the child, and hence may wish to choose a donor in the family.

I personally know a lesbian couple who had used sperm from a brother of one of the women. It is fairly common for same-sex couples or heterosexual couples experiencing infertility to involve a close relative in some way, whether as a surrogate mother, sperm donor, egg donor, or embryo donor.

In some countries IMAR is illegal and the relevant laws against incest and consanguinity apply to protect the offspring from genetic risks and to avoid possible social disruptions and conflicts.

Ridiculous. How about using genetic testing to avoid risks?

According to the principle of justice, doctors should treat similar cases in the same way. So if sister-to-sister oocyte donation is accepted so should brother-to-brother sperm donation.

This is fair.

The paper gives special attention to (rare) cases of consanguineous IMAR, involving the mixing of gametes of persons that are genetically closely related. "The Task Force considers consanguineous IMAR between up to third degree relatives as acceptable in principle, subject to additional counseling and risk-reduction," says Professor Guido de Wert, coordinator of the ESHRE Task Force. "Here, genetic counseling is appropriate to assess the increased risk of conceiving a child affected by a serious recessive disease."

With genetic counseling, there shouldn’t be any restriction on degree.

First-degree intergenerational IMAR needs special scrutiny, also in view of the increased risk of undermining autonomous choice. First- and second degree consanguineous IMAR is at odds with the spirit of anti-consanguinity and anti-incest legislation in most countries and should not be offered.

The laws should be changed.

In any general population the risk of having a child with a handicap or a major disease is 3%. In third degree consanguinity [such as between cousins], the risk is estimated to be around 5-6%. If the applicant and the intended collaborator carry the same disease, there is a 25% risk of conceiving a child affected with that particular condition.

I encourage anyone, even if they don’t believe they are closely related, to get tested before making children, and that would include testing any donated sperm or egg. Isn’t it good to know the risks ahead of time so that an informed decision can be made? Close relatives can and have had healthy babies together, but it is good to know the possibilities? You don’t have to get tested as a pair. You can get individual tests.

Bramham Has Fun With Statistics

Daphne Bramham at the Vancouver Sun looks for any reason to deny people their freedom to marry. Here’s her latest on Bountiful, a community that has come under scrutiny during the Canadian poly trial, because some there practice polygyny. She cites some statistics.

The number of births alone is surprising -- 833 born to 215 mothers in 13 years in a community whose population is commonly estimated at around 1,000.

That’s fewer than four children per mother. A woman having four children over the course of 13 years is hardly shocking.

The most disturbing fact is that 85 mothers -- a third of the total -- were 18 or younger. That's seven times the provincial rate of teen moms.

Very interesting how this is worded, “18 and younger.” How many of those were 18? Plus, the age of consent in Canada is 16. So out of those “teen moms,” how many were under the age of 16? Why doesn’t Bramham tell us? Also notice that this means that two thirds of the mothers were age 19 and older. She cites the “provincial rate.” How many teen girls outside of Bountiful are having sex outside of marriage? My guess is that most of the wives in Bountiful are not getting abortions. What is the provincial abortion rate? Is is better for 17-year-olds to be having sex with multiple partners in casual encounters or with a husband who is bound to them?

Ideally, I think people should be age 25 or older when they marry, simply because they’ll know themselves better and have more life experience and perspective. But I would not be in favor of raising the legal age to marry.

Two of the teens had three children each by the time they were 18; 16 had two children each. That means one in 10 babies was born to a teenager.

This sounds a lot better than what we see in low-income urban areas, especially when you consider these teens are married and having children by the same husband, rather than unmarried and having children by different fathers, non of whom care about her, as seen in some areas.

And it's no secret that in Bountiful (as in most polygamous societies), the powerful older men have the most wives and the most children. The statistics support that.

Well, yeah, the longer you live the more children you can have. Of course the older men have more children. And wives are better off with more powerful husbands. If a heterosexual woman has a choice between marrying a man with more power or a man with less power, she’s more likely to marry the man with more power.

The age gap between the 215 mothers and the 142 fathers is slightly more than eight years. That's nearly double the regional average and an anomaly in B.C., where the average is 4.6 years.

It is much smaller than the gap in the Playboy Mansion, however. And doing the math, it looks like it breaks down so that there could be just as many monogamous fathers as polygynous fathers, with the polygynous fathers having two wives.

(Even though the legal age of sexual consent was raised to 16 from 14 in 2008, it bears noting that it's a criminal offence for someone in a position of trust or authority to have sexual relations with anyone under the age of 18.)

Well, I’d hope a wife could trust her husband.

It also bears noting that the legal age of marriage in B.C. is 18.

I find it a problem that someone has the freedom to consent to sex and other things, but not marriage.

Not that it matters. As Chief Justice Robert Bauman has repeatedly been told, most fundamentalist Mormon marriages are "spiritual" or "celestial" unions arranged by the prophet or his designate.

So… she’d be in favor of making them legally recognized?

As Bauman has also heard, women and girls are routinely moved between the fundamentalist Mormon communities for arranged marriages.

Woah, woah… moving to get married? Who ever heard or such a thing?

Look, I’m not a member or follower of the FLDS or any related group. I’m not saying I like everything going on in Bountiful. But I cringe when alarmism and broad-brushing is used to deny adults the freedom to choose their marriage partner(s).

Rev Bev Has a Polyamory Workshop

An ordained minister in Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), “Rev Bev” Beverly Dale preaches these words…

Pleasure is good.

The body is good.

Sex is good.

No argument here!

For 21 years, Dale was a campus minister at the University of Pennsylvania, teaching students that healthy sexuality is about more than plumbing, lust, and penetration. She encouraged them to be proud of their bodies, to become independent moral agents (deciding if, when, and how to have sex), to resist the hookup culture's potential for exploitation, and to experience sexual pleasure and intimacy in a state unadulterated by alcohol. Along the way, she earned the affectionate nickname "Rev Bev."

A farmer's daughter from Illinois, a former submissive wife who married the first time at age 18, the Rev Bev describes her evolution in her one-woman performance piece, An Irreverent Journey From Eggbeaters to Vibrators. She has participated in literary salons with an erotic theme, held discussion groups in bars and taprooms for young adults about sexual decision-making, and next month she'll lead a workshop called "Clear Conscience: Morality and Polyamory" for those considering opening their intimate relationships to more than one partner.

And now you know.

