An Example of the Benefit of Nonmonogamy in Nature

I am polyamorous, but not one of those polyamorists who say everyone else should be polyamorous, too. When I say I support the rights of consenting adults, that includes the freedom to be monogamous or celibate. And, as I always say, just because something is found in another species, it doesn't automatically apply to humans. With those things out of the way, I wanted to note Carl Zimmer's report at nytimes.com that flies forced into monogamy apparently lose learning ability.

Forcing male flies into monogamy has a startling effect: After a few dozen generations, the flies become worse at learning.

This discovery, published on Wednesday in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, isn’t a biological excuse for men who have strayed from their significant other. Instead, it’s a tantalizing clue about why intelligence evolved.

The new study was carried out by Brian Hollis and Tadeusz J. Kawecki, biologists at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland. They investigated a fly species called Drosophila melanogaster that normally has a very un-monogamous way of life.

I do think it causes all sorts of problems to try to force a polyamorous person into monogamy. Human history has shown that over and over again. Also, many polyamorous people will tell you that living out polyamory has made them better people and taught them much.

Read more »

Posted in: academia,human origins,lack of equality harms,monogamy,open,polyamory,polygamy,science

Bus Sighting at Media Matters

Luke Brinker at mediamatters.org, in responding to an anti-equality column by twice-divorced-now-in-third-marriage radio talk show host and author, Dennis Prager, threw polyamorous and consanguinamorous people under the bus.

Prager's prediction dovetails with those of other marriage equality opponents who similarly suggest that necrophilia and bestiality might become commonly accepted practices if gay couples are allowed to marry. But in the 10 years since Massachusetts became the first state to legalize marriage equality, there hasn't been a rush to legalize polygamous unions. Meanwhile, most states that allow incestuous marriages are right-leaning states where same-sex marriage currently isn't allowed.

As Slate's Dahlia Lithwick has observed, the problem with "slippery slope" arguments of the kind advanced by Prager is that they ignore the deep differences between allowing a committed, loving same-sex couple to get married and permitting, say, a brother and sister to get married. Incestuous relationships, Lithwick notes, are often exploitative and psychologically destructive, with severe consequences for children's health.

Here is how I responded in the comments (with links added here for further reading)...
 
The response to bigots when they bring up polygamy and consanguinamory is "What's wrong with letting consenting adults marry?" Please note that under our broad legal systems, corpses and other species (necrophilia and bestiality) are not considered consenting adults. However, a consenting adult might want to marry more than one person, or marry a close relative. When (white) women got the right to vote, there wasn't a rush for voting rights for people of color, and when Loving v. Virginia knocked down bans on monogamous interracial marriages, there wasn't a rush to grant to same-gender freedom to marry, but there should have been.

It is unfair to say that incestuous relationships are often exploitative and psychology destructive. That is ABUSIVE relationships in general, which can include complete strangers and interracial couples same-gender couples. Also, it is the abusive relationships that tend to come to the attention of law enforcement and counselors. Nobody in a good relationship is calling up a shrink or law enforcement and saying, "Hey, I just want to tell you I'm in an incestuous relationship and it is great!"

The "mutant baby" argument is a smokescreen. First of all, some consanguinamorous relationships involve only people of the same gender. Yes, they are gay marriages, so to speak. I have interviewed people in these relationships myself. Secondly, marriage shouldn't be equated with baby-making. Not all mixed-gender relationships birth biological children. Thirdly, contrary to myth, most births to consanguineous parents do not produce children with significant birth defects or other genetic problems (I know some of these children, and so do you, whether you know it or not); while births to
other parents do sometimes have birth defects. Heterosexual couples with obvious, series genetic diseases are not prevented from dating, having sex, having children, or marrying, so the "mutant baby" argument is not a justification for stopping genetic half-sisters who didn't even grow up with each other from marrying.

I expect more from Media Matters than to throw some consenting adults under the bus to assuage bigots. There is no good reason to deny that we must keep evolving until an adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, monogamy or polyamory, race, or religion is free to marry any and all consenting adults. The limited same-gender freedom to marry is a great and historic step, but is NOT full marriage equality, because equality "just for some" is not equality. Let's stand up for EVERY ADULT'S right to marry the person(s) they love. Get on the right side of history!

Read more »

Posted in: boundaries,children,consanguineous,freedom to marry,incest,marriage equality,media,polyamory,polygamy,prejudice,solidarity,stigma

How Nonmonogamous People Can Avoid Trouble

Believe it or not, there are still criminal laws in many places criminalizing consensual sex and relationships between adults.

It doesn't matter to them how loving, happy, and lasting the relationships are. It apparently doesn't matter to the people interfering that every dollar or minute they spend trying to stop consenting adults from loving each other is a dollar or minute that could instead go into protecting people, especially children, against predators.

In addition to the persecution and prosecution of consanguinamorous people, polyamorists, polygamists, and other ethical nonmonogamists can face discrimination and even prosecution.

Some awesome people put together a very helpful lists of state laws for polyamorous people in the US or considering moving to the US. First, note the disclaimer that there is an ever-present at the bottom of this blog. I'll mostly repeat it here:

The focus of this blog is consenting adults. This blog does not advocate anyone engage in activity that is currently illegal in their jurisdiction; it does advocate changing or repealing any law that prevents the freedom of association, love, and full marriage equality for adults. This blog condemns rape, sexual assault, and child molestation, and does not provide medical, therapeutic, legal, financial, or cooking advice. This blog links to other sites for informational purposes; it does not necessarily support everything at those links.

OK, with that out of the way, I'll continue as a friend.

Please keep in mind that while a state may not have a law against "fornication" (sex outside of a legal marriage), "adultery" (when a married person has sex with someone other than her or his legal spouse), or cohabitation, it might still criminalize consensual sex between close relatives (whether genetically related, steprelation, or adoptive). For more information about that, see here. Also, laws on the books may be rarely or selectively enforced, so it it s good to consult an attorney familiar with the laws of a state as well as actual criminal and civil cases in that state and general legal climate.

