Fundie Mormon women with 3 or more HUSBANDS

[opihimoimoi]

From a small town, Kanab, just North of Johnson Canyon, comes news of a growing trend, multiple husbands. The women just luv it. More income with the same amount of kids. More daddies to play with the kids. More fun for all. America should learn of these wonderful things called multiple spouses.

Come, we go visit Hubert, he got a boat for fishing

[IDUDOYOU]

1. What kind of post is this?

Yes, Kanab, Utah sets the trend of the rest of the nation.
Can anyone say incest?

[Phoenixtongueof fire]

4. Incest?

Are they marrying their brothers? fathers? uncles? why is multi-spouses considered"incest"??????

[KCDem]

2. ugh, one is bad enough

I can't imagine feeling I had to put out THAT much. Sheesh.

[TXlib]

27. Hey

n * 0 is still 0.

:P

[The Lone Liberal]

3. Sounds damn good to me

Proportion the work around the house, no not that! Lawn, trash, etc.

[opihimoimoi]

5. I guess its a bunch of horny women caught up in a desperate situation

of too many men and not enough women. Who the hell knows, they are happy and its all that matters, lol.

[IDUDOYOU]

6. Small towns Utah

Not much room for meeting someone except at family reunions or weddings.

[Mz Pip]

7. This is nuts

I can barely deal with one husband. What am I supposed to do with 3??? Just 3 more guys who can't put the toilet seat down or pick up their dirty socks.

I've been married for 28 years to one guy. I would last about 2 days with 3 of them wandering around my house annoying me.

MzPip
:dem:

[maxanne]

8. great idea

and far more logical than the one husband for a bunch of women.

After all, women can experience multiple orgasms - men tend to peak at one, especially as they get older. Men are moody and tempermental, and often won't perform their marital duties - so it sure would be handy to have a stable to choose from. Plus you could keep 'em busy with plenty of housework.

I'd get my novel written!

[Booberdawg]

10. You have a point there

I hadn't considered the correlation with orgasms. And a woman with multiple husbands doesn't seem as exploitive as a man with multiple wives. Having a stable to choose from might be a bit sexist, but I can always dream! LOL!

[cprise]

13. And you need polygamy for this How?

"After all, women can experience multiple orgasms ..."

So far I've read how 'great' this is because of the extra spouses acting as 'uncles' and 'playmates' and 'extra income'. But that sounds like the roles of family, neighbors and jobs to me.

Come back 3 years later, and tell me if a polygamous, er, group/gathering of 7 people still has most of the same men in it. If yes, then they're cheating or the group is composed of bisexual men.

[shugah]

9. woo-hoo N o' Johnsons Canyon

why does 'multiple spouses' always mean 'many wives'?

i think it was Mark Twain (in "Letters from the Earth") that pointed out that, at the end of the day, women would do better with multiple husbands. (correct me if i'm wrong, but i think it was Samual Clemens...)

so, the "women jes' luv it," huh, opi? i wonder why? ;-)

[opihimoimoi]

15. Mother Nature sez "If it works, why the hell not?"

:bounce:

[GoddessOfGuinness]

11. I've never been able to figure out why any woman

would want more than one man.

That'd drive me nuts.

[opihimoimoi]

14. Its not for everyone????

Not for you but for those who do?

Who knows where Kanab is anyhows? LOL

[GoddessOfGuinness]

16. I was just kidding...

Should've put a smiley next to my snippy comment... :-)

I've no idea where it could be; but maybe Mapquest could help.

[opihimoimoi]

17. I Knew you waz kidding, LOL

so am I

Come, we hike Johnson Cabyon, look fer der rabbits.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

24. What does Opihimoimoi mean?

...and please don't say "Woman with many husbands"!
;-)

[opihimoimoi]

26. Napping Limpet

Limpets are mollusks that clings to shoreline rocks and cliffs.

Moemoe means to sleep.

moi is a fish, polydactylus sexfilis, Pacific threadfin.

moimoi is a play on Hawaiian words, the sleeping opihi. I raise Moi in a fish pond.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

29. I've always liked limpets...

Saw them as a kid when I'd visit my grandparents on the FL coast.

What a charming nickname!
Have a nice nap! :-)

[opihimoimoi]

30. Gonna take one in 3.009 nanoseconds

:bounce:

[Interrobang]

22. Ok, then I'll explain it to you...

...if you'll explain how you manage to get along wanting only one man. Deal?

