Marriage Builders
Posted By: Tabby1 Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/11/09 10:25 PM
A subject on a completely unrelated forum raised some questions for me. Is there such a thing as infidelity in polygamous (or other) types of marriages? I imagine there must be, but how does it work? I'm sure in some societies, the WH just marries the OW makes her wife #x, but what if it's the WW who cheats? And it can't always be that simple either.

I'm not interested in the morality or lack thereof with this. Just the mechanics. Does anybody know? Has anyone from a non-traditional marriage come to MB seeking help? Could you even apply MB to this?

Curious minds want to know!
Posted By: black_raven Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/11/09 10:36 PM
I don't think you can apply MB to non-traditional marriages. MB supports a marriage between two people as far as I've read.
Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/11/09 10:49 PM
Originally Posted by Tabby1
A subject on a completely unrelated forum raised some questions for me. Is there such a thing as infidelity in polygamous (or other) types of marriages? I imagine there must be, but how does it work?

If they make up their own standards of what constitutes marriage, then wouldn't it only follow that they make up their own standard on what [or IF?] constitutes infidelity?

I don't see how marriage builders could possibly address that question since it is based on tradition marriage.
Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/11/09 11:13 PM
Makes sense I suppose. Although it would bring a whole new dimension to exposure if there were other wives involved!

I guess it's just an area I know nothing about. I know there are some highly structured cultures that practice polygamy - heck, there are cultures whose entire family structures are completely alien to us westerners. I suppose another reason they don't come here is because HERE is completely alien to them. I just wonder if infidelity is something that plagues them too, or is it limited to what we consider to be a traditional marriage?
Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/11/09 11:36 PM
Originally Posted by Tabby1
Makes sense I suppose. Although it would bring a whole new dimension to exposure if there were other wives involved!

I guess it's just an area I know nothing about. I know there are some highly structured cultures that practice polygamy - heck, there are cultures whose entire family structures are completely alien to us westerners. I suppose another reason they don't come here is because HERE is completely alien to them. I just wonder if infidelity is something that plagues them too, or is it limited to what we consider to be a traditional marriage?

I gotcha. Sort of like a culture that practices human sacrifice or pedophilia, therefore, it is not murder or pedophilia, but a cultural alternative.

What are these highly structured cultures that practice polygamy? France?

I suppose if they were practicing polygamy, then it wouldn't be infidelity, right? We have had ppl who came here and called infidelity different things, such as "polygamy," "3-D marriage," "swinging," "just friends," etc, etc, etc..... If you are making up the rules as you go along, then I guess anything goes.
Posted By: Pepperband Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/11/09 11:42 PM
LMAOPIMP rotflmao
Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 12:05 AM
shaddup, Spanky! grin
Posted By: weaver Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 12:21 AM
What does LMAOPIMP stand for? I get the LMAO, just the PIMP part.

Mel, are you saying France practices Polygamy? Is that what you are saying? France is very near and dear to my french loving heart. JSYN

Tabby,

I'm very liberal, way more liberal than most of the very non liberal people here, and I can't wrap my mind around polygamy. It's so far out there to my way of thinking, even.

I don't know, I guess they got a problem if they don't like one of the partners. But if they like all the partners, then they don't (have a problem that is). That's all I can figure.

Posted By: Pepperband Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 12:25 AM
pee
in
my
pants
Posted By: weaver Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 12:26 AM
If the man can just marry his cheating partner, then why can't the woman just marries her as well?

Why the double standard? Why can a polygamus husband marry his OW, but the polygamus wife not marry her OM.

Maybe that is where the problem lies, in the double standard.
Posted By: Pepperband Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 12:26 AM
Originally Posted by MelodyLane
shaddup, Spanky! grin
hey Spanky, Reno starts in 3 weeks ... get the keg ready
Posted By: weaver Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 12:27 AM
LOL, Pep.
Posted By: Pepperband Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 12:28 AM
Originally Posted by weaves
LOL, Pep.
PIMP Weaves
Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 12:32 AM
Originally Posted by weaves
Mel, are you saying France practices Polygamy? Is that what you are saying? France is very near and dear to my french loving heart. JSYN

I dunno who does, weaves! that is why I am asking... think
Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 12:38 AM
Believe you me, I am ALL ABOUT setting our OWN standards as we go along. I live in a facist police state where the speed limits are too damn low. I have tried to explain to these people that my standard may not be THEIR STANDARD on a given day. IT ALL DEPENDS ON MY MOOD. I wear a MOOD RING as my driving guide, actually. smile

That is my standard and, unfortunately, these folks here seem to be a tad bit rigid and intolerant.