While most nonmonogamists never get prosecuted or sued, the threat is always there in many places.

With states that allow a legally married spouse to get an advantage in a divorce by citing adultery or sue their spouse's lover for financial compensation, the only way to be sure of avoiding a problem is to simply avoid the risk entirely by not getting involved with someone who is legally married, or, if you are legally married, not getting involved with anyone other than your spouse. Even if everyone is enthusiastic at first or at the time of the sex or relationship, someone can still use the law to get what they see as revenge should things tum cold.

State By State


All 50 US states have statutes against bigamy/polygamy (multiple licensed marriages). In most states, bigamy is a felony.

In the following states, bigamy is a misdemeanor. However, once the penalty is paid, you are back at square one.

Alaska
Arkansas
Hawaii (petty misdemeanor-- 30 days in jail)
Iowa
Maine
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
New Jersey
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island (misdemeanor, $1000)
Tennessee
Texas

The following lists are ordered by which states have the most promise statutorily. The first list is the best, the last list is the worst.

The following states, have no statutes against  fornication, adultery, or cohabitation, and they also do not recognize common-law marriages (which assigns marital status to people who might not want to be considered married).

California
Hawaii
Nevada
Oregon
Washington

The following states have statutes that concern adultery, but none for fornication, cohabitation, or common-law marriage. In some of them adultery is grounds for divorce only. In others the offending spouse simply forfeits any rights to the innocent spouse's estate. In the rest of them, adultery is a crime that can only be prosecuted by the offended spouse. In a successful polygamous relationship, these need not be obstructive. If the relationship fails, however, the statutory adulterer will be charged.

Connecticut
Delaware
Indiana
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland (Adultery results in a $10 fine and is grounds for divorce)
Missouri
New Jersey
Ohio
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas (Texas does recognize common-law marriages, but apparently only if they are registered with the county clerk)
Vermont

Both states make adultery and fornication misdemeanors, although in Illinois the conduct must be "open and notorious." For interest's sake, we have listed all of the states whose statutes are no worse than Georgia or Illinois. This only means that in these states you are as likely as not, to be able to find a lawyer who will talk to you.

Arizona
Georgia
Illinois
Michigan
Minnesota
New Hampshire (New Hampshire recognizes common-law marriages, but only for inheritance purposes after death)
New Mexico
New York
North Dakota

The following states have laws against cohabitation.

Alabama
Alaska
Arkansas
Florida
Massachusetts
Mississippi
Nebraska
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia
West Virginia
Wyoming

The following states recognize common-law marriages, or else make adultery a felony, and are not on the previous lists.

Colorado
Idaho
Iowa
Kansas
Montana
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Utah
Washington D.C.
Wisconsin

How do people minimize the risk of losing in court? What can nonmonogamists do to protect themselves? Any of these steps might help...

1) Consult a lawyer. I am not a lawyer. A criminal defense or family law attorney might be someone well worth consulting.

2) Move to more enlightened states or countries.

3) Be careful who you tell and what you tell them. In the US, we have a Constitutional right against self-incrimination (see 5th Amendment) and the right to remain silent when arrested by law enforcement. It's a good idea when dealing with police to give them polite, brief "yes" or "no" or "I don't know" or "I don't remember" answers unless even one of those could incriminate you. In the US, you also have the right to an attorney and it is a good idea speak up and ask for a lawyer if you're held or taken in by police. Also in the US, unless there is imminent danger to someone, you don't have the let police into your home without a search warrant, and even search warrants can have limits. YOU may think something is obvious and gives you away, the police may even have figured it out, but staying silent about it can still protect you.

4) Be careful what you document. Many lovers enjoy taking video or pictures of themselves having fun with each other, but for the nonmonogamous, such media, if it falls into the wrong hands, can be trouble.

5) Have a cover story. Anticipate questions, whether from those you know you or those who don't who might not approve. Historically, it isn't unusual for a home to have three or more adults.

6) Know your risk in raising children. Not only will children have to deal with the prejudice of others, but children may also provide testimony that goes against you, often unwittingly.

7) Stick to private places and lock the door when you get to the fun.

Note that most ethicists say it is OK to lie to authorities who are trying to enforce unjust laws or policies. An extreme example is a Nazi SS officer asking you, "Are you hiding any Jews here?" It was ethical to say "No." Well, I think that applies here, too, though the situation is not as extreme. It is nobody else's business if adults are having consensual sex or relationships.

This advice shouldn't even be necessary, but until we get to the point where we have relationship rights for all adults, including full marriage equality, nonmonogamists should think about protecting themselves. Of course, some level of trouble is necessary to make change. Laws need to be overturned in courts or changed by legislatures, but it is up to each set of lovers to decide for themselves if they want to come out of the closet and to push for those things. The more other people realize that ethical nonomonogamy is a reality all around them, the sooner the persecution will be greatly reduced.

Police officers usually have some wiggle-room when it comes to investigating or arresting people can can look the other way if they choose. Prosecutors can choose not to prosecute. Judges can dismiss cases. Juries can refuse to convict (research jury nullification). So I beg these people to let consenting adults love each other without harassment, without prosecution.

Do you have any suggestions? Any tales to tell about what you've done to protect yourself? What do you think, dear reader? Leave a comment or email me.

Read more »

Posted in: bigamy,boundaries,cheating,FAQ,lack of equality harms,law,love,open,persecution,polyamory,polygamy,prejudice,swinging,US

Polyandry as a Theme in a Plymouth, England Theatre

Martin Freeman reports at plymouthherald.co.uk about a woman and her play... 

“In parts of northern India there are 300 women to 1,000 men,” says Sharmila [Chauhan]. “Polyandry is not normal but it is becoming more common.”

The latest new drama to come to the Drum, Theatre Royal Plymouth, might sound heavy stuff but is not all darkness.

“There are lighter moments. It is turned on its head.