Me, I'd be totally happy if I had two -- and I already know which two. :)

[freeforall]

35. I've never figured out why

any woman would want just one. Variety,...

[cprise]

12. Polygamy has an anti-devotional basis

It is essentially a series of promises to increasingly spend LESS time and resources and emotional involvement on someone than you used to. In that sense it asks the state to disregard the status of the individuals already having an equal claim on the time and resources of the person being married again.

Also, polygamy requires chauvanism towards one of the partners as the center of sexual attention. Otherwise with a group of men and a group of women all married to each other, what you have essentially is a growing front of sexual activity; like a small village or commune where all the people are intimately involved. Over time marriage (and divorce) lose their qualities as milestones and it becomes a continual process, like managing a club membership.

The modern concept of marriage is based on the spirit of exclusivity and mutual respect.

Finally, mariage is also a contract between a couple and the community that the spouses interests are profoundly bound-up with each other. With polygamy, the arrangement is unbounded and the social and economic role of the community becomes meaningless: healthcare plans, immigration laws, inheritence law, etc. cannot fairly deal or even cope with the devotional legal imperatives of married couples applied to groups of N-number of people.

From a legal standpoint, polygamy has zero weight and no future. Having whole towns that become engulfed in passionate and angry legal wrangling when ONE person dies/divorces/breaches contract/commits a crime/etc, is unacceptable. That is a community that is destined toward repression and a lack of modern legal rights if they want to keep polygamy viable. Other structures are better suited to managing responsibility and inclusivity: clubs, LLC, co-operatives, and even communes.

As for the 'female-centered' social angle, I'd be surprised to see the relationships last when male partners decide they're not getting enough, or that none of the kids are theirs, or that one of them is bi or gay. And when this happens to one or two of the men, then the remaining spouses are left with a ton of negative emotional baggage.

I'd say the chances are pretty high this 'new thing' is an ultra-conservative ploy to provide ammunition to Sen. Santorum and his buddies to use against gay marriage; they probably hope the public will think polygamy must come with an acceptance of gay marriage, and reject it on those terms. IMO there is no comparison, nor do I think the Santorums of the world could intelligently compare them either.

[Interrobang]

23. What about bounded polygamous/polyandrous relationships?

I know a woman with two husbands, one de jure and one de facto. They seem to manage everything in terms of running the household just fine, and so far it's never expanded sexually into anything other than the three of them. These are not religious people doing this for some sort of religious reasons; they're doing it for purely personal reasons. Their relationship is at least four years old and shows no signs of deteriorating thus far. It neither grows nor shrinks, and has very clear boundaries: the three of them, and no one else.

There are already communities unrelated by marriage (such as that is) where when one person "dies/divorces/breaches contract/commits a crime/etc" it causes uncountable legal wrangling, especially in close-knit religious groupings concentrated in certain geographic areas. This is neither "acceptable" nor "unacceptable"; it simply *is*, that is, it already exists and has for some time. Longer than you or I have been alive, that's for certain.

The modern concept of marriage (such as it is) is based on a system of inherited (historical) rights and permissions granted by society and/or an outside agency (such as a religious institution), based on traditional reasons for and concepts of union, and largely bound up with property rights. In fact, property rights are inextricably part of modern marriage, and have been that way for several centuries now.

[cprise]

33. They are still unbounded

...as long as they have the right to divorce, or marry additional people.

I am glad for your friend (although she does not legally have "two husbands" if she is from this continent).

And I wasn't referring to just exceptional inviduals causing mayhem in their communities; If, say, 10% of a town's population are "married" this way (and therefore have extremely large extended families) then either legalistic and emotional disruption becomes the norm, or people simply care less and have less rights when they're "married" in large groups. Take your pick.

Where I work, we used to belong to teams of 3 or 4 people and birthdays were always celebrated with cake and a party. Now the teams are 9-12 people and we are completely sick of cake and planning parties every month. Each person experiences the "imperative" parts of the relationship (i.e. major disruptions) on an increasing exponential curve as spouses are added. And there is no reason to think polygamists would be an exception to the 50% divorce rate. That means a child growing up in a 7-parent household gets to experience not one marriage and divorce on average, but three, and siblings are added and removed with high frequency.

The increase in legal complexity (and resources consumed in the courts) would be even steeper. We do not have an ultraconservative patricarchy where spousal rights and welfare concerns can be brushed aside based on favoritism or sexism or biblical-correctness. In a liberal democracy polygamy would certainly be good for the legal profession, but I do not even want to live NEAR a community where I could get caught in that kind of crossfire. Two spouses are strain enough on the courts.

