Why is polygamy taboo-ed?

Sort:
Bishop_g5

No! The mutual desire is the motive. The original desire is to satisfy the individual independence from how satisfied will be at the end the other side.

This is why sex is a strong factor between relationships, because chemistry allows both to be pleasant with it or not.

bigpoison
trysts wrote:

Polygamy has always been about male dominance. Usually springing from an unequal society and used to keep it that way. In the U.S., polygamists marry very young girls and brainwash them and all their female offspring into believing their sole role to be serving the male.

It's too bad you think sex is about power, Bishop. No good can come of that, surely.

Polygamy, in the U.S. is about pedophilia.  Well, that's the conclusion I came to after reading this:  Under the Banner of Heaven.

The book wasn't nearly as much fun to read as his mountaineering books, but still interesting.


trysts
clockblockerz wrote:

why were you offended by what i said?

If you're speaking to me, then I was extremely annoyed by your assumptions not only about my point of view, but how you can even suggest that polygamy is some personal choice which must be respected. I've spelled out what polygamy is based upon--the practice of polygamy, not a vague dictionary definition which some thoughtless person would use to try to appear irreverent--and only a egotistical guy or a brainwashed woman would think it's acceptable.

trysts
Bishop_g5 wrote:

No! The mutual desire is the motive. The original desire is to satisfy the individual independence from how satisfied will be at the end the other side.

This is why sex is a strong factor between relationships, because chemistry allows both to be pleasant with it or not.

I don't understand you here. Are you suggesting that people should not engage in sex without first being in love? Are you suggesting that people have to have a future plan together before they have sex with one another? I don't understand?

trysts
bigpoison wrote:

Polygamy, in the U.S. is about pedophilia.  Well, that's the conclusion I came to after reading this:  Under the Banner of Heaven.

The book wasn't nearly as much fun to read as his mountaineering books, but still interesting.


No doubt, Nathan. Pedaphilia seems to be one of the motivating factors. Agreed.

trysts
clockblockerz wrote:

but what if the woman is not brainwashed?

Uh huh...

Bishop_g5
trysts wrote:
Bishop_g5 wrote:

No! The mutual desire is the motive. The original desire is to satisfy the individual independence from how satisfied will be at the end the other side.

This is why sex is a strong factor between relationships, because chemistry allows both to be pleasant with it or not.

I don't understand you here. Are you suggesting that people should not engage in sex without first being in love? Are you suggesting that people have to have a future plan together before they have sex with one another? I don't understand?

 No I am not suggesting something. The desire to have sex is something natural in both sides that has to do with our appetite to satisfy an individual need. Both men and women.

As I falsified understood polygamy ( open marriage) I tried to explain Claire that we can't survive only in this because I believe that love completes sex as an action since the individual stops care only about his side but to serve also. I also mentioned that the best sex comes through love as an evolution of our specie.

Of course people can have sex with out being in love or making plans to be together but it's not a base to build a moral society this! Love is the base.

Clairvoya

You guys do know there's always polygyny (the male equivalent of polygamy), I probably should've started the topic including this. 

You guys are bringing real life examples like: america, male dominance etc. But in isolation polygamy can be a very pure thing. I know a friend who is a gentle man. Both woman wanted him, and he wanted to make them happy. You can't generalise everything.

SkullMonki

This probably isn't safe for my yong ears... :)

SkullMonki

*young

AdmiralPicard

There's nothing inherently wrong with polygamy. Saying polygamy is wrong because of "Male dominance, QQ Patriarchy!" is the same as saying that sex is wrong because of rape. On the woman's side, men usually wouldn't accept such a thing because a male wants to be sure his child is "his", and not another man's child.

trysts
Bishop_g5 wrote:
trysts wrote:
Bishop_g5 wrote:

No! The mutual desire is the motive. The original desire is to satisfy the individual independence from how satisfied will be at the end the other side.

This is why sex is a strong factor between relationships, because chemistry allows both to be pleasant with it or not.

I don't understand you here. Are you suggesting that people should not engage in sex without first being in love? Are you suggesting that people have to have a future plan together before they have sex with one another? I don't understand?

 No I am not suggesting something. The desire to have sex is something natural in both sides that has to do with our appetite to satisfy an individual need. Both men and women.

As I falsified understood polygamy ( open marriage) I tried to explain Claire that we can't survive only in this because I believe that love completes sex as an action since the individual stops care only about his side but to serve also. I also mentioned that the best sex comes through love as an evolution of our specie.

Of course people can have sex with out being in love or making plans to be together but it's not a base to build a moral society this! Love is the base.

Empathy, not love, is the basis of moral thought and conduct. We don't love everyone, and so there is no reason to hope for it. In fact, a great way of making hate desirable is to be around a bunch of people acting like they love each other. 

And I don't think the best sex necessarily happens with the person you love, but that's my own personal view point:)

denner

MorraMeister wrote:

Really. can we actually just see some chess played on here???

I am sure there is another site somewhere if all you want to do is talk about trash and raise controversial topics to inflate your ego.

 

when your parents friends ask what you do, do you tell,them you are a...

You must be new around here.

There are plenty of forums discussing chess and you click on this one and complain the discussion isn't chess? I'd wager you're one of those people that wants to "ban" whatever you don't like so nobody can do it.

Bishop_g5

Trysts @

I am sorry empathy is not enough. We people believe that love is a unique emotion that comes and goes once at ten years or something but that is not true. One of the reasons the human spiece will never make any progress is because at a huge average is incapable to interact love in regural basis. The cause of this is our nature to think and act selfish even the moments when we pretend that we do things for others.

Unfortunately sex is one of those moments. That's why sex has to do with power! It's a nature instinct that not depends in any kind of emotion , but we can't allow this individual need to define the morality of our society by creating majorities of Polygamy or Poligini , or open marriages.

Empathy is not enough that's why young couples divorce after six months more and more. Love is the key. We need to learn how to love.

The sex you make with someone you love is beyond the original idea. It's not only sex. It's a progression of your self mentally and spiritually. Forget the animal instinct!

Pulpofeira

Patience is the key. My wife is still loving me when she's about to smash my head.

Bishop_g5

Perhaps this is the reason why your head stands on its place. She loves you enough...but can you guarantee this if you betray this feeling?

ero-0
[COMMENT DELETED]
Pulpofeira

Who said my head still stands on its place?!

17rileyc

Need to borrow some of my head glue?

Bishop_g5

Clairvoya wrote:

You guys do know there's always polygyny (the male equivalent of polygamy), I probably should've started the topic including this. 

You guys are bringing real life examples like: america, male dominance etc. But in isolation polygamy can be a very pure thing. I know a friend who is a gentle man. Both woman wanted him, and he wanted to make them happy. You can't generalise everything.

It's not about generalization Claire. Ask your self what's the point to be with two men even if they can share you? The meaning to be with someone is the ability to share different feelings than you do with others. You can love two,three,five as many as you wish but there is no something special to this. Love between you and them loses the true potential and value.

Except this love requires from people to make difficult decisions, occasionally sacrifices, concessions, priorities. How you will do all this knowing that your man is sharing your feeling for him with another person?

Your common dream for creating life, family. You know life is not so simple. Some thinks can't be shared more than once, it's practically impossible even if there are pure intentions to give happiness.