Poly and Kink

Polyfulcrum discusses how being poly and getting into Dominance/submission mesh.

Just like those who profess to be monogamous, some poly people are very "vanilla" in that the only thing different from their relationship that the Rated PG "romantic comedy" monogamists is that that they have more than one partner or spouse. They don't even do threesomes; others are into various kinks and fetishes. In other words, they are people.

Yahoo Answers Compares Poly and Faux Monogamy

The question asked…

Wouldn't honest polyamory/polygamy be better than constant, hidden cheating that involves lies?

I live in the United States. All over the world there are many people who cheat on their partners. I don't think monogamy truly works for most people. I think people go along with monogamy and then secretly cheat because very few people can truly have sex with only one person their whole lives.

I think the truly monogamous are a minority. Whether one includes “serial monogamists” in the “monogamy” category or “the rest,” consider that “the rest” includes unattached people who have having sex with more than one person one-on-one, or in threesomes or group sex; attached or married supposedly monogamous people who are cheating physically or emotionally, unmarried couples who have threesomes or swap, or swing; married couples who have threesomes or swap or swing; married people who have “don’t ask, don’t tell” side affairs or are on the down-low or have open marriages; unmarried people with polyamorous situations, and married polyamorists (including polygynists, polyandrists, and group polygamists).

See this map of nonmonogamy.

There is no one-size-fits-all, which is a good reason to support full marriage equality. Let people truly have the freedom to decide for themselves.

Doesn't it make more sense to stop the lies and the hiding and just be polyamorous, than to keep lying and hiding in monogamy and cheat?

It is my belief that the real wrong and problems is not the sex, but instead, the lies, deceit, the hiding, the pretending, and the games.

I agree.

What do all of you think is truly the solution to eliminating most of the cheating and the lies all over the world?

I don’t believe full marriage equality would eliminate cheating. I do think it would reduce it. The legal and social freedom to be true to oneself would reduce the number of people in the closet or in denial.

Jace Gordon…

I am a gay guy in a three-way relationship. (Most gay men don't agree with me doing this.)

My partners love each other, and I share love with both of them. Our relationship is remarkably stable because we trust each other.

Sounds good.

Which Is It?

In the context of the discussion around the Canadian poly trial, the Fall of Reynolds calls out an anti-equality bigot…

One more thing - Ms. Maschlitska has floated the rather novel idea that the two independent fundamentalist Mormon witnesses (at the BC trial this week) are actually "Alpha-Females". Does this mean that, rather than being subjugated, downtrodden, enslaved, beleaguered, marginalized, suppressed, demeaned and cowed, these two evidently sweet and beautiful women are empowered, capable, forthright, independent, self-assured, confident, free-thinking, emancipated and strong ??? - - - because, if Ms. Mischlockska is right, then this whole phony manufactured myth about all polygamous women being disenfranchised, human-rights victims is a big bucket of horse doo-doo. That's the thing - when you fall prey to the polygamy-hating-eradicating-delirium, it can sometimes get too hard to keep your story straight.

Those who want to deny the freedom to marry often have trouble being consistent. There are women who choose polygyny. There are women who very much enjoy polygyny. They do not deserve to be made criminals or ridiculed.

A Hypothetical About Consanguineous Sex

The Stig Mommy asked “What Would You Do?” Here’s the situation.

You meet your DH [Dear Husband], date for years, are madly in love and get married. You have four beautiful, smart, and healthy children. Your marriage is still strong after 15 years.

15 Years into your marriage you somehow discover that your DH’s father (who has passed away) had an affair and a love child from a disclosure by your MIL [Mother-In-Law]. The name of the other woman strikes a chord with you but you cannot remember where from. Weeks later it is still bugging you so you go digging. Turns out this woman is listed as your birth mother on your adoption papers. She too has passed away before you ever got a chance to meet her. You match the timelines up and it turns out YOU are that love child. Surprised

WWYD??

Tell your husband that you are actually brother and sister? Would you get a divorce? Stay together? What would you tell the kids? Or would you keep the whole thing a secret and sweep it under the rug? Please explain your reasoning.

So what would you do, dear reader?

I’m a male and not gay, so if I was a husband who had discovered this truth about my wife (that we were half-siblings) I would tell her only if I thought it would make her happier or have no effect. I would not tell her somethng like this if it would upset her, seeing that she could not do anything about it. But I wouldn’t be married to a woman who is grossed out by the very idea of consanguineous sex, and I’m sure she wouldn’t want to be married to me. So most likely, I would tell her. Nobody else necessarily needs to know. Notice that the children in this hypothetical are healthy.

What if you had to live with it as an open secret? As in everyone know that you are brother and sister and decided to stay married.

The problem there would be bigotry. But I would challenge the gossips to explain exactly what the problem is. It would provide many teachable moments, showing that such marriages can be lasting and happy.

Most respondents, by far, chose “Stay married but tell only DH the truth”.

There were a lot of comments.

Grinberga…

I would throw up..for weeks.

I understand that some people are turned off by certain things. For example, most heterosexual men do not care to think at all about male-on-male sex, and may even be grossed out by the idea. I understand that some people have that reaction when it comes to consanguineous sex. But wouldn’t the life and happiness built together mitigate that?

Amy1352…

You know, I would honestly tell my husband and then we'd probably sweep it under the rug. I don't think I would tell my kids at all.

Then I'd go into therapy.

Therapy? Why? To get over new negative feelings? Certainly not to get over having a great marriage.

MetaIMama…

I would divorce but remain friends, no reason to not have ANY relationship. I just couldn't live with the fact that I was married to my own brother.

Sad.

Skipper13…

I would keep it a secret, but I also would probably get a divorce. We can stay friends and parent the children, but I do not know that I could be comfortable being romantic with him ever again, that kind of ruins it for me.

Why? Think of it as finding out that something happened your husband when he was so young that he didn’t remember it. You find this thing to be a turn off. Would you really break up a good marriage over it?

The Stig Mommy checks back in…

DH says its way to gross and he would divorce.

That’s sad. She’d still be the same person he married.

emilysmom110405...

I actually know of a similar thing happening IRL. In this case, they were young adults (early 20s) and were not married, but were dating and the girl got pregnant. Her father passed away soon after she discovered her pregnancy. That's when all the family secrets came out. The boyfriend was either the son of her father or her father's father (could have been either as his mother was sleeping with both of them).

Interesting.

Buttercup+4…

The horse is already out of the barn. The four kids are born, and they are fine. . So there is no issue. .

