Legalize Polyandry...
I am hearing more and more momentum to legalize gay marriage. Some Christians and Muslims even support it. The President has evolved and embraced it. If we are going to redefine marriage, why stop at gay marriage? Why not legalize polyandry?
One of the major justification of the traditional marriage is child rearing. However, with the advent of genetic testing, there is no confusion in parentage of a child any more. Moreover, more and more households are either single parent, or multiple parent (50% of marriages end up in divorce; and most of the people involved re-marry). It is not uncommon for a child to have a mother, father as well as step mother(s) and step father(s). I know a kid who has 6 parental units, through multiple marriages and divorces.
So, if gender is not an issue, and "serial marriage" is OK, then why not parallel marriage? Why can't one woman have multiple husbands? There are cultures around the world that have historically had examples of polyandry. Surely, we don't want to be intolerant to these communities? Feminist groups are often against polygamy - because they see it as some sort of abuse of women. But surely they would support polyandry?
What could be the harm in consenting adults participating in a polyandry marriage?
What say Ricochet women? Would you support it? Why? or Why not? How about the guys in favor of gay marriage? Is this going too far or not far enough? How about you traditionalists? If you can support divorce, (serial marriages), why not polyandry?
- Comment (263)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (7)
Comments:
Feb '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Barkha (supports polyandry) Herman: .....
By restricting access to "traditional", the government is essentially restricting my right. · 9 minutes ago
"Restricting your right" to do what? I don't consider "official"marriage to be a contract among individuals nor do I consider it a right, so your critiques dependent on that don't really work for me. "Official" marriage is for the common benefit of society, and anything that doesn't benefit society can be ignored. Fine that you disagree about the benefits of polyandry and that you think it should be included too (go ahead and try to convince your fellow citizens), but there is nothing inherently unjust about a society acting in common interest and excluding anything that doesn't serve the interest.
Jul '12
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Ed: Well, a couple of things. First, things like marriage and the sanctity of human life should never be up for debate. Citizens of a decent society have a right to rely on those things. Perhaps the OP here is positioned in society in a way that living the style that she advocates would work. But for most of us, it would be incredibly destructive. Just take single parenthood and check out what it has done to the black community as well as other groups on an ongoing basis. Over the centuries, vocies like that of the OP have been justly shut out in the cold. In a free society, we don't silence them, we simply turn our backs on them. What you've seen this past 40 years is what happens to a society that gives an ear to the voices of chaos.
But my main point was that Ricochet should use some judgment in what is published on this site. Mollie wrote that pedophilia advocacy is an acceptable topic. Is that what this site is for? Is a little judgment too much to ask?
Feb '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Barkha (supports polyandry) Herman: All -
This has been a lively and fun discussion. A few points: · 7 minutes ago
1. Shocking.
3. Most of us traditionalists KNOW that SSM is a slippery slope and have been arguing to that effect for quite some time.
4. IMHO, the government does have a role - has almost always had a role. Traditional marriage has been under attack from a variety of quarters for quite some time.
Feb '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Barkha (supports polyandry) Herman: All -
This has been a lively and fun discussion. A few points: · 22 minutes ago
5. Again, I don't think "official" marriage is strictly a contract. Besides, restrictions on participation in government programs can be justified in relation to the purpose of the program (among other reasons). Welfare is justly restricted to low income, Medicare is justly restricted to the elderly, marriage is justly restricted to the relationship that is most likely to produce AND raise children in a stable environment.
6. Accusations? Like what?
Feb '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
But those things are up for debate in our society. If we turn our backs on these arguments we're likely in for an unpleasant surprise when we realize they've gone unchallenged. Better to confront and defeat these ideas than ignore them.
Nov '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
After 119 comments, your carefree dismissal of those who oppose such "evolution" as timid souls fearful of change is, frankly, insulting to your honest interlocutors, and strongly indicates that you cannot give opposing views the consideration they deserve and therefore wouldn't benefit from my effort to relieve you of this foolishness.
The very phrasing of your question reveals a mind-bogglingly blithe imperviousness to reason:
"What could be the harm in consenting adults participating in a polyandry marriage?"
There's little to be gained wasting reason on anyone would ask such a question in such a way.
Better to spend one's efforts elsewhere.
Jul '12
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Ed: Yes, your point is taken and we have gotten too far into the muck now and we will have to fight our way out of it. But if we survive this, I hope that those who are around understand the need for taboos. And I hope they understand that you don't have to give someone a forum to prove anything. Free speech means you can speak. It doesn't obligate anyone to listen.
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Eric Voegelin
Mollie is on record that she would countenance a post advocating pedophilia and I have asked her to provide all of us with a guide as to how we could interact with such a member with civility. I am awating her response. · 5 hours ago
I guess I just have a tremendous confidence in my positions. I engage someone advocating raping children the same way I engage someone advocating something else vile -- say, killing unborn children -- an argument I have to deal with daily. I calmly and rationally work to convince them they're wrong.
Fact is that pedophilia was being defended and argued for by elites not long ago -- read Mary Eberstadt's brilliant essay explaining the recent victory against pedophilia chic here. That was only 16 years ago.
I do actually appreciate people who simply recoil in horror at evil things -- and I think Leon Kass is onto something when he talks of the wisdom of repugnance. I think that's what you're showing here. I'm really sorry I offended you, and I wish you would stay and fight for what you think is right, but I understand if that's not tenable.
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Barkha (supports polyandry) Herman: In all seriousness, here's the arguments against polyandry: · 3 hours ago
This is why I'm convinced that Barkha is doing elaborate satire. Beyond this not being in any way a fair or accurate summation of the arguments against polyandry, it doesn't even make sense.
Natural law is about majority rules? Hunh?
If someone doesn't know what natural law is, they shouldn't be in the business of redefining marriage.