I have a constitutional RIGHT to the pursuit of happiness and they seem to have missed that little item in the Constitution. sigh

Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 12:57 AM
Weaves, that's just my problem - I can't get my head around it. I'm not talking about somebody in western society choosing to live an alternative lifestyle - though I'm sure that has it's own set of problems. There are even a few western cult-like groups, though I'd rather leave those out of this since there are often alterior motives involved. But there are cultures where polygamy is the norm. Some muslim cultures as well as a number of aboriginal peoples of many places live this way. They aren't just swinging or making it up as they go along. They have all kinds of rules and rituals that they believe in as strongly as we believe in ours. I know virtually nothing about them, except that they exist.

For example, from Wikipedia:
Quote
Patterns of occurrence worldwide

According to the Ethnographic Atlas Codebook, of the 1231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous. 453 had occasional polygyny, 588 had more frequent polygyny, and 4 had polyandry.[2] At the same time, even within societies which allow polygyny, the actual practice of polygyny occurs relatively rarely. There are exceptions: in Senegal, for example, nearly 47 percent of marriages are multiple.[5] To take on more than one wife often requires considerable resources: this may put polygamy beyond the means of the vast majority of people within those societies. Such appears the case in many traditional Islamic societies, and in Imperial China. Within polygynous societies, multiple wives often become a status symbol denoting wealth and power. Similarly, within societies that formally prohibit polygamy, social opinion may look favorably on persons maintaining mistresses or engaging in serial monogamy.


Lots of this type of info is available. I suppose I could simply research a bunch of different polygamous societies and see what comes up.

BTW, the jokes are funny and I am laughing, but I'm also very curious as to whether infidelity is a problem in western culture, a problem with monogomous marriages in general, or if it is a universal marital problem.
Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:07 AM
Originally Posted by Tabby1
BTW, the jokes are funny and I am laughing, but I'm also very curious as to whether infidelity is a problem in western culture, a problem with monogomous marriages in general, or if it is a universal marital problem.


Honestly, I have read this 3-4 times and I still don't get it. think

Oh well..
Posted By: weaver Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:10 AM
Tabby,

I don't know if infidelity is a problem in non western societies like it is here. I don't know the answer to that.

I know some countries kill women for cheating and the man can do whatever he wants.

Personally, I think non-monagamy is counter to our basic human make up, but there are others who think is very much our basic human make up.

I got in a discussion with someone on here once because I said animals normally mate for life, and apparently that is not true. So then I said we are not animals then, we're human.

Spiritually, I don't think infidelity is productive to our growth. I think it is very, very destructive.

It's interesting though, hey? Except for the polygamy which I just think exploits women (or better said young girls).



Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:11 AM
Just reading on in the same article:
Quote
Thailand
Until polygamy was outlawed by King Rama VI, it was expected that wealthy or upper-class Thai men were historically recognized to maintain mansions consisting of multiple wives and their children in the same residence. Among the royalty and courtiers in the past, wives were classified as principal, secondary, and slave. Today, the tradition of minor wives still remains, but the practice is different from that of the past. Due to the expense involved, minor wives are mostly limited to the wealthy men. While a "proper woman" (Kulasatrii; Thai: กุลสตรี) must remain faithful to her husband, there were no equivalent rules in history mandating fidelity in the "virtuous man."
Regardless of the historical acceptance, male polygamy or plural marriage is no longer legally or socially acceptable in the contemporary Thai society. However, the practice of having "minor wives" (Mia-Noi: เมียน้อย) continues in modern days in secrecy from the "primary wife" (Mia-Luang: เมียหลวง).[14] Almost all married Thai women today object to this practice, and indeed for many it has been grounds for divorce.[15] Minor wives are viewed with contempt by the Thai society along the lines of being amoral women or home breakers.[16]


Funny, but thinking of OW as a "minor wife" gives me a bit of a chuckle.

This is the only thing I've come across with regards to infidelity in such a marriage.

Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:13 AM
Originally Posted by weaves
I know some countries kill women for cheating and the man can do what ever he wants.