I wouldn't care if I found out my husband was my fraternal twin and we were separated at birth.

There is true love.

Mommy_Pix…

After 15 yrs and four children, you have pretty much run the gamut, the only thing left is the empty nest/retirement. Why throw that away because of something you've found out AFTER all of that?

Yes.

How about you, dear reader? What would YOU do?

Checking in on Polly

Polly continues to have a wonderfully insightful blog, giving us a look at what it is like to be a mother with two husbands and doing all of the things that she does in terms of running a household, education, and dealing with hostile family members.

She gets a lot of questions. She has some great advice for someone looking for a polyamorous partner. Go read the whole thing if you can, but here’s some of it…

1. Don't cheat. If you are with someone who cheats, it's probably time to change or end that relationship. (It's definitely not time to add a person to the relationship.) Therapy and/or breaking up are pretty much the only options here.

2. Figure out if you are poly *before* you start falling in love with lots of other people. It simplifies things immensely. You probably will have some failures before you have successes.

3. Look for other poly people to date, instead of trying to "convert" monogamous people. This also simplifies things immensely. People who have identified as poly for some time probably have already gone through the Fail stage, too.

And here's possibly the most important thing:

4. Polyamory is a lot of work, and people are real people, with individual characteristics that may surprise you.

Further along…

Ultimately, what I found about my poly relationship was that it wasn't about what Gabe was providing for me, or what Stuart was providing for me, either. It was also about what I could give these men, and what we share as partners. Nobody is perfect, and Gabe, Stuart and I are no exceptions. We are, however, perfect for each other, even in our imperfections. I am cradled and kept warm by these men. They nurture me and my children and each other and are providers and protectors and champions of my heart. They are so affectionate and respectful with each other, and truly partners for each other as well as for me. Seeing them embrace is in many ways more wonderful than having them embrace me. I am deeply grateful for every moment of every day that they deem to love me. And yet, somehow, Gabe (or Stuart) will so often take me into his arms and tell me he feels like the luckiest man in the world.

Beautiful. It is disgusting that someone would want to deny them their freedom to marry.

In this one, one of the things she talk about is dealing with mothers.

In talking with her own mother…

Anyway, mention of Gabe prompted a whole bunch of talk about how she believes marriage is sacred (so do I), that she thinks we are breaking our marriage bonds (not true, we just happen to have three people in ours, instead of two, and we're not looking for more people, thank you very much), and how would I feel if she had brought someone home when I was a kid (I said it would have depended on who she brought home - I didn't get into how it might have been nice to have someone who was more present and less depressed than Dad was most of the time, or more physically healthy than Mom was most of the time).

Further…

Then she said she worried that it wouldn't work out, and that we'd get hurt. I said that I'm a big girl, and that it *has* been working out for years now, that we are all happy, and we were all of the opinion that everything needs to remain stable for the kids, if nothing else. Then we changed the subject and talked about her poor health. I know my mother loves us, but she can be very frustrating.

If someone in your family is poly and their partners are being good to them, please respect them and their relationships.

An Advantage of the Polygamous Over Monogamous

From a study that appears in the journal BMC Evolutionary Biology, we find out some interesting news out of the Centre for Evolutionary Biology, University of Western Australia.

The team discovered that sperm from polygamous mice are better competitors in the race for fertilisation.

As always, this may or may not be applicable to human beings.

Dr Renee Firman and her team attempted to show that sperm from rival males compete to fertilise females and that, over several generations, polygamy can select for mice who produce more sperm, with stronger motility, than monogamous males.

The study found that while 53 per cent of the litters had mixed paternity, 33 per cent of litters were fathered by the polygamous males compared to 14 per cent by monogamous males.

And whether they were mated first or second, polygamous males retained this advantage, showing that the increased fitness applies to both offensive and defensive competition.

Depending on the causation, if someone wants children they may be better off practicing polygamy, and someone who doesn’t want children may find an advantage in monogamy instead of polygamy. Or maybe the more fertile are more likely to practice polygamy? As a reminder, I am not against monogamy. I am a firm believer that each person should be free to pursue celibacy, monogamy, polyamory, or polygamy (in whatever form).

More About West Virginia Incest Case

This article gives more information about this case.

A Rand man pleaded guilty to incest in Kanawha Circuit Court, admitting he had sex with his daughter, subsequently impregnating her.

Larry William Darby, 41, told Judge James Stucky, "I had sex with my daughter and we had a baby."

Darby said the girl was 19 when the sexual act occurred between them last year at their home in Rand.

He said? Isn’t this verifiable by doing simple math?

When asked how many children he had, Darby replied he had four -- aged 21, 20, 16 and a newborn.

Asked if he was married, Darby replied that he would be divorced as of Tuesday.

Darby also pleaded guilty to sexual abuse by a parent, guardian or person in a position of trust. That charge pertains to his 16-year-old stepdaughter, whose breasts he touched when she was 14 years old.

It is any wonder his marriage is ending?

In exchange for his guilty plea, prosecutors will not seek an enhanced sentence based on Darby's past felony record, which involves sexual abuse charges in Indiana.

Stucky will sentence Darby Jan. 12. He faces a possible five- to 15-year prison sentence on the incest charge and a 10- to 20-year prison sentence on the sexual abuse charge.

He should be locked up for a long time for anything he’s done to a minor. There should be no charge for any consensual sex involving adults. If he forced himself on an adult, he should be charged for rape or sexual assault for that.

Prison Sentence in West Virginia Incest Case

Most news sources hide the identity of sex crime victims. Most news sources hide the identity of minor victims. We're never given the age of the supposed victim in this case. Overall, I find this coverage of the story to be deficient.

A father got his daughter pregnant, and she had the baby.

Larry Darby was sentenced to 15 to 35 years in jail for incest and sexual assault by a parent.

He was sentenced for "incest and sexual assault." Was the victim underage? Or was she an adult who consented. If she was an adult, the sexual assault charge would indicate she did not consent. Either the incest charge was superfluous, or there were consensual encounters that were incestuous, but did not fall under the sexual assault category. I wish we had clarification.

"I don't ever want to lie to my child," Aleena Jones said. "I'm scared to tell him the truth because I don't want him to hate me for what happened."

If she was coerced, she had nothing for which to apologize.

This is where we get some indication that there is more to this than consensual sex between adults (which should not be a crime at all):

The family says this isn't the first time he has had sexual contact with young girls.