“It looks at the relation between the husbands. There is a feeling of brotherhood and tenderness.

“It is intense but there are moments that are surprisingly funny.”

Sounds like it would  be interesting.

She says, though, that polyandry and matriarchal societies are not as rare as many believe, especially if you travel in history or in time. “I went to Kerala (southern India), to see the way of life of the Nair people who used to be matriarchal. I have done lots of research about polyandrous communities across the world in Africa, parts of the Far east and south Asia.

It is happening in polyamorous homes all over the world.

The Husbands is at the Drum, Theatre Royal Plymouth, from Wednesday to Saturday, February 12-15.

If you see it, let us know what you thought!

Read more »

Posted in: polyandry,polygamy,UK

Will Utah Make Legislative Baby Steps?

After a federal judge did what should have been a no-brainer to everyone and slapped down Utah's criminalization of polyfidelity and polyamorous cohabitation, a state legislator is trying to make baby steps in the law, as reported by Antone Clark at standard.net...

Rep. Jerry Anderson, R-Price, said House Bill 56 was inspired by a federal judge's ruling in December striking down part of the state's law banning polygamy, following legal action brought by the stars of a TV reality series "Sister Wives." The court ruling threw out the state's section of law prohibiting cohabitation, saying it violates the constitutional guarantee of due process and religious freedom.

Not to mention freedom of association, right to privacy, etc.

His bill is only 29 lines long, and essentially changes the definition of cohabitation and then points out under existing law, bigamy is a third-degree felony.

Bigamy shouldn't be a crime unless it involves fraud. An adult should be free to marry any & all consenting adults. If someone is married and they are marrying another, that shouldn't be hidden from current spouses. Absent that sort of deception, there's no reason for polyamorists to be denied their fundamental rights.

He said the state's existing bigamy definition forces many people into the shadows. He said thousands of schoolchildren list their fathers as unknown, to avoid dealing with the implications of being in violation of the law.

He said the state's existing definition of bigamy puts police officers in a tough position.

Exactly. Criminalization of consensual adult relationships is destructive, causing many unnecessary problems.

This is a baby step. Really, any US state needs relationship rights, including full marriage equality, for all.

UPDATE: The bill is "dead" as the lawmakers sit around waiting for further court action. Sigh.

Read more »

Posted in: allies,bigamy,freedom to marry,law,politicians,polyamory,polygamy,Sister Wives,Utah

Request For Polyamorous People

The more books we have like this, the better, so please consider responding. Here is the request...

My name is Richard Gilmore. I am a member of a MFFM quad. We have been in this configuration for over 13 years. My partner Elon and I have written a book called, Creating A Line Family. Our editor (Alan of Poly in the Media) made a good suggestion, include personal stories. So what we are looking for are interview volunteers who are members of a poly family. Here are some of the questions we would like to hear about.

1. What types of intimacies - besides sexual - do you share with your partners?

2. What vision, or long range plans do you have for your family?

3. How are household chores managed, both regular duties and emergent failures?

4. How is "family money handled?" By this we are talking about real property ownership, investments, community personal property, etc.

5. How will you support launching any children?

6. How do you make decisions as a group?

7. Do you plan, or have any family businesses?

8. Do any other issues come to mind?

You can see an early, rough draft of the book at http://www.line-family.info/
We really need personal stories to make the book come alive. Funny stories are great, stories of failures can also be instructive.

All names, locations and personally identifying details will be changed to protect everyone's privacy.

The book price will be as low as we can make it. We really want this information out there. Therefore we expect to make little to no money on this publication. That means all we can offer you is our sincere thanks and maybe a signed copy of the book.

Please message me to arrange an interview.

Thank you for taking time to read and consider our request.
Richard

Richard can be reached at rlg at 4dreality dot com.

I will add whether or not you contact Richard, if you want to be interviewed by me (see this interview I have done), pleas write me at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com.

Read more »

Posted in: help,polyamory,polygamy

19 Responses to Anti-Polyamory

Much thanks to MultipleMatch.com for running my defense of ethical nonmonogamy, such as polyamory, polygamy, and so on.

Click here to read "19 Responses for Answering Anti-Polyamory & Plural Marriage"

Bumped up.

Read more »

Posted in: group,myths,open,polyamory,polyandry,polygamy,polygyny,prejudice,swinging

Out In Africa

Thabo Seroke has an important commentary printed at thoughtleader.co.za about human rights and civil rights in some African countries.

A couple of months ago, Uganda asked a question that could usher in the systematic hate aimed at a group of people. The question was simple: Who is going to inspire the senseless murder of gender-variant people in Africa?

This was not a view that needed to be vocalised by Ugandans, but many nations responded. Nigeria is the latest. The Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act, which provides penalties of up to 14 years imprisonment for gay marriage and a maximum of 10 years for membership or encouragement of gay clubs, societies and LGBTI organisations, was last week signed into law by Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan.

Since then, nearly 40 people have been arrested and many more threatened with violence.

Frightening stuff.

History provides many examples of same-sex practices such as the “boy-wives” of the Azande in contemporary Sudan and Congo, the gender-crossing queers of the Hausa Bori culture in … wait for it … modern-day Nigeria! Lesbian relations were also prominent among co-wives in polygamous marriages in 19th century Southern Sudan — the same polygamous practice frowned upon by the western world — which leads me to an unsurprising fact. Colonialism imposed this prejudice and other divisive ideals on a number of non-western societies.

Same-gender sexuality and relationships, as well as polyamorous relationships, are nothing new.

The issue in countries such as Uganda, Malawi and Nigeria isn’t a “gay issue”, it’s a human-rights issue.

Precisely!

We must stand up for the rights of ALL.

Read more »

Posted in: Africa,lack of equality harms,LGBT,Malawi,polygamy,polygyny,same-sex,Uganda

A Polyamorous Woman Denied Her Right to Marry

By my count, this is the twenty-ninth ongoing relationship I've covered through exclusive interviews in which the lovers are denied the freedom to be open about their love and are denied their fundamental right to marry.

