Skip to main content

View Diary: Equal Marriage = Bisexual Polygamy to IL Rep. Morrison (38 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Polygamy is fundamentally unstable (0+ / 0-)

    Outside of brainwashed religious fanatics, it doesn't work.

    I know lots of hipsters who like to try out new lifestyles. There have been MMF and FFM bisexual relationships where everyone started out "equal" and sleeping with everyone.

    All of those relationships failed in short order. One bond was stronger than another, or jealousy set in, or they got bored of it. Threesomes are just not stable, so no one needs to worry about a massive push to legalize them.

    •  Um no (5+ / 0-)

      I've known people in poly arrangement's that span decades.

      "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

      by Horace Boothroyd III on Wed Mar 13, 2013 at 11:56:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I've known (6+ / 0-)

      Straight marriages that failed in days (Looking at you KimK) or years (numerous).   I've known relationships that fail for a lot of reasons.   But the fact that a relationship may fail or succeed doesn't mean the government has the right to determine whether it has a right to happen or not; it cannot use "success" as a measure, otherwise all marriage would be verbotten.

      I've known two couples that live together in a marriage of 4.. and have for eighteen years.  Now, they may all split up tomorrow.. but so what?  Doesn't mean that it was less valid from the get go, nor is it a reason to deny anyone their relationship form.

      I understand that polygamy is scary to a lot of people, because it is unfortunately used by those who are religious to prey upon others who are not equal, or who are sometimes forced into relationships.   But I've seen it work from a very different perspective as well.

      Could I pull off that living arrangement?  No.   But it doesn't mean it's impossible or should be denied because success rates as perceived.

      Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle

      by Chris Reeves on Wed Mar 13, 2013 at 12:06:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's different than what I said (0+ / 0-)

        I didn't say the gov't could refuse to offer it because the success rate is too small.

        I said there wouldn't be a big push for it to be legal, because the success rate is too small for their to be a large number of long term stable poly relationships.

        •  Again, you are basing your statement (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Horace Boothroyd III

          on a small number of people that you know. There are a LOT of poly relationships in this country, and many of them do quite well.

          "The Democrats are the lesser evil and that has to count for something. Good and evil aren't binary states. All of us are both good and evil. Being less evil is the trajectory of morality." --SC

          by tb92 on Wed Mar 13, 2013 at 02:51:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  False. (2+ / 0-)

      I've known decades-long stable threesomes, and I know some current larger arrangements that are easily as stable as any couple I've met.

      If someone wanted to try a vegetarian diet and decided after a few weeks that it wasn't for them, would you conclude that vegetarianism is inherently unstable?

      •  Same question to you as to Horace then (0+ / 0-)

        So the Republican is correct?  If all are equal, and we can't deny rights to people based on orientation, then we have to legalize poly marriage as well?  No limits at all?

        •  We certainly don't have to. (4+ / 0-)

          Practically speaking, we can very easily draw the line at "two consenting adults."  Morally speaking, I don't think we are denying anyone a fundamental right by not legalizing group marriage.

          I see no reason we shouldn't legalize it, but it does not follow as an inevitable consequence of legalizing same-gender marriage, either logically or sociologically.

        •  We CAN place limits, but why should we? (4+ / 0-)

          What consenting adults choose to do in their homes should be nobody's business. Poly families have more adults to care for children and are likely to be more financially stable. As long as they are willing to make the same commitment as mono marriages, why should they not be allowed?

          "The Democrats are the lesser evil and that has to count for something. Good and evil aren't binary states. All of us are both good and evil. Being less evil is the trajectory of morality." --SC

          by tb92 on Wed Mar 13, 2013 at 02:54:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Vegetarianism is fundamentally malnurished (0+ / 0-)

        My brother is a vegetarian, and had a massive protien deficiency until he got it right.  At a fundamental level, without strict balance and guidance, being a vegetarian is not a good idea.  It can get a person into trouble if they don't know what they're doing.

        Stability is a tricky thing.  There are airplanes that are fundamentally unstable, that fly perfectly well.  But the computer is making a thousand adjustments a second, and if the computer fails, the plane drops like a rock.  No human can fly it.

        Fundamentally unstable doesn't mean stability is impossible.  It means that the system is not passively stable.  The groups you know beat the odds, and certainly put a massive amount of work into those relationships to keep them stable.

        •  If a two-person marriage is passively stable (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Norm in Chicago, tb92, Cali Scribe

          then there is something deeply, profoundly wrong with at least one of the people in it.

          Any relationship between independent adults takes work to stay stable.

          •  Yes, but... (0+ / 0-)

            I can't imagine ever possibly keeping two women happy at the same time.  Now if I was uber rich, I'd be willing to give it a try.  But I would never expect it to work.