"He was glaring at me the whole time I was up on the stand," Jones said. "It just made me feel even nastier."

The family says he's fondled another victim and has served time for it.

"My second daughter was involved in all of this, too, and he tried to do stuff to her, too," Kimberly Jones said.

"Young girls" would indicate minors to me. But we're never given ages for any of the girls.

Now, Darby will spend more than a decade in a cell, but with the possibility of parole.

"I'm not willing to take a chance on these types of people who engage in these types of crimes," Prosecutor Mark Plants said.

If Darby gets out, he will have to spend the next 50 years on supervised release.

It is bad enough the law isn't more precise when it comes to consenting adults vs. an adult preying on a minor, lumping both together as "incest." But the media does this as well. There should be more clarity in reporting. If this woman is a victim, her name should not have been published.

A Confused Opponent of Equality

Beverly Nye Stratford embarrassed herself with this anti-equality letter to a newspaper.

Polygamy hurts men.

Why don't we let people decide for themselves how their marriages will be?

If three men out of 10 take three wives each, that leaves one woman for the seven other men.

There are billions of people in the world, though. The three men aren't "taking" those wives by force. Those women choose to marry those men. Shouldn't they have that choice?

Keep in mind too that in most polygamous countries, like the Muslim ones, all sex outside of marriage is illegal with penalties up to death itself, so it is unlikely the last woman would dare to service the other seven men even if she wanted to.

This a red herring in places like Canada and the United States. All adults should have the right to love, sex, and marriage. That some freedoms are restricted in one place does not mean we should restrict other freedoms here.

The only way to make it fair for a man to have more than one legal wife at a time is for the wife, or wives, to be legally able to have an equal number of husbands.

They should have that freedom.

For example, a man takes a second wife. This new wife is now eligible to take another husband, as is the original wife as well.

Everyone should have the right to marry the person or person(s) they want to marry. The letter writer really should be writing to support full marriage equality. Seems to me her beef is with "polygyny-only."

Another Witness For the Freedom to Marry

Mary Batchelor, a Utah woman, wants to have the freedom to marry, and has testified in the Canadian poly trial.

A Utah woman who describes herself as a former polygamist says she would be happy to enter into another plural marriage if the opportunity arose.

She should not be denied by laws imposed by people who don't even know her.

She told B.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Bauman that she had some "very good times, some very positive times" during the polygamous marriage.

Some women enjoy polygyny.

She also had some "very challenging times" when the first wife had an affair and left, she said.

"It was especially hard when the marriage broke down and there was a loss of trust," she testified.

The first wife, Victoria Prunty, became a third wife in another polygamous marriage before becoming a spokeswoman for a group called Tapestry Against Polygamy, which opposes plural marriage, the court heard.

It's convenient that Prunty wants to keep this freedom to marry illegal, while she had the freedom to cheat.

Despite the divorce of the first wife, Bauman said she hopes to re-marry into a polygamous relationship.

"I do hope to be able to live in a plural marriage again. It would be wonderful if I could do it without a law against it. When that plural marriage ended, it broke my heart."

She should have that freedom to marry. We need full marriage equality.

Thank You, Sophie Hirschfeld

Sophie Hirschfeld gets it right when it comes to testimony in the Canadian trial over polygamy that portrays polygamous communities as horrible places.

This account about tortured babies is being used to argue that polygamy should continue to be illegal in Canada. I don’t want to downplay Jessop’s suffering. It certainly deserves attention and it does need people to take action, but this action is not the appropriate action. Polygamy is not what is to blame for what has happened to these children. Polygamy is not to blame for the young brides forced into marriage, either, or for the displaced boys who have been tossed out of their religious community. No, instead, the blame goes to dogma and people, mostly people.

Polyamory and Polygamy have become dirty words in our culture. It has become symbolic of something that is a distant, distorted image of what it once was and what it can be. Polyamory is alive and well in the United States and I’ve had plenty of experience with polyamorous people and have even been in polyamorous relationships, myself. I’ve seen many varieties of poly family structures and have seen what kinds of struggles those people face because their chosen love life is not what people think is ‘right.’ I’ve seen no evidence that polyamory or polygamy are, themselves, dangerous things.

Read it all.

Woman's Incest Conviction Upheld in Canada

A mother, known as "B.D.", lost her appeal of her conviction on incest and other charges. The case developed after it was discovered that a child who died was the offspring of her and her 21-year-old son, who was also her husband. They have two other children together as well. The other criminal offenses included trying to forge birth certificates.

An autopsy revealed the girl who was brought to Cambridge Memorial Hospital one June morning in 2001 had died of natural causes. However, the glands on top of her kidneys were very thin.

It’s a condition that can result from incestuous conception.

Police grew suspicious and asked Ontario’s Centre of Forensic Sciences to set aside a sample of the girl’s blood for possible DNA testing.

The appeal was based on whether or not the police should have been allowed to do that.

The 21-year-old man who brought the child to hospital had identified himself as her brother.

But the girl’s mother, then 47, claimed he was her husband.

As it turns out, both were right.

Until the laws change, it would be good to avoid self-incrimination.

On Thursday, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld her convictions for incest in a case Justice Robert Blair described as giving “new meaning to the word bizarre.”

People used to think interracial and same-sex marriage were "bizarre" too. But we've overcome such bigotry.

Hindered by a Hang-Up

GeneticSexualAttraction.com is a site for people who may be experiencing GSA or others who have concerns because someone in their lives may be experiencing GSA. There are some very helpful people there, helping people through all sorts of agony. There are also varied opinions on GSA held by the participants there. Some people there discourage any romantic or sexual relationships between close relatives, others are supportive of such relationships. Some people there are involved in such relationships and are happy, but the nature and tone of the website more often draws people in which at least one person in the relationship is struggling under the weight of societal conditioning that has taught them that such relationships are wrong. An example of that is seen in the first posting in this thread by “lostdaughter”.

She is 29 years old, and explains that her mother’s actions separated her from her biological father when she was just six months old. This past Christmas she was reunited with her father, who is now 50 years of age, and after about three weeks things progressed.

Its been very exciting...very "normal" - until 2 days ago ...things changed...
we went out for drinks and we were dancing...and i got very close...and well...he got excited...but nothing happened. later at home we started kissing. He felt bad. He has four other children...other daughters...but had never done anything like this with them. But I never had a father...and didnt feel any boundary issues.

