|Polygamy Page 2 of 6 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)|
|zentral ...yes technically your right ..Amor is love but in today's society .... chaste love is considered friendship and polyamory is considered sexual conduct between more than two people whether they love each other or not..but Yes technically your right ....but (im not giving up on this yet) lol ...you would be hard pressed to find anyone that considers themselves in a Polyamorous relationship that does not include sex ...if you find three people just living together no matter how much they loved each other ...in a chaste /platonic relationship they would just consider themselves to be friends ...you know like the TV show supposedly...as a mater of fact if you referred to a group of people in a non sexual /platonic relationship as Polyamorous they would be offended ..no mater how much in love ....me thinks|
sometimes words are modified from their actual make up ...by social conduct ..i think this to be the case with polyamory
it is about loving more than one person.
if this the case i hope we are all polyamorous ..I love lots of people ....no polyamory IS today SEXUAL love ...just like marriage is suppose to involve sexual love ...even if they neither involve LOVE ...as is the case in society today ...too many times
Posted: 7/23/2008 11:39:21 AM
Polyamory is mostly just sex
polyamory =sex between more than two people
polygamy= marriage between more than two people
I'll give you the polygamy short definition, however, you are seriously wrong about polyamorous relationships.
I'm not a big wiki-fan, but it's simplistic, to the point and pretty acurate in this instance:
Polyamory (from Greek p??? [poly, meaning many or several] and Latin amor [literally “love”]) is the desire, practice, or acceptance of having more than one loving, intimate relationship at a time with the full knowledge and consent of everyone involved. Polyamorous perspectives differ from monogamous perspectives, in that they reflect one or more partner's wish(es) to have further meaningful relationships and to accommodate these alongside their existing relationships.
Polyamory is distinct from polygamy, being closer to a personal outlook than a predefined bonding system. It is grounded in such concepts as choice, trust, equality of free will, and the more novel idea of compersion, rather than in cultural or religious tradition.
Obviously, that is a short description quoted, there is much more to poly living than is explanable here. And being this is such a conservative site, it's rather useless to even venture into discussions on topics relating to alternative relationship options. JMO
Posted: 7/23/2008 11:40:38 AM
|Double post...sorry OP.|
Posted: 7/24/2008 5:10:20 AM
Latin amor [literally “love”]) is the desire, practice, or acceptance of having more than one loving, INTIMATE relationship at a time
i rest my case oh green eyed one.
....Love only exist when both people are in love ...people dont understand Love ....you cannot love someone that dont love you ...thinking that you love someone that dont love you is self destructive ..love shared is wonderful ...love just taken or given one way is a ugly thing which the word Love does not describe.....Love is an emotion shared between two (or more)people if the emotion is one sided its something different ...maybe infatuation,insanity,im not sure but it aint love ... however sex is a pretty tangible thing
Posted: 7/24/2008 5:44:21 AM
|Me share my mate with any other woman/women? That'll be the day!|
Posted: 8/20/2008 10:28:02 AM
Want to live a little longer? Get a second wife
Honny you are never going to believe what the doctor prescribed...?sounds convincing to me ...but i just dont think it will work on her ..oh well its worth a try anyway
Posted: 8/20/2008 10:51:15 AM
|Ilook at my SO's picture each day and think I would marry you so yeah I could marry her several times and she could satisfy all and every need I will ever have no need for more trouble|
Posted: 8/21/2008 12:54:00 PM
After accounting for socioeconomic differences, men aged over 60 from 140 countries that practice polygamy to varying degrees lived on average 12% longer than men from 49 mostly monogamous nations.
How long do the women live?
Posted: 8/22/2008 8:48:06 AM
I don't like it and wouldn't be able to accept it unless I can have many husbands. While he out with his other wives, I would be with my other husbands. No polygamists in my family that I know of...there are rolling stones though...
This would be more descriptive of polyamory, a growing trend.
Polygamy is having more than one spouse. It's a gender-neutral term.
Polygyny, what the OP was referring to, is one man with many wives.
Polyandry is one woman with many husbands.
Polyamory simply means many loves, and may or may not involve marriage among any of the involved parties.
There's nothing in the term "polygamy" to preclude what this commenter was talking about.
Posted: 8/22/2008 12:51:21 PM
|No OP; I think its wrong. |
Do you ever notice that in polygamists groups most men are older and have VERY young wives?
Look at Brigham Young. He screwed girls as young as 15 when he was in his 40's.
Polygamists groups are mostly about one thing; older men being able to screw younger girls. And because they are polygamists, one more wife isn't a big deal. Why a woman would share a man is beyond me.
