5 ms·

You could recreate marriage as a form of incorporation which wouldn't be a bad idea if you think about the cost of growing old and having children. More adult p

You could recreate marriage as a form of incorporation which wouldn't be a bad idea if you think about the cost of growing old and having children. More adult partners equals more income to ensure the survival of its members and their children. And yes, I read Moon is a Harsh Mistress too many times (I'm a sucker for that novel). :P

lisper 11y ago
Nothing is stopping you from doing that today. In fact, if you're really serious about advancing polygamy, this would be the way to start: show -- don't tell -- us how it would work. Because right now the poster children for polygamy are (AFAICT) all white male religious nut cases who just want to use it as an excuse to keep a harem.
- norea-armozel 11y ago
  I never said I want to be in a group marriage, so I don't know why you seem to be suggesting that I should "show, don't tell" anything. I just said I could see it working out for some people. The fact that there exists an entire subculture of queer and pansexual individuals who are in such group relationships seems to me the proof in the pudding that it should be ratified as part of our civil law. And not some horny old man looking to recreate a Turkish harem painting. I think it would be wise to consider the possibility that maybe the legal institutions involved in marriage aren't up to scratch in terms of what humans can possibly do in terms of romantic and intimate relationships. It's better, in my opinion, to incorporate a method by which we can address these issues by more effective methods (as in don't ban something just because you don't like it. You ban it because it's destructive to the social order.).
  - lisper 11y ago
    That comment wasn't necessarily direct at you specifically, but at anyone who wants to see polygamy legalized. It was just a suggestion.
    - norea-armozel 11y ago
      You realize that there are legal scholars already positing their legality right now, right? It's not too hard to search Google to see some of the more interesting papers being written on the subject from the legal point of view. The social and psychological aspects are still scarce since we live in a society built around western European Protestantism (heteronormative). So, whatever research that does exist is relatively new or limited in scope.
      - lisper 11y ago
        > You realize that there are legal scholars already positing their legality right now, right? Of course. On my list of social causes worth spending time and energy on, polygamy ranks pretty low. If it's near and dear to your heart I wish you the best of luck.
        norea-armozel 11y ago
        It's not so dear as you wish to be. I merely recognize the nature of law is not unlike any other logical enterprise. When you allow one form of inference the other forms that depend upon it must be analyzed to see the limits of it. Just like how legal scholars debate the limits of speech even today. It's both academic and practical.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
- Nadya 11y ago
  To play devil's advocate here: If the white male religious nut case can provide and care for the woman and any resulting offspring and the woman are willing and knowing participants in the harem. What's the problem? That you don't like it? That seems rather bigoted.
  - lisper 11y ago
    The problem is the religious nut case part, which often leads to the reality being very different from your rosy hypothetical. In real life, polygamous relationships often involve older men with young, often underage, women who have been coerced into the relationship and are often sexually abused. I have nothing against polygamous relationships among fully fledged consenting adults. But that doesn't seem to be what most polygamous relationships are. I could be wrong. I haven't done extensive research into this. If you want to convince me, show me the data.
    - norea-armozel 11y ago
      You realize the data is scarce because the phenomena hasn't been studied, right? You seem to be hung up on the Sister-Wives nonsense and see it as the only viable data point in a truly unanalyzed section of human behavior. The fact of the matter is that I personally know people who are polyarmous and none of them are the creepy Mormon/Branch-Davidian type. Most that I know who are poly are queer (like myself) and far from religious. If anything, it should be you that should go and create a research program analyzing the nature of poly relationships in humans and the underlying causes, not me. I merely pointed out the reality that our law should consider accommodation for those individuals as it does for others. All you seem to be bringing to the table is scare mongering that depends more on the tiniest of slivers of human society for the proposition that poly relationships should be illegal. Such a proposition is not tenable on it's face nor in its contents thus far. Or in simpler terms: please do your own research because I'm not here to convince you either way (but you seem damn sure to convince me that my poly friends are some evil bad fundies wanting to rape children). Edit: sorry for the rudeness. I take things personally sometimes.
    - Nadya 11y ago

lisper 11y ago

Nothing is stopping you from doing that today. In fact, if you're really serious about advancing polygamy, this would be the way to start: show -- don't tell -- us how it would work. Because right now the poster children for polygamy are (AFAICT) all white male religious nut cases who just want to use it as an excuse to keep a harem.

norea-armozel 11y ago
I never said I want to be in a group marriage, so I don't know why you seem to be suggesting that I should "show, don't tell" anything. I just said I could see it working out for some people. The fact that there exists an entire subculture of queer and pansexual individuals who are in such group relationships seems to me the proof in the pudding that it should be ratified as part of our civil law. And not some horny old man looking to recreate a Turkish harem painting. I think it would be wise to consider the possibility that maybe the legal institutions involved in marriage aren't up to scratch in terms of what humans can possibly do in terms of romantic and intimate relationships. It's better, in my opinion, to incorporate a method by which we can address these issues by more effective methods (as in don't ban something just because you don't like it. You ban it because it's destructive to the social order.).
- lisper 11y ago
  That comment wasn't necessarily direct at you specifically, but at anyone who wants to see polygamy legalized. It was just a suggestion.
  - norea-armozel 11y ago
    You realize that there are legal scholars already positing their legality right now, right? It's not too hard to search Google to see some of the more interesting papers being written on the subject from the legal point of view. The social and psychological aspects are still scarce since we live in a society built around western European Protestantism (heteronormative). So, whatever research that does exist is relatively new or limited in scope.
    - lisper 11y ago
      > You realize that there are legal scholars already positing their legality right now, right? Of course. On my list of social causes worth spending time and energy on, polygamy ranks pretty low. If it's near and dear to your heart I wish you the best of luck.
      - norea-armozel 11y ago
        It's not so dear as you wish to be. I merely recognize the nature of law is not unlike any other logical enterprise. When you allow one form of inference the other forms that depend upon it must be analyzed to see the limits of it. Just like how legal scholars debate the limits of speech even today. It's both academic and practical.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
Nadya 11y ago
To play devil's advocate here: If the white male religious nut case can provide and care for the woman and any resulting offspring and the woman are willing and knowing participants in the harem. What's the problem? That you don't like it? That seems rather bigoted.
- lisper 11y ago
  The problem is the religious nut case part, which often leads to the reality being very different from your rosy hypothetical. In real life, polygamous relationships often involve older men with young, often underage, women who have been coerced into the relationship and are often sexually abused. I have nothing against polygamous relationships among fully fledged consenting adults. But that doesn't seem to be what most polygamous relationships are. I could be wrong. I haven't done extensive research into this. If you want to convince me, show me the data.
  - norea-armozel 11y ago
    You realize the data is scarce because the phenomena hasn't been studied, right? You seem to be hung up on the Sister-Wives nonsense and see it as the only viable data point in a truly unanalyzed section of human behavior. The fact of the matter is that I personally know people who are polyarmous and none of them are the creepy Mormon/Branch-Davidian type. Most that I know who are poly are queer (like myself) and far from religious. If anything, it should be you that should go and create a research program analyzing the nature of poly relationships in humans and the underlying causes, not me. I merely pointed out the reality that our law should consider accommodation for those individuals as it does for others. All you seem to be bringing to the table is scare mongering that depends more on the tiniest of slivers of human society for the proposition that poly relationships should be illegal. Such a proposition is not tenable on it's face nor in its contents thus far. Or in simpler terms: please do your own research because I'm not here to convince you either way (but you seem damn sure to convince me that my poly friends are some evil bad fundies wanting to rape children). Edit: sorry for the rudeness. I take things personally sometimes.
  - Nadya 11y ago