I consider myself to be a very open minded person. Including sexual behaviours...but I never thought i would be doing anything with a father (that i never had).

it felt so right...kissing and touching each other...eventually we went upstairs to a bedroom - and we had sexual intercourse including - both of us gave/received oral sex.

he felt very guilty in the morning. I talked with him. I told him, we were both consenting adults, I am not 3 yrs old, I am almost 30. and if we enjoyed it - then there is nothing wrong. He said it wasnt normal and he felt guilty. I asked him if he enjoyed it and got a bit worried...perplexed....why I wanted to know? I asked him again, and he said YES, but he felt guilty about liking it. I told him I didnt. I told him perhaps it just society who says those things - and we shouldnt listen to it. I told him he doesnt see me like his other daughters because he didnt raise me....etc. He felt a little less guilty. I honestly enjoyed it very much, and I wanted to happen again. He said no, the first should be the last time. but we talked about it whether thats what HE wanted for himself or because thats what society told him to want. He confessed it was because of the "society"...that he enjoyed it very much and he would make love to me again. So we did again last night. the first time we had drank some...but last night we were completely sober. and we both enjoyed it.

She describes a situation that involves consensual sex between adults; something enjoyable to both. Nobody should be feeling guilty. This is where the condemnation of the “sex police” impedes the happiness of others even without getting the real police involved.

i do not have any feelings of guilt but i know he has...he thinks he shouldnt want to have sex with me. I told him its normal he doesnt see me as a daughter and sees me as a 29 yr old woman. I find him so attractive (he is very fit and doesnt look his age). He does tell me he enjoys me very much - but just feels guilty and thinks about other people finding out.

Other people should not be giving people like this a hard time. The guilt-trips people try to give others starts with condemning appreciation for the human body and condemning masturbation and doesn’t stop, continuing on to condemning relationships between mature, idependendent, consenting adults. Love is love, and what consenting adults do in a bedroom is their own concern.

Happy Wife Extols Polygyny in Court

After a parade of bigots and the dissatisfied, the Canadian poly trial is finally receiving testimony from people actually in polygynous marriages. Alina Darger didn’t avail herself of the option to testify anonymously.

In a marked contrast to former FLDS members who have told the court about overcrowded, abusive homes filled with conflict and power struggles, Ms. Darger described her childhood and marriage in glowing terms.

Her father had two wives, and Ms. Darger herself is the first of three wives. She has seven children of her own, and she and her two “sister-wives” have a total of 24 children aged from six months to 20 years old.

Ms. Darger said she chose to practise polygamy because it is central to her faith and she wanted the same closeness and security as an adult that she had experienced as a child.

“I loved that experience and thought it was really amazing,” Ms. Darger said. “I always felt I had somebody close to care for me.”

Why would anyone want to deny her this choice?

Ms. Darger said she does not believe in arranged marriages and, under questioning by a B.C. government lawyer, said while she is aware that some fundamentalist Mormons have married underage girls, she does not endorse or approve of that practice.

“I disagree with that; it’s not in my belief system, and there are laws to take care of that – and they should,” Ms. Darger said.

Yes! Exactly!

Anyone who doesn’t want this kind of marriage doesn’t have to enter one. But let those who want to have a polygynous (or polyandrous, group, same-sex, interracial, intergenerational, or consanguineous) marriage have one. Do not prevent other adults from exercising their rights to love, sex, and marriage.

Put the Bigots on Defense

The blogger at The Religiously Sanctioned Co-Habitation Chronicles has an entertaining and thoughtful essay in which he calls on his fellow LDS church members to accept that polygamy (polygyny) is part of the church’s heritage, and not to get upset when someone mentions it or expresses some mistaken impression about it.

Polygamy is a part of our collective history. It might be embarrassing. Maybe it’s even painful to recollect. But it’s there. The longer we deny it or try to change it, the longer we as a Church will continually bob back and forth between self-hatred (and try to recreate ourselves as a completely anti-polygamous group and hate on others who practice it, which is dangerous, uncharitable, and disingenuous) and smugness (and try to label anyone who brings up polygamy as ignorant and laugh haughtily at their stupidity and discount anything they say, which is dangerous, uncharitable, and disingenuous).

When I see us backpedaling and running around trying to tell the world that “Oh my GOSH we are NOT polygamous OKAY?!?!?!??!?!!!”, all I see is our own angst and embarrassment, exposed for everyone to see. It’s clear that we as Mormons are more uncomfortable with our polygamous past than anyone else, and it makes us look kind of guilty, guys.

Nobody should feel ashamed or defensive about a family history of polygamy. Bigots should instead feel ashamed that they would make fun of someone based on such a thing, and that they’d keep people from having the freedom to marry in there here and now.

If someone asks you if you are, or your ancestors were, polygamous, ask them “What does it matter? Are you looking for tips?” Seriously. Instead of getting upset or defensive ask them what the problem is. None, or virtually none, will be able to articulate a single problem.

Siblings in Love

Amanda wrote at Yahoo Answers…

My best friend does incest with her brother?
I was at my best friend's house and I accidentally caught my best friend(15 year old) having sex with her older brother(17). Which I know is wrong, but they begged me not to tell anyone.
Now that I know their secret and think they can trust me, they aren't afraid to actually make out(kiss) in front of me.Which I am still not used to the idea, but I know if I tell my best friend is going to get in trouble.

She chose this answer from kstahl as the best…

I think the only real issue here that has any substantive importance is whether they are both fully consensual with what they doing. The secondary issue would be whether they are using adequate birth control. Beyond that it just devolves into various legal matters (incest is illegal in the U.S.) and psychological matters with some crossover into sociological issues. But generally I would say that if they are both full participants and enjoy what they are doing together and they do more to keep it private, then no real harm is being done.

Amanda should not gossip about her friends, and there is no need to tell anyone, since this is a mutal relationship. I’m not clear if she is generally turned off by “public displays of affection,” or if she is bothered by it in this case because she thinks what her friends are doing is wrong. If it is the latter, then she’ll get used to it and see that her initial reaction is mistaken. These are siblings who love each other and care about each other, not strangers at a party.

The always thoughtful Natalie Underwood wrote…

Well, if you get them in trouble it won't help them, and they will just resent you. It could wind up tearing apart their family if you do. But if you drop them as friends it won't help them either, and it will just make them afraid you will hurt them. So stay friends, but learn what you can about incest - there are lots of places you can google to find more information. Then talk to them about it.

