Of Psychology And Polygamy.

[Fiannan]

I suspect this is going to generate a heated debate but here goes.

I saw a repeat of a Dr. Phil show on polygamist families in Colorado City, Utah. While Dr. Phil did have an intelligent, sincere woman giving a presentation on the positive aspects of polygamy (her husband had been kicked out of the group that dominates Colorado City so he and his 15 or so wives moved to Canada) it seemed to be a hit piece against polygamy.

I just wonder though, I know polygamy will come back sooner or later with or without LDS participation or not. Strangely enough, the sexual revolution and the evolution of acceptance of "alternative lifestyles" will likely lead to a more libertarian view on whatever form of marriage people want to have. Then on the other side of the spectrum you have the growing numbers/influence of Islam that is already generating calls for the acceptance of polygamy in Europe and Canada.

I came across some comments on homosexuality by psychological pioneers Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung that got me thinking about the polygamy thing. Freud was tolerant of homosexuality but labeled it an immature expression of sexuality. He felt factors such as disruptions in the phallic stage of development of a boy (4 - 6 years of age) could lead to homosexuality as well that some men lacked the libido energy to sublimate these energies into taking on the responsibilities of fatherhood. Overall, Freud gave a highly secular view of homosexuality as being a fixation or immature while also recognizing that some men might not have homosexual inclinations but also be weak.

Carl Jung also saw homosexuality in the weakness context but also felt (unlike Freud) that it should be accepted by society as an outlet as weaker men would choose this over marriage and childbearing and this would weed the weaker men out of the gene pool. An interesting form of eugenics.

There are many men (yes, even in the heterosexual category) who are immature and weak -- probably more suffering from this than there are neurotic women. Monogamy assumes that there will always bean equal number of men and women desiring marriage (there isn't -- once adulthood is acheived women slightly outnumber men and I generally find more women seeing marriage and family as a goal than men). Also, more men (3%) are exclusively homosexual while only 1.5% of females live this pattern. So our system today encourages people to pair up like an advanced form of musical chairs even though there are men who might be able to take up the slack and take on more than one wife as one must recognize that many women will never have the chance to marry within the current realities.

I've even noticed on these boards women who have married men who seem to lack proper libido or the ability to fulfill traditional male roles. One wonders if that might decrease if a single woman in a ward noticed that she might have the ability to choose between a man who has already shown advanced qualities and desires to provide her a family as well or pick a guy who obviously doesn't show these qualities but is single and male.

Maybe Jung has a point -- maybe polygamy might create a stronger gene pool (I had a biology instructor who really advanced this point to his classes -- no in a secular school, not BYU). What do people think?

[begood2]

Fiannan,

I love the present LDS church, but I would have never joined if the practice of polygamy was still going on today.

When I marry, I only want one wife to love and share my life with ... just as I would not want to share her with someone else if the shoe was on the other foot.

[Fiannan]

If polygamy existed as a norm I doubt you would have more than 2 or 3% of men engaging in it -- which would hardly be noticable except (when we calculate on a macro-socio-economic scale) it might held hundreds of thousands of women in the USA find a good partner (either joining into a polygamist marriage or benefiting from the reduction in competition offered by surplus women).

My other point is, following a more psychological area of thought, maybe polygamy might improve the species as psychologically immature or weak males would not pass their genes on as much.

[StrawberryFields]

Originally posted by begood2@Oct 28 2005, 01:57 AM

Fiannan,

I love the present LDS church, but I would have never joined if the practice of polygamy was still going on today. 

When I marry, I only want one wife to love and share my life with ... just as I would not want to share her with someone else if the shoe was on the other foot.

←

Begood2,

Your post caught me off guard...All this time I thought you were female.

[StrawberryFields]

Originally posted by Fiannan@Oct 28 2005, 01:14 AM

 

 

I've even noticed on these boards women who have married men who seem to lack proper libido or the ability to fulfill traditional male roles.  One wonders if that might decrease if a single woman in a ward noticed that she might have the ability to choose between a man who has already shown advanced qualities and desires to provide her a family as well or pick a guy who obviously doesn't show these qualities but is single and male. 

