Your views on polygamy

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Personally - I feel Polygamy and/or Polyamory and/or Polyandry - - - are a far more natural way of being then monogamy.

Just because we were raised that it is wrong and you can only love one person - - does not make it so.

Obviously people can Love more then one person - - as testament to our increasing divorce rate.

I think understanding jealousy is a Possession emotion - - gives a different perspective. Do you really feel one person has the right to possess another?

Of course like everything else - - Respect and Rules are needed.

In Polygamy the women should have the power - and in Polyandry the men should have the power in how the home is run. That prevents the single person from playing one wife or one husband against each other.





You took the words out of my mouth. Thanks for this reply I couldn't say it any better. couples should work together.




posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Personally, it isn't about jealousy to me, although I can tend to be a jealous boyfriend, in all honesty.

To me, its about the seconds in the day, the energy we have, and the magic of having a "better half" that continually grows with you to become the apple of your eye.

You simply can't be there for each person every second of every day. There will continually be choices made in favor of one person or another. The reliability of a one-on-one relationship (a good one anyway) is undeniably better than a polyamorous situation.

I also think we have limited tolerance and energy throughout the day. Having one person who understands that is much better than worrying about the needs of many individuals when you yourself are just having a downright bad day.

Polyamory seems to be more about sex than anything, not the people involved. People want options physically, and polygamy gives them that.

I honestly have been in a relationship where I wanted no one else physically or emotionally, so I guess that's why I don't understand the desire or need to have more than one person in your life. Seems like a lot of excess baggage, even if you do genuinely love the people involved.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by SantaClaus
Personally, it isn't about jealousy to me, although I can tend to be a jealous boyfriend, in all honesty.

To me, its about the seconds in the day, the energy we have, and the magic of having a "better half" that continually grows with you to become the apple of your eye.

You simply can't be there for each person every second of every day. There will continually be choices made in favor of one person or another. The reliability of a one-on-one relationship (a good one anyway) is undeniably better than a polyamorous situation.



Well I thought like you did when I was younger.

But having lived 64 years and gone through many incarnations - - I have a different perspective now.

No you can't be there for each person every second - - and they probably don't want you to.

I have come to the realization that Women need to bond with other women. It doesn't happen much in our modern society. Women today tend to be somewhat isolated in monogamous marriages.

There was a time when a neighborhood (village) raised a child. Every mother on the block "was your mother" too (at least in actions). You did something wrong - - and what ever "mother" was closest - - is the one who swatted you.

In these modern times - - not only do I approve of Polygamy (and other) - - I encourage it - - as a solution to our disconnecting as humans.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Actually, I think you're right on with the women connecting with other women thing. In my first long term relationship, that was our major first hurdle. She became very quickly and very deeply invested in our relationship, and began to spend 90% of her time with me. This cause major friction with her then roommates, and even her sisters and mother. A once extraordinarily popular girl with hundreds of friends seemingly had none.

But we talked about it and started going on double dates and having friends out with us more, and she regained her connection to other females. I'm an understanding guy, but I am far from able to handle some of the longer conversations some women need.

I can connect with you on the problem and the disconnect, but I also think there are perfectly reasonable solutions for both within a monogamous relationship.

I would never accuse you of being spurned by love, but I would ask if you are. I have definitely been spurned by love, and in my recovery did a lot of running around with multiple people, but I'd never give up hope on the one on one relationship.

And as a qualifier, I am not saying that "running around with multiple people" is the same as polygamy.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by SantaClaus
 


Just know it took me many years and many experiences to get to this point of understanding.

Positive Energy to you - - - and that your life continues on - - - in how you believe.

Some do live their dream. I hope you are one of them.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Thank you, and same to you. Thanks for giving me another thoughtful opinion, even if we don't agree.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
My wife has played both sides of the field, so to speak, and it isn't off the table with her to have another gal join in for a wild night maybe...


You lucky devil...


On topic, a good friend of mine has two ladies and they both seem perfectly happy sharing him. Whether it will work out in the long run, only time can tell but it's working for right now, so whatever's clever.

Is it moral? I have no right to judge, so it's a moot point.

$0.02


TheAssoc.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 


Personally i would only want one spouse any more and your just asking for trouble. Not to mention all the nagging and bickering you would have to endure.
The expense alone would be staggering a whole bunch of wives going on shopping sprees youd be bankrupt in a week. :bnghd: To me polygamy is just a foolish idea besides those women would eventually
:bash:
you.:shk:



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
I would like to get views on polygamy from other members. I would like to come out that I believe in and support polygamy. My views are that a man should be able have more then one wife.


Polygamy means that the number of women available to you will shrink drastically. Just because you're cute and available doesn't mean women will choose you -- they'll choose to marry men who can support multiple wives.

This is a problem in Muslim countries where polygamy is allowed. Wars traditionally killed off large numbers of young men, and arranged marriages (where the woman has no choice) were the norm.

So look at it from the other perspective -- how would you enjoy being the guy who doesn't have enough income to interest ANY woman because society is encouraging them to all go after the rich guys who can support them?