If this is not satire, I can't think of a better example of how poorly thought out, reasoned, argued, imagined, etc. marriage redefinition efforts are.
Yes, this thread did turn into a goat rodeo. Nevertheless, apart from angering folks, I think it showed some valuable things.
Jul '10
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Simply put:
Bourgeois virtues tend to flourish in a bourgeois culture.
The expansion of bourgeois virtues just happens to coincide with the greatest expansions of liberty, equality, and wealth of modernity.
Screw with this (ahem) at your peril.
As a side note: I always find it interesting that those most likely to dismiss such considerations tend to fall into one of two camps:
1. Those with little-to-no stake in the society.
2. Those who know that their stake is unlikely to be molested in the near term (the next generation).
Aug '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Barkha (supports polyandry) Herman: All -
This has been a lively and fun discussion.
Well, no . . . not really.
If Fred Cole encouraged you to jump off a bridge, would you do it?
Jul '12
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Mollie: You did not offend me at all. In fact, I can't remember when I last felt offended. But I do think I read some awfully foolish copy. The OP did not deserve rebuttal. She deserved to be ignored. I ignored her but I threw you a jab or two. I hope I didn't hurt your feelings.
But to repeat myself, I do not think it's wise to give these people a forum. It gives them a leg up (oh yes it does) and it drags you down.
So, yes, I would advise the higher ups to sit down and decide where the line is and then draw it. It'll make this a better place and, for sure, get you some publicity. But it's up to you; I have no dog in this fight.
Well, I'm paid up for another 11 months.
Nov '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
The very act of attempting to engage in reasoned discussion implies something reasonable to engage on the other side, and therby lends it legitimacy.
Only in some perfectly abstracted ivory tower, or in a sadly devolved society, would it seem wise to attempt reasoned arguments with someone advocating child rape.
For me, for a healthy society, the best response to such views is not to dignify and legitimize them or their proponents by offering reasoned discussion. The best response, the socially healthy response, is expression of universal disgust and contempt.
Haven't you noticed how quickly your reasoned arguments are met with the response that you have no reasoned arguments, that you are a captive of your own fears, hatreds, and prejudices? Soon the question of what is wrong with polygamy is replaced with the question of what is wrong with you that makes you disapprove it.
It's foolish, and nearly hubristic, to think that such opinions can be reasoned away.
Excessive confidence in reason is the modern vice.
Edited on August 8, 2012 at 4:21amJun '12
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Is 250 a record? If not, what is? And where is Rob Long? Just light up a room (promote to Main Feed) and leave, eh? Typical Hollywood, LOL. ;) I thought it was an interesting, if at times exasperating, conversation. Good thing it wasn't a dinner party though. This would be the awkward silence part.... Good night folks, tomorrow let's close ranks, one and all, and go after something we can all agree on, like defeating the incumbent POTUS.
Edited on August 8, 2012 at 4:28amNov '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Mollie: You argue that this post is either "an elaborate satire," or it is a very poorly reasoned piece, but your reason for believing it to be a satire is that one cannot take the arguments seriously because they are so poor. I take your assumption to be that the author could not be so unintelligent or uninformed as to have made the arguments she made, but where is your evidence for this? On the other hand, if it is a kind of un-funny joke, it is also true that it drew serious effort from serious commentators who were not amused. Under either interpretation, it seems to me that it should not be on the Main Feed.
In addition, you say that the thread "showed some valuable things." I agree that it showed on one side the clear belief in the necessity of upholding the traditional family, which many here believe to be the sine qua non of civilization and which has been relentlessly attacked from the Left, but we already knew that. What other good things were shown?
Not all conversation is good conversation.
Mar '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Eric Voegelin:
But to repeat myself, I do not think it's wise to give these people a forum. It gives them a leg up (oh yes it does) and it drags you down.
So, yes, I would advise the higher ups to sit down and decide where the line is and then draw it. It'll make this a better place and, for sure, get you some publicity.
One thing I have noticed over the last year and a half at Ricochet is that, while the site may be advertised as an online cocktail party, the discussions often much more closely resemble dormroom banter during freshman year.
Personally, I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing - I certainly expressed my mind much more freely during college bull sessions than during any snooty adult mixer - but I'm not sure that all such topics need to land on the Main Feed.
Jul '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
Now after all is said and done I do not support polyandry but if a bunch of guys want to live with one girl, well it's a free society. Polygamy and polyandry should not be sanctioned by law for the benefits that come from marriage. It's not the government in your business, its you asking the government to bestow benefits upon you for an odd lifestyle. As for the inner city black community, I have delivered 25 kids and never seen one father. In the infant ward one dad did come around but referred to the kid as a check.
Mar '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
250 is not a record, not by a long shot (only 400 more posts to go!).
Check the "Most Active" tab on the Main Feed. Feel free to count for yourself how many of those threads deal with gay marriage or some element/iteration thereof.
Oct '11
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
At least this might help solve the epidemic of passionate gun murders that afflict societies with gun ownership (Brazilian gun control advocates love this argument), because after a life trained to accept the fact that women can have multiple husbands, no man will ever again reach for his drawer gun when He founds his wife with another guy.
Since multiple marriages for the same women is possible, we will also grow to accept affairs as normal, since it would be absurd to marry without first dating. So no more meetings in hidden motels with your boyfriends dear married women, you can bring your boyfriend home and your husband will not object to both of you have a bit of a romantic conversation under his nose.
Also polyandry would break the mancentric aspect of marriage that sees women as an exclusive property of man and give her full power to choose.
Dec '10
Re: Legalize Polyandry...
DrewInWisconsin
If Fred Cole encouraged you to jump off a bridge, would you do it? · 11 hours ago
Maybe... he always has such damn good arguments...