In Saudi, our niece, an Army nurse, witnessed a young 15 year old Saudi girl being STONED TO DEATH in the public square for getting pregnant. I would venture to guess there is not much cheating going on in Saudi.
Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:14 AM
Mel, I'm just wondering if infidelity is a problem directly related to monogomous marriage as we know it. OR, is it a western- society thing? OR, are all marriages of all forms subject to the pain of infidelity? Basically, is it human nature to cheat, regardless of the circumstances?
Posted By: weaver Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:17 AM
Originally Posted by MelodyLane
Originally Posted by weaves
I know some countries kill women for cheating and the man can do what ever he wants.

In Saudi, our niece, an Army nurse, witnessed a young 15 year old Saudi girl being STONED TO DEATH in the public square for getting pregnant. I would venture to guess there is not much cheating going on in Saudi.

Oh my God. Man. Doesn't that just make you feel like crying. How horrible. Poor little girl.

As much as I moan about the USA, I am so very, very thankful my little girl lives here.
Posted By: weaver Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:22 AM
Originally Posted by Tabby1
Mel, I'm just wondering if infidelity is a problem directly related to monogomous marriage as we know it. OR, is it a western- society thing? OR, are all marriages of all forms subject to the pain of infidelity? Basically, is it human nature to cheat, regardless of the circumstances?

Tabby,

If it was basic human nature to cheat, why would it cause us such pain. We are going against our nature, if it causes such destruction, no?

If God created us in his image, then it just stands to reason that cheating would be against our basic human nature.

I will never, ever for as long as I live, believe that it is in our basic human nature to be non-monogamous (sp).

It is simply too destructive to family and society.
Posted By: black_raven Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:24 AM
Originally Posted by weaves
Why the double standard? Why can a polygamus husband marry his OW, but the polygamus wife not marry her OM.

Maybe that is where the problem lies, in the double standard.

Or it could be that women know better...who wants 5, 10, 15 husbands at one time? stickout laugh
Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:26 AM
Of all the instances of polygamy in western society I've heard of, they have all exploited young girls and/or women. It's probably true for non-western societies as well but I don't know. The wiki article discusses availability of resources and other things that aren't even a consideration in western society.

Regardless of the why's or wherefores of a polygamous society, these people are still people and must have emotions and feelings and surely they must hurt at times. And for all the problems that happen between 2 people in a monogomous marriage, they must be greatly compounded the more people you bring into it.

As far as animals go, I've spent a lot of time on farms and have seen a lot of animal behavior. Some mate for life. Some are outright promiscuous. I've seen homosexual behavior in more species than a regular city-dweller knows exists. I've also witnessed more caring, committed, monogomous relationships between a pair of animals than has never been experienced by a human being. You just can't compare people to animals in this light. There are just way too many variables including different species, life-spans, lifestyles, number of live births per litter etc.. that have no equivalent among humankind. Not to mention, there are few animals around these days in a "natural" environment anyway and you have to take into consideration that any behavior you observe is affected by their confinement and domestication.
Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:26 AM
Originally Posted by Tabby1
Mel, I'm just wondering if infidelity is a problem directly related to monogomous marriage as we know it. OR, is it a western- society thing? OR, are all marriages of all forms subject to the pain of infidelity? Basically, is it human nature to cheat, regardless of the circumstances?

But, if you recognize no STANDARD of infidelity, then isn't that a moot point? That doesn't mean it "doesn't happen" in a polygamous culture, just that it is defined as an acceptable way of life. How can you conclude this is a "western" problem if your point of comparison is a society that practices and accepts adultery as a way of life? That makes no sense.

That is like comparing the US to a country that practices human sacrifice and saying we have murders and they don't. Both countries have murders, one just defines them in a different way.

I am just not getting your point, Tabby. Sorry..

weaver, my poor niece was traumatized by that horrendous barbaric scene. I will never get it out of my mind either. They are barbarians there.
Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:28 AM
Originally Posted by Tabby1
Basically, is it human nature to cheat, regardless of the circumstances?

Its human nature to SIN, period.
Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:35 AM
Originally Posted by weaves
If God created us in his image, then it just stands to reason that cheating would be against our basic human nature.

I really would like to keep this to a sociological/anthropological discussion rather than a religious one, however, you do have to acknowledge that basic Judo-Christian beliefs state that man is imperfect and is tempted by a whole bunch of things, not just infidelity. One could ask why people steal if it is against our basic human nature.
Quote
I will never, ever for as long as I live, believe that it is in our basic human nature to be non-monogamous (sp).