Be careful not to be judgmental, or they won't listen. Just give them information, try to help and keep them safe. Ask them why they started having sex, and when. Find out what makes them do it.

SIX PAK wrote…

Keep the details to yourself.

Yes.

This is not uncommon believe it or not.

No, it isn’t.

As they experiment in sex now they will stop on their own.

Maybe. Maybe not.

No one said it is OK.

Of course it is okay, if this is what they’ve chosen.

The fact that they were kissing in front of you tells me they like the shock value.

Maybe they wanted her to join in?

A bigot wrote…

you have to tell someone and its needs to be your parents first. They need to let you friend parents know and get both of them help. It is not normal to have sex with a family member and it has to be stopped.

Yes, and don’t forget to tell them that they’ll go blind if they masturbate.

The Benefits of Polygamy

On Health Answers, I found “13 Reasons Why Polygamy Would Be Beneficial To Human Society.” It appears to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but I wanted to take a look at it.

There would be much lower numbers of single, frustrated and lonely men and women in society : Women sharing the husband and men having to not compete over women anymore.

I do believe that there would be at least some reduction in the number of frustrated/lonely singles and some reduction in the rates of cheating and in the rates of divorce. “Much lower” might not be the right description, because it hinges on people agreeing to be polygamous, and for a lot of people, that is not something they’ve been conditioned to consciously choose.

No more parent less homes : More and more households would have a father and mother in the home with the children.

Again, there would be some reduction, but there would still be some homes with just one parent.

Wealth and Value increase exponentially : If you have a household with 3 or 4 adults all making some money. They could
A. Bring in more income
B. Displace all their debts/liabilties and
C. Save extra money for supplies, vacations, savings etc.

Yes.

Peoples mentality changes for the better : People generally will become more mature, more giving, more caring and more responsible.

Some poly people report this effect.

There were some responses.

NobodyAn…

Ok, here’s the biggest question. Why? Why would a woman, or women, choose to be with a man who has to share his time, income, everything, with other women?

Some women do prefer “sharing” a certain kind of husband over monogamy with another kind, or being unmarried. Let them have this choice.

One person wrote…

I have no problem with a man having multiple wives, but a woman having multiple husbands is IMMORAL and WRONG!

You can hold that belief, but both men and women should have the same freedom to marry.

There were the typical bigoted objections that assume women are incapable of making choices and any man who doesn’t have a wife all too himself will turn genocidal. Astounding.

Polygamy = Polygyny Talk on Yahoo Answers

The question is, “Should men be allowed to be polygamous?”

The answer is yes, but only because all adults should have the freedom to marry more than one person. I’m for full marriage equality. Allowing polygyny, but not a group or polyandrous form for polygamy, would not be equality.

Here’s one discriminatory response…

We do not live in caves and throw spears anymore. We are civilised human beings and we are able to think logically and rationally and we are able to consider others. Sleeping with numerous women all at the same time is not very civilised or considerate.

Actually, there are highly civilized and considerate poly people. But she goes on to explain she is incapable of sharing…

I for one would not share my boyfriend with other women and if I found out I was that WOULD give me a real reason to terminate the relationship. My ex slept with another girl and I ended it with him. I wouldn't cheat on a man because I don't think it's right, even if there was no sex in the relationship.

That’s fine for her. But some people can mutally agree to other arrangements.

This person is an ally…

If everyone involved is cool with it, then yes. Why is it my business to tell people who they can marry? If a woman wants to have multiple husbands, and they are fine with it, then I think she should be able to. It is not my place to tell people how to live their lives, unless how they live is hurting me, which polygamy wouldn't do.

Someone else…

Poligamy can only work if you get rid of most men.

Not true. Assuming there would be more polygyny than polyandry, the fact is, not every person needs to or wants to get married.

Someone who has put a little more thought into it…

I am against the legalisation of polygamous marriage because women invariably have lower status in countries where this is allowed.

Does anyone believe that having this freedom to marry would lower the status of women in the US or Canada or Europe or Australia?

However, thre is nothing stopping a man living with more than one woman.

In some places there are. But there’s nothing stopping gay or lesbian couples from living together, either. Why should people have to be second class citizens and be denied marriage rights, though?

A man who 'spreads his seed' and fathers many children had better be prepared to support all those children.

Let them. This already happens, but many of the children don’t have the benefit of their parents being married.

He will also need to be prepared to satisfy all his wives and keep them happy all the time.

Wives and/or husbands.

He will have to be prepared for quarreling and jealousy among his many partners, women are often bitterly resentful of the other wives in polygamous marriages. Women don't really like sharing a man.

This person has a low opinion of women. Some women don’t want polygyny. Others do.

He will also have to be prepared to fend off competition.

Let him worry about that.

Another person is a little confused…

Even if polygamy wasn't wrong, even if your wife wasn't hurt by it at all, just being with other women for their body would fill you with lust, and you wouldn't be filled with the much more pure feeling of love anymore. I'm not sure if polygamy should be allowed, but I don't think there's a reason for it to be legal. Anyone who doesn't feel filled with love for their partner shouldn't be married in the first place.

It should be legal. Let those who choose to participate worry about the balance of love and lust. Give people full marriage equality, and let them decide for themselves.

False Assumptions About Poly People

It’s always nice to see the allies pop up in discussions prompted by questions like “How do you feel about polyamorous relationships?” More people participating take the attitude like this one…

I think you should be able to date as many people as you want as long as they're all aware and consenting of each other. I think it's just as wrong to hate someone for being gay, straight, pan-sexual, a-sexual, etc.

Tony D…

As long as you are up front and honest about what you are doing, people should be able to do as they we please. We are all consenting adults :D

But then there are attitudes like this one…

That COMPLETELY defies the reason for a relationship in the first place.

Ridiculous assertions like this are stated without any explanation. Many poly people have great relationships, so how can polyamory defy the reason for a relationship? Having more of something defeats the purpose?

Someone else wrote…

Plus, if you're not sexually nor emotionally satisfied with just one person, then I think it's perhaps time to re-evaluate what you want in a relationship to begin with.

It is insulting to assume poly people haven’t thought much about what they want in a relationship. Most have thought about it more than others.

Lynn…

I believe it is wrong and if you can't be happy with just one then you don't really love them.