 

Maybe Jung has a point -- maybe polygamy might create a stronger gene pool (I had a biology instructor who really advanced this point to his classes -- no in a secular school, not BYU).  What do people think? 

←

 

To suggest polygamy for this reason is just sick and wrong IMO.

Sure there are some immature males who walk this earth but that is no good reason to suggest polygamy to build a stronger gene pool.

How does this theory support the fact that from the same parents there are born those who are born strong males and those who later choose homosexuality?

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Fiannan@Oct 28 2005, 07:58 AM

If polygamy existed as a norm I doubt you would have more than 2 or 3% of men engaging in it -- which would hardly be noticable except (when we calculate on a macro-socio-economic scale) it might held hundreds of thousands of women in the USA find a good partner (either joining into a polygamist marriage or benefiting from the reduction in competition offered by surplus women).

My other point is, following a more psychological area of thought, maybe polygamy might improve the species as psychologically immature or weak males would not pass their genes on as much.

←

Try thinking of it from a woman's point of view. If they knew it was acceptable for her husband to go and marry another woman, would she ever feel truly secure? Not that all men would say such a thing, but the threat would always be there that if they didn't do everything the way their husband wanted, he'd go find another. Or if she didn't keep her girlish figure, he'd just add one to his 'harem' that would (for a couple of years anyway).

And even though lots of LDS men say things like, "I wouldn't want more than one... one's hard enough... ha ha ha!", I think that if the LDS church reinstated polygamy, many men would indeed partake. I think that's just BS that men made up to make LDS women feel like they have nothing to worry about.

IMO, all women should be OK with polygamy, because in principle it is still practiced as far as men being able to be sealed to multiple women at the same time, while women cannot. Plus if men are 'commanded' to do so by God (through your prophet), they will, if they are faithful LDS.

[Guest Member_Deleted]

There are many men (yes, even in the heterosexual category) who are immature and weak -- probably more suffering from this than there are neurotic women. Monogamy assumes that there will always bean equal number of men and women desiring marriage (there isn't -- once adulthood is acheived women slightly outnumber men and I generally find more women seeing marriage and family as a goal than men). Also, more men (3%) are exclusively homosexual while only 1.5% of females live this pattern. So our system today encourages people to pair up like an advanced form of musical chairs even though there are men who might be able to take up the slack and take on more than one wife as one must recognize that many women will never have the chance to marry within the current realities.

You are not allowing for other stats.. more women die from being murdered ... I think in the end the numbers won't be as significant.

BTW I like what Freud and Jung had to say about Homosexuals. I think they were right on..

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by shanstress70+Oct 28 2005, 09:07 AM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Fiannan@Oct 28 2005, 07:58 AM

If polygamy existed as a norm I doubt you would have more than 2 or 3% of men engaging in it -- which would hardly be noticable except (when we calculate on a macro-socio-economic scale) it might held hundreds of thousands of women in the USA find a good partner (either joining into a polygamist marriage or benefiting from the reduction in competition offered by surplus women).

My other point is, following a more psychological area of thought, maybe polygamy might improve the species as psychologically immature or weak males would not pass their genes on as much.

←

Try thinking of it from a woman's point of view. If they knew it was acceptable for her husband to go and marry another woman, would she ever feel truly secure? Not that all men would say such a thing, but the threat would always be there that if they didn't do everything the way their husband wanted, he'd go find another. Or if she didn't keep her girlish figure, he'd just add one to his 'harem' that would (for a couple of years anyway).

And even though lots of LDS men say things like, "I wouldn't want more than one... one's hard enough... ha ha ha!", I think that if the LDS church reinstated polygamy, many men would indeed partake. I think that's just BS that men made up to make LDS women feel like they have nothing to worry about.