Zoey is a beautiful young woman, someone you might give a nod and smile to if you saw her shopping in your local store. If you want to see her NOT SAFE FOR WORK Tumblr, you can find it here.


Read the interview below and ask yourself if there is one good reason her right to love the adults she does should be denied.


*****


FULL MARRIAGE EQUALITY: Describe your background.

Zoey: I am almost 23. I am in a type of polyamory/open relationship with my girlfriend Tess (almost 25) and my boyfriend Jack (almost 24). These are our fake names used for anonymous purposes only of course.


FME: Are you legally married or have you ever been legally married?

No, I am not married. I have not ever been married either.


FME: How would you describe your sexual orientation... are you heterosexual, bisexual, what?

I am bisexual.


FME: You currently live with…?

My boyfriend Jack, Girlfriend Tess, our 3 kids, Jack’s mother and his younger sister.


FME: Please describe your polyamorous relationship.

Neither I nor Tess get jealous if we have one-on-one time with Jack. But, there is always time for some group play. Jack even prefers if all three of us make love together. As for how things work, it’s simple, really. Jack has the job in the relationship and Tess and I watch the kids - for now. I’ve been trying to get a job as well so that I can help him with the bills. It’s seems unfair to me that he has to support the 6 of us by himself.


FME: How did this polycule form? Was it a sudden event or a gradual process? Was there a clear initiator?

Originally, I met Jack when we were both working at a haunted house. At the time I was currently in a monogamous relationship with a guy that I used to go to school with, who was also working at the same place but in a different part of the attraction. Jack was very flirty and silly. I clicked with him instantly. He told me a little bit about himself and how he had kids and a girlfriend that was bisexual. I confessed to him that I was also bisexual. We became close friends.

After the season was over I went back to my life with my boyfriend. A lot of drama started between me and my boyfriend’s mother. She found out that I was bisexual because she googled my name. What she didn’t know was that it was a different ‘Zoey’ that she found but, she’s the kind of person where once her mind was set there was no changing it. She was disgusted with me and forced my boyfriend to kick me out. I ended up moving in with my dad and that’s when I got back in touch with Jack. I had a friend request from him on my Facebook. We talked for about a month then he invited me over one random September day. That was when everything fell into place. We all clicked and I’ll admit, it was a sudden occurrence. But, it’s one that I will never regret or forget.


FME: Describe your relationship now.

Now our relationship is more refined and unrevealed except the occasional hugs and kisses but at night when our kids are asleep it’s still very sexual and romantic.

In the aspect of the 3 children that are in our relationship, I am basically a 'step-mother' to Tess's two kids and she is the 'step-mother' to my son. Jack is simply daddy to all of them. It works out wonderfully. In the future Jack and I would like to have more kids. Tess is physically unable to birth any more children so she has been thinking about adoption, and so have I. We all have always wanted a big family and every child deserves a home and a loving family that they can call their own. But, because of our current governmental standing... I don't know how well that would work, if at all.


FME: What are the sleeping arrangements? Is there a schedule?

Tess sleeps by the wall, Jack is in the middle and I sleep on the outside. We share a King sized bed. The only schedules that we follow are Jack’s work schedule and the schedule of our kids. Only one of them is old enough for school and the other two is the job of us stay-at-home mammas.


FME: What kind of rules/agreements for maintaining the relationship are there?

There’s really no rules. We all get along so well.


FME: What is your past experience with polyamory, if any?

Until this relationship that I’m currently in, I had no prior experience. And, I will admit that in the beginning Tess and I had our fair share of jealousy. She wasn’t used to a polyamory relationship either.


FME: Who are you out to? How were you outed? What has been the reaction by family, friends, neighbors, coworkers, random strangers, etc.?

Random strangers are funny. They give us the strangest looks when we’re out together. Me, Tess and Jack have gotten to the point where we don’t care about their looks or we just tell them to f--- off! That’s only if they are being rude though. For everyone else I just posted a status update on Facebook. Although, with my mother I sent a private message. At first she did not accept as easily as the rest but, after some time and my son (her grandson) she was much more accepting.


FME: Is there anything you've had to do to hide the nature of your relationship from anyone? Having to hide can be a lot of trouble. Are there other disadvantages to being in a relationship like this? Conversely, do you think polyamorous relationships have some advantages?

The only people we’ve had to hide from is the government. But, the reason to that is obvious. And, in the sexual aspect there is an advantage for Jack. If one of us is on our period then he can play around with the other. His only disadvantage is when we’re both on our period at the same time.


FME: What do you want to say to people who disapprove of your relationship, or disapprove of anyone having this kind of relationship? What's your reply to those who would say that women are victimized by a relationship like this?

I would say that they are wrong! We are not victimized by our relationship. The only way that I would see us as a ‘victim’ is if Jack was abusive. Which he is NOT!


FME: Can you think of anything that would make relationships like this inherently wrong?

I can’t think of anything wrong with my relationship. Unless it’s abusive, like I have stated above.


FME: If you could have a legal polyamorous marriage, and that included protections against discrimination, harassment, etc., would you? Or even if you do not want a legal polyamorous marriage, do you see a need for protections against discrimination?

Yes, we’ve all already discussed marriage. We ALL want to be united. Both Tess and I have already stated that if we were to get married we would take Jacks last name. And, if we ever decided not to get married for whatever reason then protection against discrimination would be wonderful.


FME: What advice do you have for someone who thinks they may be polyamorous or may want to enter into a polyamorous relationship?

Make sure that the people that will be involved in the polyamorous relationship get along without any type of jealousy. Major conflicts would be good to avoid but, there’s no avoiding tiny little conflicts. Every relationship, whether it be polyamorous, monogamous, or otherwise will have some type of little conflicts. It’s unavoidable.


FME: What advice do you have for family members and friends who are having trouble coming to grips with the reality of their family member or friend being polyamorous?