So I guess Lynn will only be having one child? Other people wrote it wasn’t for them, but they understand it might be for others. But bigots will dismiss it outright and insist something is wrong with people who find happiness this way.

Will Utah Legalize Polygamy?

KSTU has an story on efforts to decriminalize polyagamy in Utah.

Members of Utah's polygamous communities are making a renewed push to decriminalize polygamy. They argue that if state officials really want to combat abuse in the closed society, they should decriminalize their marriages.

Boudicca Joseph was one of the nine wives of Alex Joseph, who founded the southern Utah town of Big Water. She is one of those pushing for polygamy to be decriminalized, arguing that it is the only way to really fight crimes within the closed and often isolated polygamous communities.

"Who's going to go to a policeman and tell him there's a problem when they're committing a felony and there's a fear they're going to be arrested?" she told Fox 13. "It's not going to happen."

No justification for continue to deny this freedom to marry is given. Everyone, regardless of their religion, should have this freedom if they want to use it.

Be Reasonable

Incest laws were debated in a discussion online at the Richard Dawkins Foundation. The recent Swiss proposal to decriminalize sex between consenting adults was used as the starting point.

A spokesman for the upper house said - quite rightly and justly in my opinion - that the often-cited eugenic reason for a law against incest is not something that a civilized society can use as a basis for a law. After all no one seriously considers punishing the drinking of alcohol during pregnancy, or sex between partners who both have a history of genetic defects in their respective family backgrounds. The abuse argument also doesn't carry us very far, since sexual abuse, coercion and rape are already illegal.

Yes, this is exactly right.

Are there any rational moral reasons for upholding this law against what some consider the last sexual taboo?

No.

CallumW…

I don't really see how a relationship or sex between relatives could be morally wrong if both consent and are uncoerced, however the incidence of genetic disease in inbred families when parents are only cousins is much higher than those with access to a more diverse gene pool, and if siblings were to produce offspring the risk would be greater again. This doesn't really seem fair on the children of such a union. But then to legally ban people from having children in circumstances when the risk of genetic disease is particularly high seems to be a gross infringement of their human rights.

Rtambree…

Sexual acts and procreation are two different things.

Right again!

Still, people tried the “deformed babies” argument, so this comment was made by MMAtheist…

Since the concern about birth defects is predictably the big issue here, I'll repeat my question to everyone: should we also start regulating against older women giving birth to children?

"The British Down's Syndrome Association has posted a chart showing the risk of producing a baby with the syndrome at various maternal ages. From age 20 to age 31, the risk doubles. From 31 to 35, it doubles again. From 35 to 38, it doubles again. From 38 to 41, it more than doubles again."

What about smoking and drinking when you're pregnant? Is that illegal in your country? Shouldn't it be if your #1 concern is birth defects?

Jice…

"Because it makes me feel iky," seems to be the only deffence I see, which flat out is on the same page as religious thinking that your view is supperior to that of thoes providing the consent.

Sex /= offspring. We aren't the catholic church here, we allow contriception.

To set a precident that it's ok to legislate against couples who might have children with birth defects is wrong in any free country. Who makes the decision? If I had a certain gene that would give my baby a 20% chance to be born with Crie-de-chat should I be legislated against, reguardless of who my partner is? Because of a slim chance that if I even have a child (gay) that it has a slim chance to not be perfectly healthy?

And what about gay incest? Any arguments about genetics fly out the window in that case and now all you're doing is legislating against brothers/sisters who like to have a close relationship that includes sexual activity.

And I don't really think age plays much of a factor either. If they are 12, it's just the same curiosity we all grew up with which could amount to a few encounters, and if they are 16, then they are adult enough to make up thier own minds and shouldn't have to be worried about going to jail because they enjoy themselves. Anything younger and they probably haven't even hit puberty and it's completely innocent. And if there is an age gap, say 12 and 18, then it's already illegal through other laws.

The only potential I can see for this law is to double charge sex offenders, of the variety in which paretns molest thier childern. Yes, it's incest, but it's also pedophelia which unless Swiss are all ok with that, is probably still illegal, and still carries the same penalties.

Double dipping laws like this don't help prevent crime, or help the victims of thoes crimes. They just make criminals out of otherwise innocent people whos only crime was to not hurt anyone while doing what they like.

Very well said.

Debonnesnouvelles…

In the rare case where an adult decides that he/she wants to have a relationship with another consenting grown up relative, would the law in this case not infringe on their rights not to be discriminated against?

The law already is in place to punish abusers. Should it punish people who are in a rare position of quite genuinely wanting to love someone they are not supposed to love?

Absolutely not.

Debonnesnouvelles looks at Saletan’s argument…

How would "confusing the relationships" provide a rational basis for laws against incest in view of a constitution? Is confusing relationships a crime?

Foundationist follows up…

I can well imagine a scenario where an incestuous relationship might be perfectly healthy, normal and indeed even psychologically beneficial for the couple. So could countless authors and dramatists through the ages who liked to toy with that taboo.

Yes. Just take a look here (NSFW text).

Punishing incest as a criminal offence in itself seems to be based on numerous preconceived notions and prejudices, especially when the law is unspecified enough to even apply to, say, a lesbian affair between adult half-sisters with a small age gap.

The comments I read did not contain any solid reason to deny the right of consenting adults to love, sex, and marriage simply because they are close relatives. There were many comments from allies.

Bad Sixties Childhood

In the Canadian poly trial, Brenda Jensen said that she had a bad childhood in Bountiful and in a community along the Arizona-Utah border. (See this and this.) This is meant to show that Canadians should be denied the polygamous freedom of marriage. Why? Because her parents were polygynists, which means they practiced a form of polygyny.

I wonder what her family had for breakfast? Maybe whatever they had for breakfast should be banned.

My point is, a problematic family or a problematic community or sect that also practices polygyny is not a reason to deny all adults their right to choose to have more than one spouse.

Many people tell of horrible childhoods they had in monogamous homes. Hold individuals accountable for what they do. Unless you can demonstrate an inherent, direct, causal connection, don’t blame polygamy in general for the bad actions of an individual or a group.

Brenda Jensen left the group in 1968, according to the articles. Her testimony might be useful for historical purposes, but it can’t be considered reliable about what is going on today.

I think child abusers should be dealt with severely, but I don’t believe denying everyone marriage equality helps anyone, child or adult, other than bigots who want a smug sense of control over others.