It is simply too destructive to family and society.
I'm not sure about human nature, but I do know that *I* personally cannot be non-monogomous. And I agree it's destructive to family and society. I'm just recognizing that I have a specific definition of family based on where I was born and how I was raised - and by extension, I have a definition of a functional society. I do recognize, however, that there are other societies in this world. Again, I'm asking these questions from more of a sociological perspective. Even if there's a society where the pain of infidelity does not exist in exchange for polygamy, I'm not packing up to move there.
Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:42 AM
Originally Posted by Tabby1
I really would like to keep this to a sociological/anthropological discussion rather than a religious one, however, you do have to acknowledge that basic Judo-Christian beliefs state that man is imperfect and is tempted by a whole bunch of things, not just infidelity. One could ask why people steal if it is against our basic human nature.
\
I don't thats a realistic or a respectful expectation, since adultery is a moral issue and for many, the source of morality IS Christianity. To ask Christians to leave out Christianity is to ask us to leave our world view at home when you are asking questions about our world view.

That would be like us asking you to leave your secularism out of the discussion, a form of discrimination. Not very realistic.
Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:43 AM
Originally Posted by MelodyLane
Originally Posted by Tabby1
Mel, I'm just wondering if infidelity is a problem directly related to monogomous marriage as we know it. OR, is it a western- society thing? OR, are all marriages of all forms subject to the pain of infidelity? Basically, is it human nature to cheat, regardless of the circumstances?

But, if you recognize no STANDARD of infidelity, then isn't that a moot point? That doesn't mean it "doesn't happen" in a polygamous culture, just that it is defined as an acceptable way of life. How can you conclude this is a "western" problem if your point of comparison is a society that practices and accepts adultery as a way of life? That makes no sense.
I haven't made any conclusions. So far, everything I've written is a question. Let me rephrase - IS there a STANDARD of infidelity in a polygamous marriage? In other words, even though a man can have more than one wife, can he just sleep around as much as he wants? Or is there anything holding him at least to the wives he already has? These cultures aren't random - they do have rules. I just don't know what the rules are. Perhaps all a guy has to do to take on another wife is pick her up at the bar - I honestly don't know.

Quote
That is like comparing the US to a country that practices human sacrifice and saying we have murders and they don't. Both countries have murders, one just defines them in a different way.
Absolutely except from a different perspective. In this case, westerners are looking at the human sacrifice society as an evil people and want to stop this. However, you just can't walk in and say "Stop murdering" to people who don't believe they are committing murder. You have to understand what is behind their beliefs in order to find a way to change their behavior. As to the polygamous societies, I'm not suggesting that they change - they can do what they want - I just want to know if they experience the same problems we do. I'm sure they have other problems - logistically I can't see how they don't - but do they have THIS problem - Infidelity. It's a simple question, really.
Posted By: aussieswife Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:45 AM


Quote
What are these highly structured cultures that practice polygamy? France?


rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao

rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao

rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao

rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao

rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao rotflmao
Posted By: black_raven Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:47 AM
Survival, maintaining a patriarch or old school customs. If any of these factors fit, then most if not all of the wives aren't marrying for love anyway and problably don't care about being wife #8 or wife #13. If there are multiple wives, perhaps wife #1 cares the most about status and not so much about sharing the H.
Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:48 AM
Originally Posted by MelodyLane
Originally Posted by Tabby1
I really would like to keep this to a sociological/anthropological discussion rather than a religious one, however, you do have to acknowledge that basic Judo-Christian beliefs state that man is imperfect and is tempted by a whole bunch of things, not just infidelity. One could ask why people steal if it is against our basic human nature.
\
I don't thats a realistic or a respectful expectation, since adultery is a moral issue and for many, the source of morality IS Christianity. To ask Christians to leave out Christianity is to ask us to leave our world view at home when you are asking questions about our world view.

That would be like us asking you to leave your secularism out of the discussion, a form of discrimination. Not very realistic.

Merrium-Webster Online Dictionary Definition:
Quote
Main Entry:
adul·tery
Pronunciation:
\ə-ˈdəl-t(ə-)rē\
Function:
noun
Inflected Form(s):
plural adul·ter·ies
Etymology:
Middle English, alteration of avoutrie, from Anglo-French avulterie, from Latin adulterium, from adulter adulterer, back-formation from adulterare
Date:
15th century
: voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband ; also : an act of adultery

This is what I mean by infidelity or adultery. There is nothing religious about it. Trust me, non-Christians can feel the pain of adultery just as deeply as Christians.

Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:50 AM
Originally Posted by Tabby1
In this case, westerners are looking at the human sacrifice society as an evil people and want to stop this. You have to understand what is behind their beliefs in order to find a way to change their behavior.

I am not following you. Are you saying murder is not evil? And if not, why would I want to "change their behavior?"

And actually, one does not have to "understand what is behind their beliefs" in order to change someone's behavior. That is not an accurate statement.

Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:54 AM
Originally Posted by Tabby1
: voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband ; also : an act of adultery

This is what I mean by infidelity or adultery. There is nothing religious about it. Trust me, non-Christians can feel the pain of adultery just as deeply as Christians.

[/quote]

Actually it is a Judeo-Christian construct and is considered a SIN. Even so, adultery is a MORAL issue, and as I stated before, my worldview - my moral foundation - IS Christian.

So, no I can't leave my worldview at home anymore than you can leave yours at home.

This forum does not discriminate against Christians so there is no reason, other than discrimination, to leave one's Christianity out of it.
Posted By: MelodyLane Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 02:04 AM
Originally Posted by Tabby1
There is nothing religious about it. Trust me, non-Christians can feel the pain of adultery just as deeply as Christians.

It sounds like you are saying that only the views of "non-Christians" are valid and that Christians are not welcome to express their opinion on adultery. Is that what you are saying?
Posted By: grendel Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 02:10 AM
I think there are a few people here who have mentioned having dabbled, at some point, in 'alternate lifestyles'. I'm one of them, and speak only for myself. I suspect you may find a bit of what I say surprising.

After my ex-wife's first affair, we dabbled in the 'swinging' lifestyle. We were fairly mild, in that we only saw one other couple. Some folks get way out there crazy, even more weird than you might already think, but we weren't interested in that sort of thing. It was something we thought to dabble with, considering things were already broken. I don't think we would have ever gone there had she not already stepped out. The affair really took away the 'sacred' feel of things for me.

Our agreement was very simple. It would always be WE, never any independent stuff, and if anyone was uncomfortable, it would end immediately.

We became fast friends with the other couple. The relationship was very different than I expected. To this day, my best friend is the other guy from that couple, but we are both divorced from our wives at the time, and have moved on to other relationships, and want no part of those things anymore. My tale, you can find in my post history. As for him, his wife became obsessed with pressing the boundaries, to the point that it became more important to her than her marriage and her child. She was deceiving him and meeting strangers, all the while lying to him. He ended up giving her an ultimatum: we either stop this, or I am ending this and finding a wife who will be monogamous. She chose the latter.

What you may find surprising is that both he and I felt, for various reasons, dragged into the situation by the behavior of our wives, rather than being the instigators. For me, I know it was at least partly with the idea of evening the score for the affair.

To answer your question about infidelity, yes, it still is a valid concept, at least if there have been any boundaries set by the people involved. It still hurts just as bad. Having been betrayed in both situations, I might even go out on a limb and say it hurts WORSE. It did for me, and it did for my friend when it happened to him later. He was absolutely devastated. Why? Because, even with alternatives, our wives STILL chose to betray us, and it could not be attributed to lust. It seemed that the betrayal, not the sex, was what they actually craved.

In the end, I think most BS's will agree that the WS's sexual behavior was not the source of the greatest pain: it was the lies, the deception, the certain knowledge that the person they trusted so much stuck a knife in their back, shared their secrets with others, made them less than an equal partner. It was the gut churning fear of trusting that person again, knowing what they were capable of.

I think, as some others have said, that monogamy is NOT the 'natural state' of people. We wouldn't have marriage at all if it was. We would not need to swear oaths of faith if we did not recognize the natural tendency is not to keep faith. But 'natural' and 'best' are two very different things. Our natural tendencies lead us to do much evil: violence, treachery, etc. We all have a bestial nature. Most of our morals are all about controlling and not giving in to those impulses.

One of the worst things that causes affairs, in my mind, is not recognizing that we do have such impulses. As Dr. Harley notes, everyone is capable of having an affair if they put themselves in a bad spot. There are so many who say, after the fact, "I never thought I was that kind of person." But they are. We all are. We have to guard ourselves, all the while living in a society that poo-poo's such precautions, and calls a partner who wants them in place 'controlling'.