If you need any other kind of advice you can contact us online at our blog. If you would like to talk to a specific person then specify the name with your message please.


FME: Do you know/meet up with other polyamorous families?

No, we do not, but I think it would be fun to be able to hang out with other like-minded families.


FME: Any plans for the future?

As of now, our only plan is to keep living life happy. The way we are now with no interruptions from the government trying to break us apart. If we are ever able to get married then that would be our next future plan.


FME: Anything else you want to add?

If you would like to talk to us personally you may do so at our blog. Just be sure to specify whom you are talking too in your message.  All three of us run the blog together and if you did not specify it can be confusing.

*****

Here is their NOT SAFE FOR WORK Tumblr blog:
http://ourtriplesexstory.tumblr.com/

There you have it. Consenting adults who aren't hurting anyone, but who have to hide their love, denied their right to marry.

Why should they be denied their rights? There’s no good reason.We need to recognize that all adults should be free to be with any and all consenting adults as they mutually consent, and part of doing that is adopting relationship rights for all, including full marriage equality sooner rather than later. People are being hurt because of a denial of their basic human rights to love each other freely.

You can read other interviews I have done here.

If you are in a relationship like this and are looking for help or others you can talk with, read this.

Thank you to Zoey for doing this interview!

Read more »

Posted in: bisexual,children,coming out,family reaction,freedom to marry,lack of equality harms,love,open,polyamory,polygamy,polygyny,triads

Frequently Asked Question: Why Do Polyamorists Get Married?

The question is asked as though the person asking assumes that actual monogamy is a requirement for marriage. It isn’t in most places, even though current marriage laws will only allow monogamy in the legal sense.

For the purpose of this question and answer, I will include any form of honest nonmonogamy, or any label applied, such as open relationship, open marriage, swinging, swapping, polyamory, polyfidelity and polygamy.

Why do swingers get married?

Why do people in open relationships get married?

Why do polyamorous people get married?

The short answer is: For the same reason most other people get married. They want to get married, they think it is the best thing to do at that time in life, or they’re pressured.



There are many reasons to get married, and as I noted, one doesn’t actually need to be monogamous to get married, unless one wants to be ethical and married to someone who needs and demands monogamy. People get married for love, for attraction, for companionship, to solemnize or make official their relationship, for religious reasons, to make a public statement, for sex, for children, for friendship, for benefits, for insurance, to pool resources, to co-parent, for career, for money, as a form of commitment, to apply a legal structure to their relationship, and for other reasons I’m probably forgetting. Nonmonogamists who marry do so for one or more of these reasons, just like anyone else.

Some people cite the marriage vow of "forsaking all others." But that is just ONE vow, not one that all people marrying make. The vow can also mean different things to different marriages.

Some nonmonogamists decline to marry for various reasons. Some, like some monogamists, have decided to decline until everyone can get married. Some decline to marry until everyone in their polycule can marry. Some can’t have a legal marriage for their polycule until there is full marriage equality.

The question can also be asked of monogamists: Why do you get married? Not only is actual monogamy not a requirement, in many places, of our restrictive marriage laws, but one can be monogamous without being married.

Read more »

Posted in: FAQ,group,open,polyamory,polygamy,swinging

Solidarity From Kim LaCapria

Recently at the dailyglobe.com, Kim LaCapria had the piece "Is Polyamory The New Gay Marriage? I Hope So."

The angry response to this concept that is so intriguing manifested after xoJane published what appears to be a controversial post by Angi Becker Stevens, titled simply “My Big Polyamorous Wedding.” In it, Stevens explains her plans to marry her boyfriend of several years — but plot twist: she’s already married, and planning to remain wed to her first husband.


Now, xoJane is a site where most posters and commenters are feminist and “sex positive,” but the response was overwhelmingly negative in the comments section. A small level of grudging acceptance was often appended with a “I don’t really like this, but …”, and even that was rare. Most posts demonstrated a visceral level of discomfort, fear, or otherwise disapproving assessment of Stevens’ life. (A life, we might add, that all parties involved seem to have chosen happily.)

Some people consent to, and want, things other people do not want. Why is that so hard to understand?

She points out that people quite often approach romantic or sexual relationships differently than they approach anything else in life...

Force or coercion is generally considered to be poor form, and socially discouraged — but if partners are not on the same “marriage timeline” we are, we’re advised by nearly everyone to force their hand on the matter or bail, never to consider that the decision is heavy and one to be arrived at when both parties are comfortable.

And if you question these unshakeable tenets — that there are minefields full of dealbreakers, that it’s “a breakup because it’s broken,” that “he’s just not that into you,” that tactical plays are the best route — you’re seen in one of two ways. Females are repeatedly told that it’s about “self worth,” and are called “doormats,” while men are accused of being “commitment-phobic,” “manchildren,” or simply are labeled cads.

In our strangely unformed collective opinion, you’re either the player or the played, so best to be on the offensive — a proposition we imbue with the collateral of divorce, expensive jewelry, or simply punitive use of affection. As a standard!

As such, we’ve arrived in 2013 with a post-women’s lib society and an adversarial playing ground for love. Or, at its bare bones, we no longer need the “sexual economy” on which marriage was based for so long. And in the absence of the sex for security exchange, we cling to the bizarrely dated, long-obsolete truths of monogamous marriage like some old harvest sacrifice, adhering to superstition and divination to declare certain certainties for which there really is no hard and fast rule.

Again, it isn't true that every person wants exactly the same thing when it comes to relationships as everyone else. And that's OK!

She cites the negative comments left after the article, bashing polyamorous people.

It goes on — but the ambient theme in the discussion of polyamory vis a vis gay marriage is fear. Fear we will be forced to “share,” fear that the promised happy ending will look different than what we’ve seen on Pinterest, fear that, most of all, our commitments will be tested time and again rather than a foregone conclusion, a Rachel McAdams and Ryan Gosling kiss in the rain, a post-script to the story of how we “got” the guy or girl — as if a person were a thing to get.