"The modern concept of marriage (such as it is) is based on a system of inherited (historical) rights and permissions granted by society and/or an outside agency (such as a religious institution), based on traditional reasons for and concepts of union, and largely bound up with property rights. In fact, property rights are inextricably part of modern marriage, and have been that way for several centuries now."

Poppycock. That's like saying our society is based on money and God; that may be part of it, but would also be woefully incomplete. Our current legal treatment of marriage puts in the foreground the emotional investment and well-being of the spouses and their dependents. The 'traditional' institution of marriage centered around only property (not the least of which being the wife) does not wash. The Liberal movement has seen to that, thank God.

[peacefreak]

18. Under the Banner of Heaven

by John Krakauer {Into the Wild, Into Thin Air) has just released a book detailing Mormonism & polygamy in great detail. Believe me if you are interested in being an independent woman, this way of life is not for you.
It is not about sex--supposedly. But the men of the sect freqently "marry" girls as young as 14, sometimes the daughters of their spiritual wives. To keep it legal the first marriage is with state license. The rest of them are "spiritual". Because the mariages are not recognized the families collect thousands of welfare dollars & benefits.
Somehow I don't think there is much attraction for being part of a cult that demands unquestioning obedience & loyalty. The role of the woman is to serve her husband & have as many children as possible.
Thanks, but no thanks.

[ikojo]

19. Fundy Mormons and welfare

Funny that fundy Mormons with multiple spouses and many, many children don't mind collecting welfare checks.

As a religious group don't Mormons tend to support the very -pukes who succeeded so well in demonizing those on welfare that the Democrats (that party of the working class and down trodden) took on welfare reform as a party platform?

Why is it that people vote against their own class interests?

Interesting.

[opihimoimoi]

20. The Fundie Mormons are not recognized by the Mainstream

Church. They are outcasts more or less.

[cprise]

34. Me neither

And it's dismaying how facile and shallow some people on DU can be regarding an instrument of conservative patriarchy.

Aside from the novelty of a female-centered "marriage", the phenomenon would become swamped with testosterone and fundamentalist men with religious imperatives to produce as much offspring as possible.

This was useful to the Mormons in populating Utah and dominating it only with their kind--- But only monoculture is allowed. Imagine if five Mormon families with about 10 wives each (and 4 children each) lived in your district. Then an African pagan family of similar size moves in and their friends (also black) start sizing-up property. There you have a recipie for a war in a few short sentences. The potential family scales involved tends to cause an 'astroturfing' of communities (an entire state?) culturally and otherwise, and it raises the threat level between people of different backgrounds.

[tuck]

21. anthropologically speaking...

polgyny AND polyandry have traditionally been tools of female oppression.

it's less a woman having multiple husbands than a few guys sharing a woman. the men in this situation (tradiatioanlly the oldest one) who have the power.

which is not to say that all polygamous relationships operate this way. i know some polyamorous couples who seem happy healthy and are wonderful to hang out with.

[thermodynamic]

25. Well, I'd love having three husbands too!

Can't even get ONE though, though the credit either goes to:

* Bush for making sure we're permanently second class citizens
* The gay community for preferring to be promiscuous (hence the formation of stereotypes that affect the rest of us)
* I'm so pathetic and worthless that nobody wants me. Why don't I kill myself now?

[opihimoimoi]

28. All ya gatta do is go down to the friendly HUSBANDS R US

Store. Do it soon, they got a sale going on. Buy 2 get one for free.

[geniph]

31. I'll bet their houses are a frigging mess, too

Have you seen houses where men live together? (doesn't apply where one of the men is a neat freak, but men like that - at least straight men - are few and far between) Pigsty doesn't begin to describe most male group living situations. I've come to the conclusion that many men are simply incapable of seeing mold in the toilet and tub, shed hair on the counters, dirty socks, or empty beverage containers.

Now, if the men were all bisexual and fairly tidy, this could work. Otherwise, yuck, just what the world needs, more underwear on the bathroom floor and dirty dishes left on the couch.

Now, this is some gross generalization, of course, but I'm thinking of the many situations I've seen where groups of men lived in the same house. With the exception of my gay friends and a few rare straight neat freaks, the houses were appalling. The women in these situations may have more sex than they can handle, but I'll bet they have more dirty dishes, too.

[opihimoimoi]

32. The women choose the mates

If they choose neat, hard to beat

If they go for the slobs, what can I say?