Posted: 8/25/2008 10:37:05 AM
|Jeesh, I see a ton of media bias out here. The reason that everyone sees big busts with Pedophiles being polygamist is because those are the sensational news stories. Those get people watching, talking, and more importantly, watching during commercials or viewing ads in print.|
The vast majority of polygamy worldwide (at the moment) is One man, one primary wife, and one lesser wife/concubine. These pedophile ranches really don't account for that many of them. It's just that how many people would watch the news if they reported that "man has happy loving relationship with two wives" or "man's first wife wants more attention than his second"? That isn't even good enough to make a daytime soap opera on its own.
I mean think of it this way. When does a straight, two person marriage between consenting adults appear on the news? When one of them is murdered and/or missing, when one of them is a politician/celebrity and one of them cheats, or when one of them does something so mind-blowingly stupid they use it as a 30-second pick me up story. Based on that coverage, I think "normal" relationships suck.
Posted: 8/25/2008 4:42:48 PM
According to the Ethnographic Atlas Codebook, of the 1231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous. 453 had occasional polygyny, 588 had more frequent polygyny, and 4 had polyandry
That is what Wiki has to say on the topic. And then it goes on to say that in cultures where it is allowed, it is generally uncommon. It is simply out of the financial reach of most. Just thought I'd drop some numbers in really quick.
Posted: 8/25/2008 9:20:49 PM
|I do not mean to disrespect any lifestyle. I personally adhere to monogamy, but there are benefits to all styles. Someone once suggested to me the term 'polyamory' to denote multiple relationships based in love. I personally feel that this is entirely unrealistic. Not only is it trying to have the best of all possible worlds, it's confusing and misleading to others and most importantly to YOURSELF! Polygamy can work, but I don't think true love can fit into it.|
Posted: 8/25/2008 9:56:04 PM
|polygamy, sleeping with siblings, moms and dads is illegal in the USA and in any reasonable and truly Christian country. |
it's another issue that many people just end up being complete losers and confuse the freedom of choice and messing up a little here and there during a marriage with this polygamy BS.
I am more than sure that if a poll will be made about this where not only pathetic singles in this creepy free single site will participate, but also normal people, there would be very few who would think the way looks like 50% of the retarded posters think here.
may be the reason you are wondering in this idiotic site is that bcs you are wairdoes yourself? out of the norm unlike vast majority of normal people are?
Posted: 8/25/2008 10:13:39 PM
|You call other people on the site idiots, but I just cant seem to bring myself to be able to understand any more of your post than that. |
Any person who says, "So and so is illegal in the christian country of the US" is full of themselves.
Last I checked, it wasn't against your religious faith to walk an alligator on a leash (Yes, that is against the law in Florida )
Nothing against the majority of religious folk, but those who say, "It's against the law because my religion says so" pisses me off... You are pretty much saying that a religious cult is in charge of an entire country and the country doesn't make it's own laws and regulations to abide by. There are some laws that make sense such as murder, stealing, etc. But polygamy shouldn't be illegal. If one man wants to marry multiple women, then let him. If one women wants to marry multiple men, then let them. Stay out of others lives...
Polygamy may not be for me, but that doesn't mean I want to regulate my neighbor's life and care more about what hes doing than about what I am doing.
(Incest should still be illegal given chance of increased birth defects)
Posted: 8/25/2008 11:55:26 PM
Polygamy may not be for me, but that doesn't mean I want to regulate my neighbor's life and care more about what hes doing than about what I am doing.
hey dude, I really can care less what pisses you off, what pisses me off is you being such a smart guy and at the same time so confused. It's like you are saying even though family is a society phenomenon, meaning, people do register for marriage in governmental structures which the taxpayers like me and you support.
Your neighbor who will ahve 5644545 kids with his 5 wives whom I won't even show my diicckk will seek child support from government from the taxes me and you pay, if he dies or gets herpes on his ass since even if I won't even show my****to any of his sluts there should be lots of desparate and horney dudes like you who would be ready to fuk anyone. then , part of the medical system is sopnsored by government, me and you will pay for all these deseses.
So, you can't say that polygamy doesn't concern anyone, provided that we are talking about legalizing it.
if these suckers like you, want to legalize it, it means they are applying to the government which is chosen by regular citizens like me and represents the regular citizens like me.
If you retards want to stick your tails into your assseess and do that private or suck as many bitchhes as you want that's your business, but don't BS here about the nonsense, since messages from this site go everywhere and I have seen this pathetic poygamy BS in myspace too and shut their mouthes too...
since even idiotic gay marriage took too much time to pass, which I could care less,
but this poligamy BS is out of control.
go live in Iraq then they are muslims, can have as many wives as they wont. Join the army babe , you are in the right age, instead of sitting here like a puzzy and BS-in, I have served my term, you go fight with these dudes then come and startin enjoying yourself.