            A relationship between two people is at least expected to work without superhuman effort.

            •  I hate to break it to you, Norm, (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Cali Scribe, Batya the Toon

              but a lot of women nowadays can pay their own way. In fact, in a poly family, one woman can work while another stays home with the kids. Best of both words, there. And a lot of the time, the women are keeping each other happy when the man can't.

              It's NOT easy. It is more complicated and takes more thought. But that just means that people in poly families are more thoughtful and better at dealing with complicated situations.

              "The Democrats are the lesser evil and that has to count for something. Good and evil aren't binary states. All of us are both good and evil. Being less evil is the trajectory of morality." --SC

              by tb92 on Wed Mar 13, 2013 at 02:58:29 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Some of us women (3+ / 0-)

              are cheaper than others. ;-)

              I wouldn't mind having an extra female around -- she'd have to like sports though and be a better housekeeper than I am. (I'll still handle the cooking and budgeting though -- I'm awesome at that.) For that matter, an extra guy around wouldn't hurt either, and I'm not talking about sex...Mr. Scribe isn't the handy type at all.

              Relationships are about far more than just sex -- it's about companionship, helping hands when needed. Sure, sex can be involved as well, and maybe an extra partner or two can help relieve monotony. But as long as all parties are consenting, I don't think it's anyone's business who's sleeping with whom.

              There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

              by Cali Scribe on Wed Mar 13, 2013 at 03:58:34 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Isn't that a bit degrading? (0+ / 0-)

                Would you really let your husband sleep with another woman as trade for cleaning your house?  Usually that's called banging the maid, and is grounds for divorce, not the basis of a stable relationship.  And what if Mr. Scribe liked her more than you?  You'd be willing to be pushed aside?

                I can't imagine being brought into a marriage to be just the "handyman fix-it guy"  Sure, maybe there's orgy night once in a while when the head couple gets bored and needs to be "relieved" of their monotony. Mr. Fix-it gets tied up or something.  I guess that's fine for a submissive type with low self esteem, but I respect myself too much for that.

                Ugh.  I'm not going to tell anyone else how to live their life, but I won't pretend to understand it either.  Makes no sense to me.

            •  Why not? You were built to. (0+ / 0-)

              According to Bateman and others:

                 "A male can easily produce sperm in excess of what it would take to fertilize all the females that could conceivably be available [...] Hence the development of the masculine emphasis on courtship and territoriality or other forms of conflict with competing males." (Williams 1966)
              Basically each male is capable of having two mates, for some men they are biologically capable of even more.

              The book Sex at Dawn is a good contemporary piece with good citations on the subject.

              "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

              by Horace Boothroyd III on Wed Mar 13, 2013 at 05:29:48 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Can you imagine partnering with another man (0+ / 0-)

              to keep one woman happy?  Or keeping one woman happy with another woman's help?  Or, hey here's a weird notion, keeping one woman sexually happy while keeping other members of the marriage happy in ways that have nothing to do with sex?

              A relationship between two people shouldn't require superhuman effort, of course.  But it does take effort, and people who think of any effort as superhuman effort are doomed to failure.  And the exact same thing is true for a relationship among three or more people.

              Try this for an analogy:  Raising three kids may take more effort than raising two kids.  That doesn't mean it isn't worth doing and can't possibly work.

        •  You could say the same thing (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Norm in Chicago

          about any relationship, including marriage -- those who stay together are "beating the odds" if you take into account some reports that close to 50% of marriages end in divorce.

          All relationships take a massive amount of work -- if you're not working on your relationship, chances are it's going to fail just like if you don't keep up maintenance on your car you're going to have it break down or if you don't keep up maintenance on your house it's going to fall apart around your ears.

          There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

          by Cali Scribe on Wed Mar 13, 2013 at 03:53:48 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  You sound just like the GOP. (2+ / 0-)

      Judging other people's life choices to be unstable, and assuming all will respond in the same way, is bigotry. It's not pretty. Some three member relationships last for a very long time. They are families, just like any other, and their children would benefit from acknowledgment. And yes, I do know this from personal experience.

      "The Democrats are the lesser evil and that has to count for something. Good and evil aren't binary states. All of us are both good and evil. Being less evil is the trajectory of morality." --SC

      by tb92 on Wed Mar 13, 2013 at 02:47:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (145)
  • Community (63)
  • Environment (42)
  • 2016 (42)
  • Republicans (37)
  • Elections (34)
  • Culture (34)
  • Bernie Sanders (33)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Media (26)
  • Climate Change (25)
  • Labor (25)
  • Education (24)
  • Hillary Clinton (24)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (23)
  • Barack Obama (23)
  • Spam (23)
  • Civil Rights (23)
  • GOP (22)
  • Science (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site