It seems the question of whether polyamory is the next gay marriage is secondary to the real question — why does every major divergence from “one man, one woman” terrify us so intensely, and why do we continue to indulge the idea others’ choices disrupt or even threaten our own?

BINGO!

Gay marriage has, in reality, always existed. So has polyamory. It is just that we're no longer going to force everyone into a closet unless they stick with a narrow heteromonogamous stay-within-your-race mold. Those days are over. Good riddance! Get used to it.

Read more »

Posted in: allies,LGBT,media,polyamory,polygamy,prejudice,solidarity,stigma

Lies and Damned Lies About Polygamy

[Note: I am bumping up this previous entry because it is as relevant as ever. Polygamy is not something to escape from or fear. Abusive people are. The same goes for monogamy.]

Good ol’ tool of anti-equality forces, Professor Joe Henrich of the University of B.C., is back in the news. This article comes with a picture of Bountiful, B.C. (which is NOT the picture shown here) along with this text…

New research says that polygamy, which is practiced in Bountiful, B.C., leads to increased crime.

Right. Everyone avoids driving near Bountiful because of the high crime rate.

Prof. Joe Henrich found that when rich men take more than one wife, it leaves a deficit of women leading to increased fighting and competition for the remaining women.

Got that? You non-wealthy or unmarried guys are just a bunch of criminals.

Henrich is taking about women as though they have no minds of their own and are nothing but property, akin to cars.

Rich men can “take” more than one woman, marriage or not. Shall we ban all nonmonogamy? Or, since it might lower the crime rate according to this line of thinking, shall we require a woman to find an unmarried man and keep him busy so he won’t go around being a violent criminal?

"You have low-status men who are desperate for resources," said Henrich, a professor in the departments of psychology and economics. "More polygamy leads to a greater proportion of unmarried men, which leads to increased crime."

How does Henrich explain “low status” men who marry a woman and support her decision to not earn income as she tends to the children or earn less income than she and their children will spend? Wouldn’t it make sense, in Henrich’s view, for such men to never marry and have children, so as to be less “desperate for resources?”

Henrich and his co-authors studied societies where polygamy is prevalent, trying to discover the consequences.

Did they also conclude that polygamy causes high amounts of melanin?

"The scarcity of marriageable women in polygamous cultures increases competition among men for the remaining unmarried women," said Henrich. "The greater competition increases the likelihood men in polygamous communities will resort to criminal behaviour to gain resources and women."

I wonder why the article doesn’t cite examples?

I also wonder how much funding for this, or how much of Henrich’s pay, comes from the very government that has banned the polygamous freedom to marry and is actively attacking polygynous families?

We’ve already debunked all of this here, here, here, here, here, and here. We will need many more dung beetles to clear this pile up.

An adult should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any and all consenting adults. These excuses to deny full marriage equality are flimsy masks that fail to hide festering bigotry.

Read more »

Posted in: academia,freedom to marry,myths,polygamy,polygyny,prejudice

Lies and Damned Lies About Polygamy

[Note: I am bumping up this previous entry because it is as relevant as ever. Polygamy is not something to escape from or fear. Abusive people are. The same goes for monogamy.]

Good ol’ tool of anti-equality forces, Professor Joe Henrich of the University of B.C., is back in the news. This article comes with a picture of Bountiful, B.C. (which is NOT the picture shown here) along with this text…

New research says that polygamy, which is practiced in Bountiful, B.C., leads to increased crime.

Right. Everyone avoids driving near Bountiful because of the high crime rate.

Prof. Joe Henrich found that when rich men take more than one wife, it leaves a deficit of women leading to increased fighting and competition for the remaining women.

Got that? You non-wealthy or unmarried guys are just a bunch of criminals.

Henrich is taking about women as though they have no minds of their own and are nothing but property, akin to cars.

Rich men can “take” more than one woman, marriage or not. Shall we ban all nonmonogamy? Or, since it might lower the crime rate according to this line of thinking, shall we require a woman to find an unmarried man and keep him busy so he won’t go around being a violent criminal?

"You have low-status men who are desperate for resources," said Henrich, a professor in the departments of psychology and economics. "More polygamy leads to a greater proportion of unmarried men, which leads to increased crime."

How does Henrich explain “low status” men who marry a woman and support her decision to not earn income as she tends to the children or earn less income than she and their children will spend? Wouldn’t it make sense, in Henrich’s view, for such men to never marry and have children, so as to be less “desperate for resources?”

Henrich and his co-authors studied societies where polygamy is prevalent, trying to discover the consequences.

Did they also conclude that polygamy causes high amounts of melanin?

"The scarcity of marriageable women in polygamous cultures increases competition among men for the remaining unmarried women," said Henrich. "The greater competition increases the likelihood men in polygamous communities will resort to criminal behaviour to gain resources and women."

I wonder why the article doesn’t cite examples?

I also wonder how much funding for this, or how much of Henrich’s pay, comes from the very government that has banned the polygamous freedom to marry and is actively attacking polygynous families?

We’ve already debunked all of this here, here, here, here, here, and here. We will need many more dung beetles to clear this pile up.

An adult should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any and all consenting adults. These excuses to deny full marriage equality are flimsy masks that fail to hide festering bigotry.

Read more »

Posted in: academia,freedom to marry,myths,polygamy,polygyny,prejudice

Another Polygynous Family Gets TLC Series

The Browns of "Sister Wives" have done a lot of good for polygyny, the larger scope of polygamy, and the still-larger scope of polyamory. Now the Williams are getting a series on TLC after their special in September tested the waters and drew good ratings. Here's the report from the Associated Press at dailymail.co.uk...

The cable TV network said Thursday it will produce nine, one-hour episodes about Brady Williams and his five wives and 24 children. The first episode is set to debut March 9.

These series feature polygyny, but there are so many ways polyamory can lived out, and hopefully, we'll see some variety in the future. For example, I'd like to see a series with a polyandrous triad, and definitely one with a same-gender triad.