Posted: 8/26/2008 1:02:34 AM
|7733... you claim to be a business owner, yet your grammar is horrendous and your spelling is atrocious. In order for me to make a clean rebuttal, one would hope to be able to understand his opposition. |
That said, only the idiots who can't take care of themselves apply for financial aid.
One man who has three wives has three kids each
which equals 9 kids, three wives, one man. One man and three wives who make an income, which, they are all better off then if one man had one wife who had three kids with two other girls who have three kids, taking care of these kids by herself without a father figure to help support her, which she would have to apply for financial aid. In the end, they would get less money from financial aid with the added support from the father figure.
Something that they should teach you in business school, eh?
Posted: 8/26/2008 1:31:34 AM
|If Brad Pitt wanted to bring me into the fold and gave me the choice of sharing him with all those kids or with Angelina, I'd probably choose Angelina.|
Posted: 8/26/2008 1:40:13 AM
|Personal attacks are unnecessary and should be avoided, lest the mods close the thread.|
That being said, the belief that polygamy is wrong is actually firmly in the minority worldwide. The vast majority of cultures across the world allow for some form of polygamy. That being said, polygamy is still rare because most people in the world just can't afford it. It's expensive as hell to keep two women and the children you have with them happy. As a result, polygamy is frequently a status symbol and is something that people wish they could do, but cannot afford.
Also, bragging about the Christian status of the United States demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of what the US is supposed to be. The United States is supposed to be an a-religious state. Religion and Government are supposed to be separate where everyone is free to their own beliefs to the extend that they don't encroach upon someone else's beliefs. The religious trend in the US came out of a propaganda decision during the Cold War to make the US be the good guys against the godless-heathens of communism. We never actually recovered from that propaganda decision.
Posted: 8/26/2008 9:03:47 AM
If Brad Pitt wanted to bring me into the fold and gave me the choice of sharing him with all those kids or with Angelina, I'd probably choose Angelina.
Come and join us babe, if you look at one of my GFs, you will forget Angelina /////////////////
The other guy with math, man, you did quite a math I see, still if something happens to the MAN there are more kids to be taken of, and yes I dont own a business of editing and this shhit is my fourth language as I said.
Posted: 8/26/2008 9:14:11 AM
That being said, the belief that polygamy is wrong is actually firmly in the minority worldwide. The vast majority of cultures across the world allow for some form of polygamy.
We are talking about civilized cultures, nowhere in Europe, including Western and Eastern that kind of nonsense is even considered. Vast majority of people living in US are from European decent. It's good to take positive things from other types of cultures, but to learn one of the most pathetic staff muslamic cultures have - polygamy is ridiculous. You think all these wars are only for oil? no babe, this is a idiological war, the same way USSR and USA had a cold war, bcs their idioligy was different. So, you thinking that way is in some extent a betrayal.
Posted: 8/26/2008 12:56:36 PM
|I am not a believer in majority morality. I merely brought up that 85% of cultures in the world tolerate polygamy because I think that it is interesting to get a global perspective on issues. It is healthy to look at all points of view before coming to a decision.|
Prior to the 19th century, polygamy was tolerated or looked favorably upon by most of the world. And only over the past 100 years has there been a major crack down on it, even in the "civilized" world. But much of that comes from the bleed of religion into politics.
The cold war was actually one of the biggest pushes to make America a Christian nation. Prior to the cold war, church and state had been historically far further separated and had been drifting further still. However, as a propaganda move, the US embraced Christianity during the cold war to dissuade people from finding sympathy for the soviets. We were the morally righteous nation fighting the godless communists. That's why prayer was added to schools, "In god we trust" was made the official motto of the US, and other similar measures were done during the late 50s and early 60s.
I happen to be a believer in the fundamental rights of man. One of them is the right to believe in whatever religion or system of values that you chose to. I'm pretty sure that some famous dead guy wrote something about it. A right to worship freely, on a list of ten something or others. Well, I guess it's not that important. It's not like this is the United States of America or anything.
Beyond that though, I am an academic. I will also admit that I'm a skeptic and conspiracy nutter. As a result, when I see rules that seem contrary to logic or evidence, I raise an eyebrow. One of the things that causes me to raise an eyebrow is the ban on polygamy in the "civilized" world. Throughout the overwhelming majority of human history, polygamy was ok. Even in cultures that were last connected in the fertile crescent (indigenous Africans or Native Americans) all frequently had some tolerance for polygamy. In some cases, the idea of a one male-one female marriage was foreign. So, it made me wonder, why is it that the "civilized" world favors serial monogamy when polygamy comes so naturally.
