I must admit I find this extremely interesting and hypocritical, all at the same time. Interesting in that I am not opposed in theory, rather in choice of most men. It seems a goodly amount of men seek out women they can keep under their thumbnail in those they select for 'home'....This is so hypocritical in the male mentality. From my perspective, the 'women' in the fold are typically submissive, weaker women who 'do' for their man without question and without capacity to stand up and speak their mind.. While it would seemingly be enough to have 2 'beck and call girls' , the majority of men are typically slipping off to 'afternoon delight' with a woman of 'equal mentality , if you will.
Well its obvious that your observation is subjective as is the human experience but it may be due in part to your understanding of the "workings" of plural relationships.
You noted that in your eyes, "most men" want a woman to keep under their thumb - that said, if she is comfortable and under his thumb by choice - isn't that ok?
Secondly, being "submissive" does not mean one is weak. It may simply be ones universal position by design. The world wouldn't work if all were strong.
"Doing w/o question" doesn't make anyone inherently weak.
"Capacity to stand up for themselves" - this is based on your perception on what it looks like to stand up for oneself?
If all women were strong, voicetrous (sp) and firm - none of you would get along...lol. In addition, there are just as woman that "can't/don't" stand up for themselves as there are that will so I am not sure how the previous is your stance for the norm...
At the end of the day, its about understanding for those involved and those that are observing - otherwise generalizing comments like yours will continue to manifest themselves as peoples rationale for intolerance and ignorance.
Our job is to understand and learn about people and to do so beyond the surface and what we think we see. If we did, generalities wouldn't exist...
Satch....I concur with your summation on both posts. It is the 'man' in each situation who has to walk honestly in to the plural relationship for it to be effective. Saying you are in a polygamous relationship with two wives at home selected for what they bring to the arrangement, knowing it won't fulfill your needs and then sneaking off to satisfy those needs is not effective, respectful or ideal for anyone.
@ Vic, I wasn't making any assumptions nor did I pick at your statement. I simply read what was written and responded. Your second comment to me in response is very different than your initial one.
Within your comments is appears as though labels are important to you. "home wife"? Its no different than a company. In a company the role of the janitor is just as integral as the CEO, if ether one of them doesn't come to work, that area of the company will fail. The label doesn't matter so long s the person within that position is happy doing it and does it well.
Also as Statch noted, people in a plural relationship are not selected and placed. It a bit more organic than that.
Lastly, each and every relationship is different as are the people within it.
EVERYONE within my circle that knows me knows that I will have 2 wives, and the women in my life going forward are also aware they will be 1 of 2 queens in the Snowden Family. :)
Thank you @ Satch for clarifying and answering the questions as I would have liked.
@ Victoria- I would have to agree with Satchmania that the questions you asked are describing something other than a modern or non-religious-based polygamous relationship. All parties must be open and honest in order for the relationship to work, and I think that is true of any relationship. And to answer your questions, I will not be a "home" wife to anyone. If I choose to stay at home because it works for my family, that is different. And in my perfect marriage (polygamous or not), my husband will not keep any women or deny them to me. To me this is never okay, nor is it healthy.
Well the one I'm in now works best (!!!), especially compared to my past relationships (monogamous) which have not worked out at all interestingly enough. I am currently in what can be described as a monogamous relationship waiting to bloom, and I am open to both monogamy and polygamy. I'm not limiting myself to either, whatever works best for us:)
D -- I'm not sure I'm tracking with your initial statement as a response to my last post. What do you mean there is always room for....it's never too late?
If I may....it is not the label that troubles me, rather the lack of honesty with all involved.
In response to the question you posed....if you re-read my initial post you'll note I stated I was open to a plural relationship. With that said, it has to be completely open and honest with every party aware of the other parties involved -- at least in their existence. This allows each to self select in / out as appropriate for them. Anything less is disrespectful of all involved.
@D, I'm currently dating, with no commitments to anyone. Ideally, I would like to find another man and woman that I can share every aspect of a relationship with both of them. But I suspect that finding a man and a woman who can handle me is going to be a bit of a challenge.
I'm coming in on the tail end of this conversation, but yet and still, I used to be very against polygamy until it was properly explained to me--it's purposes and it's benefits (to both parties). An Orthodox Muslim friend opened my mind to what polygamy really means, as well as some of its origins. While I understand and accept their existence, I'm not sure polygamy is for me. I am the Queen B. lol. And Taj knows very well how much I don't like to share...I'm better at it, but I just don't see it in the cards for me. I do agree that a true polygamous relationship is a honest one with roles that everyone plays, usually in good spirits. My friend brought to my attention that polygamous relationships/marriages can be some of the most close knit and healthy families. I will say, they do intrigue me... I used to be into the HBO show "Big Love," and I once had a series of dreams in which I was in a polygamous marriage. LOL. Okay, I've said my piece...I'm done sharing. @everyone, why do you believe American society is so anti-polygamy? Just a thought....