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   
I should also add that polygamous societies also have a habit of acquiring "child brides" -- which means the women are less educated and have fewer opportunities to be anything but mommies. The wealthier or more high status women (including those who have given birth to sons) can be very abusive towards the newer or younger or older or homelier or less favored women.

Polyamorous (including polygany (multiple men, one woman)) might be better but the issue of children and responsibility does become rather complex. I think there'd have to be many changes in our social behaviors before this could work.

But before we get to that stage, we really need to evolve patterns where we make a two-person long-term relationship (possibly involving children) work.



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Greetings Brothers and Sisters,

I believe polygamy is self existing, in that we should all love each other equally. The definition of spouse is of course, dictated by government, which I feel they have no business in.

Who we have sexual relations with should be left up to the two, three, or however many, to decide by consent.

Your Brother



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
I should also add that polygamous societies also have a habit of acquiring "child brides" -- which means the women are less educated and have fewer opportunities to be anything but mommies. The wealthier or more high status women (including those who have given birth to sons) can be very abusive towards the newer or younger or older or homelier or less favored women.


That to me seems like a very antiquated view. I think we are talking about the everyday average person - - not a religious cult that has many issues.

I think most of us have already established "Consenting Adults".

Does America still put that much importance on having sons?

I've already mentioned it can only work if the women are in charge. Which means they would have to consent to any new additions.



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   
I just learned a new word from one of the above posts and discovered some thing that I thought I would share.

Polyandry Is the practice of a woman taking multiple husbands i.e. the opposite of what we usually think of when we think polygamy, which is more properly called polygyny
Apparently It is practiced by the Masai people, the people of Bhūtan and in e few other places as well.

This idea actually appeals to me more then polygyny at least I would get some help re grouting the bathroom tiles.


[edit on 4-9-2010 by davespanners]

[edit on 4-9-2010 by davespanners]



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Sorry double post for some reason

[edit on 4-9-2010 by davespanners]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Yeah because today "Consenting Adults" have any clue what it is to be responsible to begin with. I wouldn't trust most "Adults" to be able to tie their own shoes let alone handle the the responsibility of dealing with one partners feelings and needs and you wanna add several more to it?

Polygamy or whatever poly you wanna make it is all about satisfying ones own ego and nothing to do with love sorry. There is a reason in modern society it is virtually nonexistent it doesn't work otherwise it would still be in common practice.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 



You truly are a romantic rebel huh. Ok me personally, It's not my thing, 1 female would be more then enough for me, 2 or more sounds about as fun as getting kicked in the balls multiple times. So no I personally dont find it appealing at all.....But it's your life and do what you want, I know from observance that there are lot's of women that would be into it as well. In fact for lots this whole 2some pair thing will not work, and never will so why pretend or force it, so do what comes natural to you. And the birds of a feather will flock together.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jovi1
reply to post by Annee
 


Yeah because today "Consenting Adults" have any clue what it is to be responsible to begin with. I wouldn't trust most "Adults" to be able to tie their own shoes let alone handle the the responsibility of dealing with one partners feelings and needs and you wanna add several more to it?

Polygamy or whatever poly you wanna make it is all about satisfying ones own ego and nothing to do with love sorry. There is a reason in modern society it is virtually nonexistent it doesn't work otherwise it would still be in common practice.


Honestly - - LOVE is usually not Love - - but Lust - - and wears off - - then the cheating starts - - then divorce - - etc.

Understanding what LOVE really means - - is understanding it is not SEX.

A genuine Love Polygamy relationship would be about - Sharing - Understanding - Cooperation - Commitment - Trust - Friendship - Support - etc.

Continuing to make Sex the focal point does show immaturity - in my opinion.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee




Honestly - - LOVE is usually not Love - - but Lust - - and wears off - - then the cheating starts - - then divorce - - etc.



Lust...wears off? That hasn't been my experience but I can see it diminishing in my near future as I'm as old as you are.

I lived with two women once. More trouble than it's worth. I prefer having a mistress....if I could find one!

[edit on 5-9-2010 by whaaa]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa

Originally posted by Annee




Honestly - - LOVE is usually not Love - - but Lust - - and wears off - - then the cheating starts - - then divorce - - etc.



Lust...wears off? That hasn't been my experience but I can see it diminishing in my near future as I'm as old as you are.

I lived with two women once. More trouble than it's worth. I prefer having a mistress....if I could find one!



Well - - I got divorced from my high school sweetheart after 14 years of marriage - - right in the middle of the Sexual Revolution. Yahoo!

This year I celebrated 21 years of marriage to my second husband who is 21 years younger then me.

I'm not dead yet.

But Lust is Lust - - and Genuine Love involves a lot more then sex.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


No would argue that love is just more than sex, but there is no way you can properly love more than one person in a committed sexual relationship equally. This is the problem with the idea of group marriage altogether. There would be too much background noise going on and one will always be standing out in front of the other, does it look good on paper in its most idealized form yeah it does, but so do a lot of other failed concepts because they do not take into account the people that have to operate in them.

It is so easy to alienate just the one that is the societal standard we have today, how many marriages end just because all the stuff in the background made its way to the foreground and got in the way? This would only be amplified in a group setting. Like I said before if it were all that great it would still be a common practice.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join