Reality stars! TLC will produce nine, one-hour episodes about Brady Williams (center) and his five wives, pictured, from left, Paulie, Robyn, Rosemary, Nonie and Rhonda

Members of the Williams family are among an estimated 15,000 independent polygamists in the West who don't belong to an organized, fundamentalist Mormon church. Williams and his wives withdrew from the Apostolic United Brethren during the mid-2000s after re-evaluating their core beliefs.

The family no longer teaches the tenets of fundamental Mormonism to their children at home, opting instead to take from other teachings such as Buddhism to instill good, morale values in their two dozen children, who range in age from 2-20.

Interesting.

In addition to the Browns and now the Williams family, TLC also has done a special featuring the Darger family of Utah. HBO's fictional show about a polygamous family, 'Big Love,' ran for five seasons.

Following the recent court ruling [decriminalizing polyfidelity in Utah], Williams said now is the time for polygamists to show they are deserving of the recognition by putting an end to the misogyny rampant among the culture and putting women on equal footing as men.

 Yes, we are making progress for equality. 

The practice of polygamy is a legacy of the early teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but the mainstream church and its 15 million members worldwide abandoned polygamy in 1890 and strictly prohibit it today.

Hmm. That could have been written better. Many American polygynists have Mormon roots, but polygamy is as old as life.

These television shows are helping more people to see that an adult should be free to marry any and all consenting adults, and that's a great thing.

Read more »

Posted in: media,polyamory,polygamy,polygyny,Utah

Another Polygynous Family Gets TLC Series

The Browns of "Sister Wives" have done a lot of good for polygyny, the larger scope of polygamy, and the still-larger scope of polyamory. Now the Williams are getting a series on TLC after their special in September tested the waters and drew good ratings. Here's the report from the Associated Press at dailymail.co.uk...

The cable TV network said Thursday it will produce nine, one-hour episodes about Brady Williams and his five wives and 24 children. The first episode is set to debut March 9.

These series feature polygyny, but there are so many ways polyamory can lived out, and hopefully, we'll see some variety in the future. For example, I'd like to see a series with a polyandrous triad, and definitely one with a same-gender triad.

Reality stars! TLC will produce nine, one-hour episodes about Brady Williams (center) and his five wives, pictured, from left, Paulie, Robyn, Rosemary, Nonie and Rhonda

Members of the Williams family are among an estimated 15,000 independent polygamists in the West who don't belong to an organized, fundamentalist Mormon church. Williams and his wives withdrew from the Apostolic United Brethren during the mid-2000s after re-evaluating their core beliefs.

The family no longer teaches the tenets of fundamental Mormonism to their children at home, opting instead to take from other teachings such as Buddhism to instill good, morale values in their two dozen children, who range in age from 2-20.

Interesting.

In addition to the Browns and now the Williams family, TLC also has done a special featuring the Darger family of Utah. HBO's fictional show about a polygamous family, 'Big Love,' ran for five seasons.

Following the recent court ruling [decriminalizing polyfidelity in Utah], Williams said now is the time for polygamists to show they are deserving of the recognition by putting an end to the misogyny rampant among the culture and putting women on equal footing as men.

 Yes, we are making progress for equality. 

The practice of polygamy is a legacy of the early teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but the mainstream church and its 15 million members worldwide abandoned polygamy in 1890 and strictly prohibit it today.

Hmm. That could have been written better. Many American polygynists have Mormon roots, but polygamy is as old as life.

These television shows are helping more people to see that an adult should be free to marry any and all consenting adults, and that's a great thing.

Read more »

Posted in: media,polyamory,polygamy,polygyny,Utah

Episcopal Priest Danielle Elizabeth Tumminio is a Ally For Poly

Danielle Elizabeth Tumminio wrote at cnn.com that she is an ally for the polygamous freedom to marry, thanks to the Browns...

Before I met the Browns – made famous by the reality television show “Sister Wives” – I had the kind of reaction most modern-day Christians would have to their lifestyle: Polygamy hurts women. It offers girls a skewed perspective of who they can be. It happens on cultish compounds. It’s abusive.

Yet when the Browns' show debuted, I began to question some of those assumptions, and when I had the opportunity to meet them a few years ago, I questioned them further.

In getting to know Kody, Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn, and their children, I saw that these parents were extremely invested in raising girls and boys who were empowered to get an education, become independent thinkers and have a moral compass.

Go read it all, especially if you are interested in a Christian perspective.

It is good to see the Browns and "Sister Wives" making a difference.

We'll keep evolving so that an adult can share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any and all consenting adults!

Read more »

Posted in: allies,polyamory,polygamy,polygyny,religion,Sister Wives

Episcopal Priest Danielle Elizabeth Tumminio is a Ally For Poly

Danielle Elizabeth Tumminio wrote at cnn.com that she is an ally for the polygamous freedom to marry, thanks to the Browns...

Before I met the Browns – made famous by the reality television show “Sister Wives” – I had the kind of reaction most modern-day Christians would have to their lifestyle: Polygamy hurts women. It offers girls a skewed perspective of who they can be. It happens on cultish compounds. It’s abusive.

Yet when the Browns' show debuted, I began to question some of those assumptions, and when I had the opportunity to meet them a few years ago, I questioned them further.

In getting to know Kody, Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn, and their children, I saw that these parents were extremely invested in raising girls and boys who were empowered to get an education, become independent thinkers and have a moral compass.

Go read it all, especially if you are interested in a Christian perspective.

It is good to see the Browns and "Sister Wives" making a difference.

We'll keep evolving so that an adult can share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any and all consenting adults!

Read more »

Posted in: allies,polyamory,polygamy,polygyny,religion,Sister Wives

Polygamy Ruling Doesn't Go Far Enough

Polygamy, plural marriage, polyamory… the news and commentary media coverage has been more than plentiful since the Browns of Sister Wives won recently in a court decision that overturned an item in Utah law that was, perhaps, the most restrictive of its kind in the country.