@ Christen, I think America is against it because of the Eurocentric ideologies brought along from the Romantic period.
75% of the WORLDS population does NOT practice monogamy. Only 3% of all animal life instinctively exercises monogamy, and monogamy truly defies the human factor being that we are social beings.
Generally speaking, Americans think poly is about a sex fest and lesbian orgies. Americans are also too busy trying to establish hierarchy, status and labels. Its not a matter of you not being "first". You are both first. Each of you are loved for different reasons and reasons exclusive to each of you respectively - period. Love is NOT a competition.
The human heart is capable of loving a million things and to the millionth power. Unfortunately its a human trait to minimize the human factor and limit love to one - insane!
That of course is the contrary of what poly really is. Poly is about family, sustainability, empowerment, and financial gain - period.
Myself, will at some point always have 2 wives. Its organic, smart, and fits as far as I see it.
@D: I have to admit, prior to the enlightenment, I used to think polygamy was all about sex and the greediness of the male sex drive. Within the last year this belief has been changed and combated with the positives and purposes of polygamous marriages. I do however believe the commitment of a marriage or a similar contract validates the core purposes and values of polygamous relationships---without the commitment I am still a tad leery about the purpose behind it and whether or not if's selfishness on the male's part to have more than one woman. Still battling with that one I guess, but it's not my relationship to judge. Interesting enough, although America is of the 25% population of monogamy, 50% of those marriages are under the chopping block! Honest question to anyone: do most poly marriages and/or relationships usually include intimate relationships between all parties or just the male with both women? or is it based on preference?
Yes, that answers my question. My Orthodox Muslim friend said that in their ideal poly the wives have separate living quarters--so the male has to pay on two mortgages! lol. and equally separate everything, including time between the wives.
[...In the past men used to pretty much accept the penis size they were born with and didn't share their concerns with anyone. Today men are not prepared to live with embarrassment or feelings of inadequacy when it comes to their sex life. They all wa...
Whew, and for a while there, I thought I was the only one who thought like this.
ReplyDeleteLOL, that's definitely some arithmetic for ya!
ReplyDeleteI must admit I find this extremely interesting and hypocritical, all at the same time. Interesting in that I am not opposed in theory, rather in choice of most men. It seems a goodly amount of men seek out women they can keep under their thumbnail in those they select for 'home'....This is so hypocritical in the male mentality. From my perspective, the 'women' in the fold are typically submissive, weaker women who 'do' for their man without question and without capacity to stand up and speak their mind.. While it would seemingly be enough to have 2 'beck and call girls' , the majority of men are typically slipping off to 'afternoon delight' with a woman of 'equal mentality , if you will.
ReplyDelete@ Vic...lol "goodly"...
ReplyDeleteWell its obvious that your observation is subjective as is the human experience but it may be due in part to your understanding of the "workings" of plural relationships.
You noted that in your eyes, "most men" want a woman to keep under their thumb - that said, if she is comfortable and under his thumb by choice - isn't that ok?
Secondly, being "submissive" does not mean one is weak. It may simply be ones universal position by design. The world wouldn't work if all were strong.
"Doing w/o question" doesn't make anyone inherently weak.
"Capacity to stand up for themselves" - this is based on your perception on what it looks like to stand up for oneself?
If all women were strong, voicetrous (sp) and firm - none of you would get along...lol. In addition, there are just as woman that "can't/don't" stand up for themselves as there are that will so I am not sure how the previous is your stance for the norm...
At the end of the day, its about understanding for those involved and those that are observing - otherwise generalizing comments like yours will continue to manifest themselves as peoples rationale for intolerance and ignorance.
Our job is to understand and learn about people and to do so beyond the surface and what we think we see. If we did, generalities wouldn't exist...
Two questions, Taj
ReplyDelete1.) Is it ok to know you were selected as one of the 'home wives' because you do a good job with his laundry, food and housekeeping?
2.) Does 'having your best interests' at the forefront of all he does include intimacy with other women he keeps from you and denies exist?
Satch....I concur with your summation on both posts. It is the 'man' in each situation who has to walk honestly in to the plural relationship for it to be effective. Saying you are in a polygamous relationship with two wives at home selected for what they bring to the arrangement, knowing it won't fulfill your needs and then sneaking off to satisfy those needs is not effective, respectful or ideal for anyone.
ReplyDelete@ Vic, I wasn't making any assumptions nor did I pick at your statement. I simply read what was written and responded. Your second comment to me in response is very different than your initial one.
ReplyDeleteWithin your comments is appears as though labels are important to you. "home wife"? Its no different than a company. In a company the role of the janitor is just as integral as the CEO, if ether one of them doesn't come to work, that area of the company will fail. The label doesn't matter so long s the person within that position is happy doing it and does it well.
Also as Statch noted, people in a plural relationship are not selected and placed. It a bit more organic than that.
Lastly, each and every relationship is different as are the people within it.