Bah, I'm blathering, as has been pointed out to me before. laugh

Posted By: MrsWondering Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 02:52 AM
Originally Posted by Tabby1
Judo-Christian

Hey, I think that tst is one of those! There are actually probably a lot of Christians that practice martial arts around here...dunno...grin stickout grin

Mrs. W
Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:24 PM
Thanks so much Grendel for your very interesting insight. This statement in particular resonates with me:
Quote
In the end, I think most BS's will agree that the WS's sexual behavior was not the source of the greatest pain: it was the lies, the deception, the certain knowledge that the person they trusted so much stuck a knife in their back, shared their secrets with others, made them less than an equal partner. It was the gut churning fear of trusting that person again, knowing what they were capable of.
And perhaps for those non-western cultures in which polygamy is the norm, it probably is true that romantic love has very little, if anything, to do with marriage compared to economics and status. I'm sure some have no idea what romantic love is and marriage and children are natural duties in life that one is expected to fulfill. Still, being so foreign to me I have a hard time comprehending wife#1 not being hurt when wife#2 comes along.
Posted By: NewEveryDay Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:48 PM
Tabby, IIRC I think The Joy Luck Club by Amy Tam explored how first, second, third wives felt about the arrangement in pre war China, and how the women did feel betrayal and sadness both when additional wives were brought in and when husbands had women on the side who did not contribute to the family.
Posted By: NewEveryDay Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 01:59 PM
Although I would think that MB concepts like POJA may well help those situations, too.
Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 02:15 PM
I never saw or read Joy Luck Club. I suppose POJA would be pretty critical, but I can't imagine how difficult it would be. It's hard enough between 2 people.
Posted By: NewEveryDay Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 02:23 PM
Did you get the answer you were looking for?
Interesting discussion. Someone pointed out that polygamous societies are exploitative of young women. They are also abusive to men - in that the powerful men amass collections of wives, which they end up treating as objects, and many non-powerful men end up unable to find a mate at all.

I had a co-worker once who was a Muslim convert. He explained to me the concept of polygamy in Islam, where the husband is (religiously) allowed up to four wives. According to him, Islamic law requires the husband to treat each wife the same. If he brings home flowers for one wife, he must bring home flowers for every wife. And, he is not supposed to feel more for one wife than for another.

This brings forth the interesting concept that even with multiple wives, if the husband has feelings of love for one wife that are stronger than his feelings for the other wives - he could be emotionally unfaithful to his other wives EVEN THOUGH it is all WITHIN the marriage.

One of the joys of monogamous marriage, to me, is being able to develop a strong and *deep* attachment to my wife. I find the concept of having to juggle affections between multiple wives to be one that would discourage the development of deep attachment with any of them.

I think, in general, that the very concept of romantic love almost requires a monogamous framework - either to support it (marriage as it should be) or to rebel against (the glamorised view of affairs).
Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/12/09 04:12 PM
Very interesting indeed. There is some wisdom in this statement as well:
Originally Posted by CuthbertCalculus
I think, in general, that the very concept of romantic love almost requires a monogamous framework - either to support it (marriage as it should be) or to rebel against (the glamorised view of affairs).

It's also interesting that you raise this point:
Quote
Interesting discussion. Someone pointed out that polygamous societies are exploitative of young women. They are also abusive to men - in that the powerful men amass collections of wives, which they end up treating as objects, and many non-powerful men end up unable to find a mate at all.
I read somewhere, though am unable to find it now, something about how many of the most violent countries have polygamous societies and they hypothesized that it could be due in part to mass sexual frustration among young men unable to find mates. I wish I could find it - I'm sure I've butchered the intent of the article with my pathetic memory.
Originally Posted by Tabby1
It's also interesting that you raise this point:
Quote
Interesting discussion. Someone pointed out that polygamous societies are exploitative of young women. They are also abusive to men - in that the powerful men amass collections of wives, which they end up treating as objects, and many non-powerful men end up unable to find a mate at all.
I read somewhere, though am unable to find it now, something about how many of the most violent countries have polygamous societies and they hypothesized that it could be due in part to mass sexual frustration among young men unable to find mates. I wish I could find it - I'm sure I've butchered the intent of the article with my pathetic memory.