Then, you can see that it's there for the same reason priests aren't allowed to marry and homosexuality is frowned upon. The Catholic church was the major political power player back in the day (by which I mean from the dawn of the Holy Roman Empire until maybe 100 years ago). There were a number of rules passed that benefitted the church or it's allies directly. If someone doesn't have a family, then their money frequently would be left to the church upon their death. But if you have polygamy, that almost guarantees that people will always have a family. So despite the fact that many of the most important people in the Old Testament practiced various different forms of polygamy (polygyny and keeping concubines being he biggest two), it was now a sin. Because of how pervasive the Catholic Church was into culture, it became obvious that monogamy is morally right. That's why the "civilized" nations happen to value monogamy so highly, but the rest don't.
Although, your definition of civilized does have to exclude India and China for that to be a true statement. Because in both India and China polygamy is allowed under some circumstances. And since both of those countries are kinda kicking US butt, if they aren't civilized, one would have to wonder.
Posted: 8/26/2008 4:35:40 PM
lthough, your definition of civilized does have to exclude India and China for that to be a true statement. Because in both India and China polygamy is allowed under some circumstances. And since both of those countries are kinda kicking US butt, if they aren't civilized, one would have to wonder.
Oh guys, I can't beleive that you made me to get serious. I hopes many were enjoying my funny stuff up to this point, but I am not gonna stop protecting my point of view. put these keywords in google "polygamy discussion singles" and you will see the first listing is this thread we are discussing which everyone can read anywhere.
here is the thing - it is a distinct correlation where more developed countries do nto favor polygamy as opposed to less developed. You can add Japan, Canada, New Zealand, Australia , Israel to the list. India and China are not developed countries. Type "standard of living worldwide" or "quality of living worldwide" in google and you will see it.
I have lived in many countries and visited many countries too. You know what's the major difference between developed and less developed countries? It is everything is much better organized in developed countries rather than less developped countries. Not how hard others work, not how much pressure some put others, but only the organization. Life what I do, I mean my business, if I were to do that in say Mexico, I would never file reports, won't need to computerize billing, payrol, material usage etc. But here in the USA if I don't do that, I will be kicked out of business, because can't stay efficient and at the same time government does control but within limits and does it very smart and organized.
So, the same way, in developed countries marriage is an institution of two adults which is governed by the state and federal government, including but not limited to taxes, child support if it will be needed etc. You may argue and ask why in developed countries government is opposed to register more than one marriage as opposed to less developed countries? I can explain easily that it is because people usually are more educated, or intellegent in developed countries. You can do a research and find out that standard of living of certain individuals in the USA is related with their education level and IQ. So, it's because people in developed countries are smarter, more sensitive, ask more from a relationship and marriage partnership rather than just having fun and bring as many kids as possible. People in more developed countries do not marry just to bring as many kids as they can and do have a birth control due to their decency. Shortly we are much ahead from our monkey ancestors who would have sex with any woman and have as many kids as possible. Decent people do not go and have 10 children and don't know where they are. Decent, educated, intellegent and smart people do not go and have 3 wives, if they do not want to live with their present wife, they try to work things out, if they can't they can get divorced.
Thus, mt academician, to tell that in developed countries government will allow people to have multiple marriages is absurd.
Posted: 9/5/2008 3:39:44 PM
|Who brought up polygyny? I thought we were just talking about polygamy...|
Also, to be completely fair, it isn't an unfounded idea that males roam while women are faithful. There is some evolutionary advantage to it. And actually the study of intimate relationships shows us that even though people wind up dating others who are around the same attractiveness on a scale of one to ten, the most successful have the woman in the relationship something like .6 to .8 higher than the man. It's attributed to the woman valuing stability more and the man valuing attractiveness more.
I do happen to agree with you that open relationships should have gender fairness as a corner stone of them. But claiming that bigotry is the only reason that there is inequality is being somewhat closed minded. That being said, I think it should be up to the individuals involved. If they want a 3 person triad with a man and two women, that's cool for them. If they want a man and woman primary relationship with a third that joins sexually sometimes, that's cool for them too. If they want to have 5 men, 2 women, and a robot, I'm ok with that as well (although worried about the robot's ability to consent). I'm even ok with the one man-one woman thing. But the point is that not everyone feels the same way that everyone else does. What you might see as unequal mysoginistic garbage, might be her ideal relationship.
Posted: 9/12/2008 2:41:38 AM
|5 screaming wives and 20 screaming kids... count me in :p.|
6 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)