EVERYONE within my circle that knows me knows that I will have 2 wives, and the women in my life going forward are also aware they will be 1 of 2 queens in the Snowden Family. :)
@Dimitri, I agree. And can you spell my name correctly in the future!
ReplyDeleteD -- you so crack me up with the spin....
ReplyDeleteThank you @ Satch for clarifying and answering the questions as I would have liked.
ReplyDelete@ Victoria- I would have to agree with Satchmania that the questions you asked are describing something other than a modern or non-religious-based polygamous relationship. All parties must be open and honest in order for the relationship to work, and I think that is true of any relationship. And to answer your questions, I will not be a "home" wife to anyone. If I choose to stay at home because it works for my family, that is different. And in my perfect marriage (polygamous or not), my husband will not keep any women or deny them to me. To me this is never okay, nor is it healthy.
@ Vic, the spin? As humans there is always room for growth and advancement. Its never too late...
ReplyDelete@Satch, my bad...I got you!...lol
Question to all: Vic, Satch & Taj, what life style works best for you or are you actively open to currently? (in the context of mono/poly)
Well the one I'm in now works best (!!!), especially compared to my past relationships (monogamous) which have not worked out at all interestingly enough. I am currently in what can be described as a monogamous relationship waiting to bloom, and I am open to both monogamy and polygamy. I'm not limiting myself to either, whatever works best for us:)
ReplyDeleteD -- I'm not sure I'm tracking with your initial statement as a response to my last post. What do you mean there is always room for....it's never too late?
ReplyDeleteIf I may....it is not the label that troubles me, rather the lack of honesty with all involved.
In response to the question you posed....if you re-read my initial post you'll note I stated I was open to a plural relationship. With that said, it has to be completely open and honest with every party aware of the other parties involved -- at least in their existence. This allows each to self select in / out as appropriate for them. Anything less is disrespectful of all involved.
@ Victoria- Agreed!
ReplyDelete@D, I'm currently dating, with no commitments to anyone. Ideally, I would like to find another man and woman that I can share every aspect of a relationship with both of them. But I suspect that finding a man and a woman who can handle me is going to be a bit of a challenge.
ReplyDeleteI'm coming in on the tail end of this conversation, but yet and still, I used to be very against polygamy until it was properly explained to me--it's purposes and it's benefits (to both parties). An Orthodox Muslim friend opened my mind to what polygamy really means, as well as some of its origins.
ReplyDeleteWhile I understand and accept their existence, I'm not sure polygamy is for me. I am the Queen B. lol. And Taj knows very well how much I don't like to share...I'm better at it, but I just don't see it in the cards for me. I do agree that a true polygamous relationship is a honest one with roles that everyone plays, usually in good spirits. My friend brought to my attention that polygamous relationships/marriages can be some of the most close knit and healthy families. I will say, they do intrigue me... I used to be into the HBO show "Big Love," and I once had a series of dreams in which I was in a polygamous marriage. LOL.
Okay, I've said my piece...I'm done sharing.
@everyone, why do you believe American society is so anti-polygamy? Just a thought....
@ Christen, I think America is against it because of the Eurocentric ideologies brought along from the Romantic period.
ReplyDelete75% of the WORLDS population does NOT practice monogamy. Only 3% of all animal life instinctively exercises monogamy, and monogamy truly defies the human factor being that we are social beings.
Generally speaking, Americans think poly is about a sex fest and lesbian orgies. Americans are also too busy trying to establish hierarchy, status and labels. Its not a matter of you not being "first". You are both first. Each of you are loved for different reasons and reasons exclusive to each of you respectively - period. Love is NOT a competition.
The human heart is capable of loving a million things and to the millionth power. Unfortunately its a human trait to minimize the human factor and limit love to one - insane!
That of course is the contrary of what poly really is. Poly is about family, sustainability, empowerment, and financial gain - period.
Myself, will at some point always have 2 wives. Its organic, smart, and fits as far as I see it.
@D: I have to admit, prior to the enlightenment, I used to think polygamy was all about sex and the greediness of the male sex drive. Within the last year this belief has been changed and combated with the positives and purposes of polygamous marriages. I do however believe the commitment of a marriage or a similar contract validates the core purposes and values of polygamous relationships---without the commitment I am still a tad leery about the purpose behind it and whether or not if's selfishness on the male's part to have more than one woman. Still battling with that one I guess, but it's not my relationship to judge.
ReplyDeleteInteresting enough, although America is of the 25% population of monogamy, 50% of those marriages are under the chopping block!
Honest question to anyone: do most poly marriages and/or relationships usually include intimate relationships between all parties or just the male with both women? or is it based on preference?
Yes, that answers my question. My Orthodox Muslim friend said that in their ideal poly the wives have separate living quarters--so the male has to pay on two mortgages! lol. and equally separate everything, including time between the wives.
ReplyDeletethicker penis...
ReplyDelete[...In the past men used to pretty much accept the penis size they were born with and didn't share their concerns with anyone. Today men are not prepared to live with embarrassment or feelings of inadequacy when it comes to their sex life. They all wa...