Freedom of Polygamy

It's more a $ issue, and paperwork issue about inheritance property and insurance coverage and payouts and the fact that offspring are produced from such arrangements whom need these monetary services.

Part of it is the taxonomy of how the financial tax code is in the USA, and a lot LESS a moral reason.

Hence the 50% divorce rate and the 60% cheating statistic. No morals have no bearing, this is something else.

 

It's still the Christian right that controls the US government and until we are a nation that truly believes that freedom of religion means all religion, the marriage laws aren't going to change much. States that are starting to legalize gay marriage is a start, but it has a long way to go before it's an accepted practice.

I think people should have the right to marry, or not, whomever they wish. If that includes more than one spouse of either gender. If you don't think it's right, then don't do it. But just because you don't think it's right for you, it doesn't make it wrong for anyone else.

I know several women who have polyamorous marriages, one with two men and one with three. I envy them.

 

I just wonder how much each person is contributing to the relationship via $ and more importantly, emotionally. I'm married with 2 kids and we're stretched pretty thin. Don't know how it would work if we had other people in our relationship (if either of us had extra spouses.)

Why couldn't DH have 2 wives and I have 2 husbands? Never seen that done before....

Another thing is that sister wives say they like having the help. Well, if DH wasn't so busy with other women, maybe he could help. Or hire a babysitter or nanny. You don't need to have an extra spouse to have extra help.

Personally, as long as they are not collecting welfare for the extra kids (Warren Jeff's people did this.) And the spouses are adults, I don't care what people do in their own homes. You should be able to have the family you want if you can afford it (that means emotional support as well as financial.)

 

I don't think it's that high. I read somewhere recently that it's only 13 percent for cheaters.

So what if the divorce rate is 50%? We can't exactly compare that to a time period where women couldn't divorce men because they had no means of supporting themselves.

 

Let's be brutally honest and admit that Polygamy, as practiced in past times and cultures has always been about a man having more than one woman to fuck! In the Bible, David and Solomon had hundreds of women in their harems among which they could pick a fuck-partner for the night! In those instances, it was never about a man "building a marital relationship" with more than one woman. These women were sexual slaves, pure and simple!

And when the reverse is true, wherein one woman has two or more "husbands", it produces a situation of extreme competition in which each husbands hopes to be picked as her fuck-partner for the evening.

It seems to me that a far more practical solution to the need for more than one sex partner would be "group marriage", in which two or more men are "married" to two or more women. The simplest form would be two men and two women in which each of the men would fuck one of the women on one night, then the following night they would switch and each man would fuck the other woman. There could also be many problems involved in this arrangement, such as envy and jealousy, but that is true in traditional marriage.

In my opinion, the best type of polyandry would be among a group of two or three women and six or seven men. This may seem disproportional to some until you consider that women are able to fuck to completion more times in a given time, than are men. If three "wives" had seven husbands, each of them could give fucks to two men each day, and one would have a third man to fuck with. And, each day, for three days, each man would have a different woman to fuck.

I also believe that such an arrangement might create a sort of bonding among the husbands involved. They might think of themselves as "Fuck brothers" and would quickly move past having any kind of envy or jealousy toward the men who were fucking the same women they were.

I do know, personally, that there is a certain bond between men who have fucked the same woman. Perhaps this bond could be expanded among larger groups of men.

 

Polygamy might be nice. It would enable me to disappoint multiple women instead of one at a time. Always been my theory that if a little is good, more is better.

 

I see your point about the biblical characters of David and Solomon, and yes I agree that they had women in excess, and nothing in scripture gives any details on if they actually built any sort of friendship-interpersonal relationship with the women in their harems. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't, but for their time, at least none of those women worried for shelter or food. We don't even know if women of that time era, had the same perspectives on their arrangement regarding marriage and sex, as modern women do today, we are projecting modern moral standards on the past. For all we know David and Solomon's wives mentally viewed their situation as a FWB or situation with the status of "wife/concubine" as not important, they themselves might've had lovers on the side. And both characters got in trouble with God later, for the sexual sin of adultery. So one could easily argue that scripture also implies limits on such a concept of multiple spouses.

(Sidenote: This is part of the basis for why the Islamic faith, puts a cap on how many spouses one can take)

-----

I also want to say that I know many guys who would rather stay on their Xbox or Playstation gaming, than have sex with their wife or girlfriend, so no I don't think your suggestions pan out.


I also suspect that men who are in bad health generally, aren't at their sexual prime of endurance either, and diet also play a role in this too, as does age.

Just reading these forums alone, tells you that some women are worn out by their man, and he just has a higher sex drive than the female. Each relationship is different, and my overall point in this thread is that lawfully in our governments of the world, should put for flexibility into the legal status of what it means to be a family.

^That last sentence is really what this thread is about.


And i'll expand further to include that claim into same-sex relationships, and single-parent households as well.