posted November 13, 2007 10:08 AM         

quote:

---

Unless you count STD's as a wonderful welcome gift.

---

posted November 13, 2007 11:44 AM         

That being said, I think the idea of polygamy/polyamory is more attractive to the "takers" in the relationship than the "givers."

When you're a giving person, being with more than one person would be draining. And while it can be done, if I truly care about and love someone, I'd prefer to give them my all than to give them 50% or whatever portion I have left after dealing with the other person or people.

posted November 14, 2007 01:47 PM         

I've seen it in all relationships regardless of sexual orientation or culture.

In a few of my homosexual friends' relationships the dynamic still exists. And the ones who are more taking are the ones more interested in hooking up with various other people while mainting their "core" relationship. It seems to be more accepted in their relationships, but it's still the predominately "taking" partner who's more into it. I've never seen a more "giving" person of any sexual orientation interested in polygamy/polyamory.

I also have some friends who are Muslim and to some polygamy is an acceptable practice though it's still not desirable to most of the wives(any that I know of, but I'll say "most" because I'm guessing there are some that are ok with it). The husbands that I've seen that are more "giving" have no interest in taking any other wives because they are putting their love and effort into the marriage and family that they have. They don't consider taking another wife for fear that it would take away from what they can give to their current family. Even if they have the means and the time, many prefer to give whatever "extra" they have to the family they already have.

posted November 14, 2007 04:16 PM         

quote:

---

The risk of STD would be small because all the women would be f##king the same man and he would not be going outside for sex. Sacred sex?

---

How interesting that only the man gets to have multiple wives... and the wives are expected to be faithful and only sleep with the husband? The more people are involved, the higher the risk of the players fooling around on the side... hence the reference to the STDs... but even yeast infections can be spread within the group.

All in all, it's just disgusting.

posted November 14, 2007 08:57 PM         

quote:

---

How interesting that only the man gets to have multiple wives... and the wives are expected to be faithful and only sleep with the husband?

---

posted November 15, 2007 10:05 AM         

quote:

---

The risk of STD would be small because all the women would be f##king the same man and he would not be going outside for sex.

---

posted November 15, 2007 11:08 AM         

That's not realistic.

There is adultery and "infidelity" in polygamy/polyamory situations. If anything, I've seen it increase for 2 reasons.

1)The partner who is seeking mutliple partnerships ends up feeling justified in being with 'whomever' outside of the agreed upon arrangement because once that monogamous barrier is broken the boundaries of "acceptable" partners becomes blurred or trashed all together. And every time you add a partner, you're adding whoever that partner has slept with into the equasion. And you have no way of knowing that each person you pick up as a new partner is being monogamous to you only, or if they too have multiple partners.

2)In a polygamous/polyamory situation where there is one central person(say a husband) and more than one partner(wives), the partners 99% of the time are not having their own personal needs met. While the "husband" may think he's doing ok at this because he sees each "wife" every few days, in most instances(that I've seen) there are huge gaps in physical, sexual, and emotional needs being met. I've known of several wives who ended up cheating on their husbands because they took on a 2nd wife and their needs weren't being met. I know of *1* situation where it did introduce a sexually transmitted disease to all 3 partners(wife/husband/2nd wife) because the man she cheated with passed it on to her unknowingly. It wasn't AIDS but it is a permanent illness that can't be cured...

I also have to say that I agree with artlovesdawn about sex being sacred. How can something that can create life be anything but?!?! And that's not even speaking about the spiritual aspects of the union. If it weren't sacred then there would be no concept of marriage in all the religions of the world in which G_d/The Most High/The Supreme Being is asked to bless a union which is spiritual and expected to be sexual. If it weren't for the sexuality involved there would be no marriage.

posted November 15, 2007 01:09 PM         

quote:

---

Every society I can think of where there is openly accepted polygomy, it appears as though the polygomy is used as yet another way to establish control by one caste (men) over another caste (women) within that society.

---

That's what I've been saying all along. On cloud nine it oculd be about "free love" and such. But in reality?....hell no. Otherwise you'd here of many more instances of polyandry too.

posted November 15, 2007 02:33 PM         

Every polygamous marriage that I've known has been in the U.S. Of the Muslims, some are African American and some are from other (usually) Arab countries.

They may legally be married to one wife, but they have a religious ceremony/marriage with the other wife/wives. In most cases where the first(legal) wife stays in the marriage it's because they have children and she's unemployed and dependant on her husband for their provision.

Also -

"I guess its just that the chief cannot or will not forgo tradition in favor of religion."

Forgive me Dulce Luna if I say anything that can be perceived as insulting, but I've found that most men will not forgo "tradition" or "religion" if there are some sort of "perks" involved. Especially if those "perks" are sexual....

I've seen the most dishonorable men take second or third wives under the guise of "religion." Arguing that they're propagating the religion or doing a good deed for the 2nd/3rd/etc. wife and society in general.

Meanwhile, these men don't see fit to propagate the religion or do good deeds by giving to the poor, educating the illiterate, feeding orphans, etc. It's only when they see a single woman that they would like to have sex with that they suddenly get the urge to be "generous."

My argument to them has been, if you want to be generous to a woman in need, then why don't you give her some financial assistance and let her choose her own husband? Instead of taking from the wife and children you already have and putting a woman almost into a position of prostitution where you will only offer her help if there are sexual favors involved?

They can never answer me....

posted November 15, 2007 04:14 PM         

quote:

---

Every polygamous marriage that I've known has been in the U.S. Of the Muslims, some are African American and some are from other (usually) Arab countries.

They may legally be married to one wife, but they have a religious ceremony/marriage with the other wife/wives. In most cases where the first(legal) wife stays in the marriage it's because they have children and she's unemployed and dependant on her husband for their provision.

---

Well Akon is Muslim, but he's of West African descent (from Senegal). And even without Islam, its still common across Africa. Its just that African Muslims and Pagans who wish to practice this (particularly the chiefs) have it alot easier than African Christians because its not against Islam to take more than one spouse (although I think there's a limit-like no more than 4 or something like that) and African Paganism is heavily based on the culture so of course they won't have an issue with polygamy either.

Hell, I used to have this misconception in my head that African Christians never practice polygamy anymore......I hate when I'm so naive.

quote:

---

Forgive me Dulce Luna if I say anything that can be perceived as insulting, but I've found that most men will not forgo "tradition" or "religion" if there are some sort of "perks" involved. Especially if those "perks" are sexual....

---

Yeah true, I've seen this with those weird little religious cults out in the MidWest (which I'm aware are not Mormon......someone once had to correct me on this).

But to me, its always seemed like the chief was just keeping with tradition and stuff. I mean, he could technically "refuse" those wives he gets as gifts if he really wanted to but I guess that's like a grave insult in my culture....LOL. But that's the rural area for you, and why prefer urban culture in Mozambique better sometimes.