One of the arguments they used to take the children away from that fundamentalist polygamous Mormon sect (in Texas? or was it Arizona?) a few years ago was that the boys were being conditioned to treat women as objects by the very nature of their society. Also, because the powerful men were monopolizing the women, that sect had the problem of young men with no chance of finding mates - and their solution was to expel them from the sect on trumped-up charges. These young teenaged boys are tossed out into the world with little education and the idea that they have lost any chance of eternal salvation - merely to allow the older, powerful men their choice of multiple women.

As far as the violence, I also expect to see that in the near future in countries like China. China has a "one child" policy, and because their culture puts a premium on boy children, girl infants are often left to die of exposure, so that the couple can try again for a boy. This means an entire generation is growing up with a very lopsided male-female ratio, and we can expect to see a huge number of young men in China with no possibility of finding mates. There will be a very destabilizing effect on that country in the very near future.

Posted By: weaver Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/13/09 08:18 PM
That just ticks me off. How could people be so stupid, to think that polygamy is natural and good for society. Or even good for themselves? It certainly isn't good for the children.

Who cares if all four wives get flowers simultaneously? It is meaningless. As you say, he can not love fully one woman. And a woman who shares her man with many others, cannot love fully as well. I mean it is just so obvious.

Cuthbert, I never thought about the shortage of women angle and the monopoly.

You would think that China would see the value of girls for that reason alone. They could sell them. Oh yeah, they already do.

There was once a very interesting thread on GQ11 about how a man gets dulled by multiple SF partners (dulls the knife so to speak, in metaphor), he is lessened, deluted.

People who practice polygamy have become so lacking in spirituality, that they cannot see two feet in front of them. Perhaps this contributes to the violence of the society as well? Just feeding their own lack. Growing it.

And the women who participate, I don't know. They either have no choice, or they have been programmed by victimization, or by the cult they were raised in.

Did cavemen and women practice polygamy?

I believe one time a fellow Morman member said that polygamy was not what was intended in the Morman culture. It was a gross twisting of the original intent that protected widowed women and familes. A man would take care of other families other than his own if the man of the other family died, abandoned, etc.



Originally Posted by weaves
That just ticks me off. How could people be so stupid, to think that polygamy is natural and good for society. Or even good for themselves? It certainly isn't good for the children.

Polygamy may indeed be "natural". But the "natural" state of man is probably barbarism. Look at hunter-gatherer tribes to see what "natural" society may be like. We've grown beyond that, and our advanced culture of today cannot survive, in my opinion, if polygamy is the norm.

Quote
Who cares if all four wives get flowers simultaneously? It is meaningless. As you say, he can not love fully one woman. And a woman who shares her man with many others, cannot love fully as well. I mean it is just so obvious.

Well, my co-worker saw it that way as well, and even though his religion allowed him four wives, he had no personal desire to take advantage of it, even if it was legal.

Quote
Cuthbert, I never thought about the shortage of women angle and the monopoly.

You would think that China would see the value of girls for that reason alone. They could sell them. Oh yeah, they already do.

Funny how that works - in so many traditional societies, a girl baby is a real liability, because the parents have to provide a dowry for them to marry. It would be more logical if it were the parents of the boy who had to provide a dowry.

Quote
There was once a very interesting thread on GQ11 about how a man gets dulled by multiple SF partners (dulls the knife so to speak, in metaphor), he is lessened, deluted.

I would agree with that idea - although my agreement is not from personal experience! smile

Quote
People who practice polygamy have become so lacking in spirituality, that they cannot see two feet in front of them. Perhaps this contributes to the violence of the society as well? Just feeding their own lack. Growing it.

My personal opinion is that women civilize men. A large cohort of men without the possibility of finding mates pretty much equates to a large cohort of barbarians. Conversely, I think the best way to judge how civilized a culture is - is by looking at how well women are treated, and how much of a voice women have in that society.

The whole idea that al Qaeda has of heaven - the whole "72 virgins" idea - is entirely carnal and not spiritual at all.

Quote
And the women who participate, I don't know. They either have no choice, or they have been programmed by victimization, or by the cult they were raised in.

I guess you don't really question the ways of your society unless your society encourages free thought... or unless you see a more free society prospering beside yours.

Quote
Did cavemen and women practice polygamy?