He Has a Girlfriend, But is Still Active With Sister, Mother

This guy is a senior at a university and has a girlfriend he wants to marry, but he’s been keeping a secret from her.

I am into incest. Not in a fetish or fantasy way, but as a lifestyle. My sister who is a year younger than me and I have been having sex since I was sixteen and she was fifteen. About a year after we started our mom caught us in the act. Instead of being upset mom said something about her always wanting this to happen, then she asked if she could join us.

He goes on to write that with varying frequency, he’s been having sex with his sister and sex with his mother ever since.

Should I tell my girlfriend. Should I invite her to participate. I love her, but I still have strong family love for both my mom and my sister. Think of it this way, my love for my mom and sis are probably the same as yours for your mom and the rest of your immediate family. The only difference is the I have sex with my family. I never thought of sex with mom or my sister as “cheating” on my girlfriend.

I know some people see it that way, but I think if his girlfriend believes they have agreed to strict monogamy or wants to know about any other current sex partners, then I think he is cheating on his girlfriend. He doesn’t make it clear his mother and sister know about his girlfriend, and so he could very well be cheating on them, as well. But I think the silence about that implies that his sister and mother are aware of his relationship with his girlfriend.

He certainly should not marry his girlfriend without her being aware of and agreeable to any ongoing sexual relationship with anyone else. That means he does have the option of ending the sex with his sister and mother, or telling his girlfriend what is going on. I’d say there is what would be a minority chance she will agree to marry him (or stay with him at all) if he tells her what has been going on. The chance is even smaller that she’d be agreeable to this continuing, and even smaller that she would join in. If she would join in (and his sister and mother would likewise be agreeable) than he’d be quite a lucky guy. It isn’t unheard of for someone to agree to share a person with two of the person’s relatives, though each situation is different.

I have to wonder if this would be an issue if we had full marriage equality. Perhaps the writer would marry his sister, his mother, or both?

John Z told the writer to stop having sex with his sister and mother…

Although I don’t personally know anybody who has had vaginal intercourse with their mothers, I do have two friends, each of whom had a sexual relationship with their sisters during high school. Both of these guys are in very secure marriages (both now over 30 years), have children, and have been very successful in life. I had no knowledge of their incestuous relationships until well after college when each of them told me about it (one, because I lusted after his sister in high school and he was aware of it… lucky guy!). So, it is isn’t impossible to end an incestuous relationship.

Of course it isn’t impossible. It isn’t necessary in many cases where others advise it, but it is possible.

While John Z was neutral about the consanguineous sex, the other two responses were from bigots.

Solidarity at the Empty Closet

Bryan90, a gay male, asked for opinions on consanguineous sex and love.

If you know someone (this means that if you don't want to disclose your own identity, you can just say you 'know someone') who wants to have a romantic or sexual relationship with his/her siblings (same-sex or opposite-sex) would you be able to share your story?

Black Cat, a gay male, wrote…

My step-dad and his sister are awful close if you catch my drift. Based solely on the way they interact, and the fact that they almost worship one another, as well as some stories we've heard from other people, they've been involved once or twice.

A couple of people brought up cocerns with being open and honest about something that is criminal in many places. Bryan90 wrote…

wow, I never knew that having a relationship would be illegal - i always thought it was the marriage that was illegal.

Yes, unfortunately, it is illegal in many places (this discussion consists mostly of Canadians and Americans) for people to have consensual sex just because they are close biological or legal relatives. This needs to be changed.

djt820, a gay male, wrote…

Incest is fine. Never had any experience considering I don't have any siblings and I don't see my cousins at all. As long as both parties can consent, its fine.

Thanks!

Beachboi92, a gay male, wrote…

While i personally am iffy on the idea of dating blood-relatives (while not so much non-blood relatives) i'm still also the kind to say whatever makes you happy, no ones getting hurt and it's two consensual adults so if you where to argue it there really isn't an issue. I mean honestly there isn't much of a moral reason to say incestuous relationships are bad.

All through history people have been involved within their own families, i'm sure it happens in the animal kingdom, and hell even the bible leaves no option but incest for how people came to exist so go bananas xD

Thanks!

Maverick, who identifies as a bisexual “transgender boi” wrote…

Any sexual act between consensual adults is fine with me, but the only in-family infatuation I've ever had is on my adopted brother, and it passed pretty quickly after he was introduced into our family as an older teenager. Also, I never would have acted on it, not then and especially not now.

I'm pretty sure my cousin was fooling around with her stepbrother when her mom got remarried and they moved in together. But I don't consider sexual/romantic relationships involving adopted siblings and step-siblings to really be that weird...after all, you're not really related.

Thanks!

Darkwing65, a “bisexualish” male, wrote…

Love and lust are boundless offenders. Reason will guide us and passion will drive us. I think as long as no one is coerced or harmed in any way, go for it. Love is maniacally beautiful like that.

It’s nice to see solidarity from the G and B males for the rights of consenting adults to consanguineous love, sex, and marriage. People who have had or want consanguineous relationships should likewise show solidatiry for LGBT rights (as many do).

One Person's Polyamory

Margarita del Norte offers a description of polyamory in her her life.

Polyamory – or at least my version of it – is about getting and giving the most love consistent with our puny human limitations, and about respecting one’s beloveds, and not trying to own them, or require as proof of their love that they abstain from the fullness of what life has to offer.

Now, I get it that some people – maybe most people, if popular culture is any mirror – are happiest loving just one person and being loved by them. And good for them; I can’t help thinking that must be simpler, at least most of the time. (Certainly the whole safe sex thing gets a lot simpler.)

But I can certainly love more than one person at a time – love them deeply, solidly, all the way through. And that does not interfere with my ability to give the one I’m with my undivided attention.

I recommend reading her whole essay. There's a f-word in there, or two, so be warned if that bothers you. Another quote I wanted to highlight, to show the diversity found in polyamory...

I even have a lover with whom I do not have sex at all (not for decades now, anyway) but the intensity of our relationship, the depth of our love, would drive a jealous/possessive person totally nuts.

You might think that being bisexual and polyamorous would make life just one big orgy, but alas, that is not so (or not very often) because my peculiar orientation, and in particular my lack of interest in casual sex (that is, sex without emotional intimacy) disqualifies so many potential lovers, and also disqualifies me as far as most people are concerned.

The misconception that some people have of all poly people being sleep-with-anyone flakes doesn't hold up. Many poly people are thoughtful, disciplined people and they should not be denied their rights.