There has been so much confusion about what actually happened.

No, unfortunately, the court did not grant the polygamous freedom to marry.

What it did was overturn what was, when you get down to it, the criminalization of a polyfidelitous form of polyamory. Under Utah law, people have been free to have a different sex partner every night, and have children with all of them. What they were prevented from doing was actually living with or considering themselves as married to more than one person at a time. So again, if one woman wanted to have sex and children with five different men, that was OK, but she was a criminal if she lived with two men and called both of them her husbands.

It was a ridiculous law, intended to attack religious minorities for their practice of what they call plural marriage, a religion-based form of polygyny. Yet how effective was it at actually stopping polygynous living, or, what is really important, preventing spousal and child abuse? It wasn’t. I argue that such laws actually help perpetuate domestic violence and child abuse by making victims and witnesses more reluctant to cooperate with law enforcement because their own consensual, non-abusive relationships are criminalized.

Anti-equality and compulsory monogamy finger-waggers have been acting like this ruling is the end of the world, no doubt using it as a fundraiser for their certified hate groups. And other people ignorant about what is really going on have regurgitated the ridiculous “polygamy is bad for women and unattractive men” warning (see Discredited Arguments #9, 15, and 16). Some monogamist gay commentators have been throwing poly folks under the bus.

But the court decision is hardly envelope-pushing. It aids long-established, fundamental rights such as the freedom of association and freedom of religion, and brings Utah a little closer to the other 49 states and most of the modern world in no longer allowing law enforcement to march into your home and say, “You can’t love and commit to more than one person! Off to jail with you!”

What I wish the ruling had done was recognize the polygamous freedom to marry (which is what some people seem to think happened.) It is nice to see that, even though there is much bigotry-spewing and there are plenty of bus sightings, there are also many allies standing up and challenging people with the simple question, “What’s wrong with letting people be with the consenting adults they love?” Although the ruling did not go far enough, it is a step in the right direction, and the civil rights march has often progressed through baby steps.

There is still much work to do, but full marriage equality will happen. We will get there. A woman, like a man, should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage (or any of those without the others) with ANY and ALL consenting adults, without prosecution, bullying, or discrimination. If a woman wants to marry a man who is already married, that is of no ill effect to anyone else. If she wants to marry two women, that hurts nobody. Let them be! Let them marry!

Read more »

Posted in: allies,boundaries,courts,law,polyamory,polygamy,prejudice,Sister Wives,Utah

Polygamy Ruling Doesn't Go Far Enough

Polygamy, plural marriage, polyamory… the news and commentary media coverage has been more than plentiful since the Browns of Sister Wives won recently in a court decision that overturned an item in Utah law that was, perhaps, the most restrictive of its kind in the country.

There has been so much confusion about what actually happened.

No, unfortunately, the court did not grant the polygamous freedom to marry.

What it did was overturn what was, when you get down to it, the criminalization of a polyfidelitous form of polyamory. Under Utah law, people have been free to have a different sex partner every night, and have children with all of them. What they were prevented from doing was actually living with or considering themselves as married to more than one person at a time. So again, if one woman wanted to have sex and children with five different men, that was OK, but she was a criminal if she lived with two men and called both of them her husbands.

It was a ridiculous law, intended to attack religious minorities for their practice of what they call plural marriage, a religion-based form of polygyny. Yet how effective was it at actually stopping polygynous living, or, what is really important, preventing spousal and child abuse? It wasn’t. I argue that such laws actually help perpetuate domestic violence and child abuse by making victims and witnesses more reluctant to cooperate with law enforcement because their own consensual, non-abusive relationships are criminalized.

Anti-equality and compulsory monogamy finger-waggers have been acting like this ruling is the end of the world, no doubt using it as a fundraiser for their certified hate groups. And other people ignorant about what is really going on have regurgitated the ridiculous “polygamy is bad for women and unattractive men” warning (see Discredited Arguments #9, 15, and 16). Some monogamist gay commentators have been throwing poly folks under the bus.

But the court decision is hardly envelope-pushing. It aids long-established, fundamental rights such as the freedom of association and freedom of religion, and brings Utah a little closer to the other 49 states and most of the modern world in no longer allowing law enforcement to march into your home and say, “You can’t love and commit to more than one person! Off to jail with you!”

What I wish the ruling had done was recognize the polygamous freedom to marry (which is what some people seem to think happened.) It is nice to see that, even though there is much bigotry-spewing and there are plenty of bus sightings, there are also many allies standing up and challenging people with the simple question, “What’s wrong with letting people be with the consenting adults they love?” Although the ruling did not go far enough, it is a step in the right direction, and the civil rights march has often progressed through baby steps.

There is still much work to do, but full marriage equality will happen. We will get there. A woman, like a man, should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage (or any of those without the others) with ANY and ALL consenting adults, without prosecution, bullying, or discrimination. If a woman wants to marry a man who is already married, that is of no ill effect to anyone else. If she wants to marry two women, that hurts nobody. Let them be! Let them marry!

Read more »

Posted in: allies,boundaries,courts,law,polyamory,polygamy,prejudice,Sister Wives,Utah

Brian Brown Has The Polygamy Sadz

"There's no doubt that the arguments for same-sex marriage were a template for this case. Once marriage is determined to be primarily about providing government recognition and benefits for loving, committed relationships, there is simply no principled way not to extend 'marriage' to everyone, no matter the nature of their relationship. People in polygamist, plural marriages are just a short step away now from winning official marriage rights. Adult incest practitioners will have similar claims, as will adult siblings and other close relations. Lost in this disastrous push to transform marriage into the satisfaction of adult sexual desires are the interests of children, and their right to the love of one mother and one father." - Hate group leader Brian Brown, comparing the ruling in Utah to the "several states that have redefined marriage." Because sixteen is several.

Read more »

Posted in: Brian Brown,Christianists,crackpots,hate groups,NOM,polygamy,religion,The Sadz,Utah