I'm sure they did. Tondor probably had both Lana and Kala as wives, leaving poor Atouk with no-one. We should be way past that now... smile

Quote
I believe one time a fellow Morman member said that polygamy was not what was intended in the Morman culture. It was a gross twisting of the original intent that protected widowed women and familes. A man would take care of other families other than his own if the man of the other family died, abandoned, etc.


I read something about this just this morning. Orson Scott Card wrote about the HBO series "Big Love" on NationalReview.com, and he said the polygamist sects rejected the authority of the Mormon President who outlawed it - and thus, these polygamist sects have as much claim to be Mormon as Baptists have of being Catholic. I'm not Mormon, and had never really thought about it before, but the way he described it made a lot of sense.

Posted By: Tabby1 Re: Infidelity in non-traditional Ms? - 03/16/09 07:25 PM
Interesting stuff. Some comments:
Originally Posted by CuthbertCalculus
Quote
You would think that China would see the value of girls for that reason alone. They could sell them. Oh yeah, they already do.

Funny how that works - in so many traditional societies, a girl baby is a real liability, because the parents have to provide a dowry for them to marry. It would be more logical if it were the parents of the boy who had to provide a dowry.
This is a definite societal paradox, however, given the overpopulation problems China faces, fewer girls actually could address this (while creating a host of other problems).

Quote
Quote
People who practice polygamy have become so lacking in spirituality, that they cannot see two feet in front of them. Perhaps this contributes to the violence of the society as well? Just feeding their own lack. Growing it.

My personal opinion is that women civilize men. A large cohort of men without the possibility of finding mates pretty much equates to a large cohort of barbarians. Conversely, I think the best way to judge how civilized a culture is - is by looking at how well women are treated, and how much of a voice women have in that society.
Interesting perspective. I would also argue that the test of a man is how he treats women - basically a variation of the same theme.
Quote
The whole idea that al Qaeda has of heaven - the whole "72 virgins" idea - is entirely carnal and not spiritual at all.
As just stated above, what does it say about a man that desires 72 virgins?

Quote
Quote
And the women who participate, I don't know. They either have no choice, or they have been programmed by victimization, or by the cult they were raised in.

I guess you don't really question the ways of your society unless your society encourages free thought... or unless you see a more free society prospering beside yours.

Quote
Did cavemen and women practice polygamy?

I'm sure they did. Tondor probably had both Lana and Kala as wives, leaving poor Atouk with no-one. We should be way past that now... smile
Marriage performs a different function in many societies.

Quote
Quote
I believe one time a fellow Morman member said that polygamy was not what was intended in the Morman culture. It was a gross twisting of the original intent that protected widowed women and familes. A man would take care of other families other than his own if the man of the other family died, abandoned, etc.


I read something about this just this morning. Orson Scott Card wrote about the HBO series "Big Love" on NationalReview.com, and he said the polygamist sects rejected the authority of the Mormon President who outlawed it - and thus, these polygamist sects have as much claim to be Mormon as Baptists have of being Catholic. I'm not Mormon, and had never really thought about it before, but the way he described it made a lot of sense.
It's worth noting that many important characters in the Old Testement practiced polygamy.
Originally Posted by Tabby1
This is a definite societal paradox, however, given the overpopulation problems China faces, fewer girls actually could address this (while creating a host of other problems).


Personally, I think overpopulation is not a real problem, but rather the result of gloom and doom demographic forecasts from the 60s. People like Paul Erhlich predicted that we would see massive famines and death from overpopulation... in the 1980s. Instead, we had a revolution in agriculture in the 1970s that made it possible to feed more and more people by cultivating smaller patches of land.

Quote
Quote
My personal opinion is that women civilize men.

Interesting perspective. I would also argue that the test of a man is how he treats women - basically a variation of the same theme.


That's a great point! And, in fact, I've read that the single best predictor of how happy a marriage is - is by looking at how open the husband is to his wife's influence.

(That's us, btw - I am *very* open to my wife's influence nowadays, and she has never steered me wrong!) smile

Quote
As just stated above, what does it say about a man that desires 72 virgins?


Yeah, exactly...

Quote
It's worth noting that many important characters in the Old Testement practiced polygamy.

I have a theory about that - I don't believe romantic love as we know it really existed back then in the time of the patriarchs. I think that was something that had to be developed over time... that you saw the beginnings of it perhaps with the Song of Solomon, but that it wasn't fully developed until the troubadours of medieval Provencal. smile

This has been an interesting discussion...
© Marriage Builders® Forums