IMO, all women should be OK with polygamy, because in principle it is still practiced as far as men being able to be sealed to multiple women at the same time, while women cannot. Plus if men are 'commanded' to do so by God (through your prophet), they will, if they are faithful LDS.

←

I think you are absolutely right Shanstress... in fact I believe the men were so irresponsible for the most part, that the Lord used natural means to do away with it...

I believe it was first instigated as a HIGHER law... and most men couldn't really live a higher law ... that is why we don't have most of those higher laws in force today...

[Winnie G]

lack proper libido or the ability to fulfill traditional male roles.

I always wondered what was wrong with my ex now I know

[StrawberryFields]

Originally posted by shanstress70+Oct 28 2005, 09:07 AM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Fiannan@Oct 28 2005, 07:58 AM

If polygamy existed as a norm I doubt you would have more than 2 or 3% of men engaging in it -- which would hardly be noticable except (when we calculate on a macro-socio-economic scale) it might held hundreds of thousands of women in the USA find a good partner (either joining into a polygamist marriage or benefiting from the reduction in competition offered by surplus women).

My other point is, following a more psychological area of thought, maybe polygamy might improve the species as psychologically immature or weak males would not pass their genes on as much.

←

Try thinking of it from a woman's point of view. If they knew it was acceptable for her husband to go and marry another woman, would she ever feel truly secure? Not that all men would say such a thing, but the threat would always be there that if they didn't do everything the way their husband wanted, he'd go find another. Or if she didn't keep her girlish figure, he'd just add one to his 'harem' that would (for a couple of years anyway).

And even though lots of LDS men say things like, "I wouldn't want more than one... one's hard enough... ha ha ha!", I think that if the LDS church reinstated polygamy, many men would indeed partake. I think that's just BS that men made up to make LDS women feel like they have nothing to worry about.

IMO, all women should be OK with polygamy, because in principle it is still practiced as far as men being able to be sealed to multiple women at the same time, while women cannot. Plus if men are 'commanded' to do so by God (through your prophet), they will, if they are faithful LDS.

←

Shanstress,

I agree with most of what you said but for all women to be OK with polygamy? To me what happens here in this life is quite different to what will happen in the hereafter. If I am to pass before my husband and he finds another woman to marry in the temple I will be ok with that. If he were to try that one here, today, while I am still alive, that would not settle well at all. After having his head examined, he would lose me forever.

[Fiannan]

Why is it acceptable for people to speak for all womanhood? I know women (mostly younger -- some LDS, most not -- ones so maybe a societal evolution is taking place) who say that they would consider polimorphous (I think that's the term) relationships. In the secular world view maybe the increase in women experimenting with bi-sexuality (Freud said that women never truly progress through the phallic stage) may explain why many don't see another female as competition.

However, whatever the sexual arrangement in non-monogamous relationships how many women may be out there who would consider polygamy? Let's say half the population of the USA is female (150 million almost). Now let's say (I don't have the exact demographic figures before me) that 40 million women fall into the 18 - 40 age group. If only 10% would consider polygamy then that's 4 million women! Is it as high as 10%? At least, in my humble opinion.

The option should be available.

[BenRaines]

I think that those that sleep with various partners and take no responsibility for their actions or better said the results of their actions are worse than those who would take on the responsibility. As said earlier in another post. "Society would be ok with me living with a bunch of women and having relations with them and having the govt. provide for my offspring but I had better not be married to all their mothers or that is a crime and I could go to prison for it" Boy do I think that the standards are screwed up.

I am not hear to promote polygamy just some common sense. To bad we can't legislate common sense.

[begood2]

Originally posted by Strawberry Fields+Oct 28 2005, 08:22 AM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-begood2@Oct 28 2005, 01:57 AM

Fiannan,

I love the present LDS church, but I would have never joined if the practice of polygamy was still going on today. 

When I marry, I only want one wife to love and share my life with ... just as I would not want to share her with someone else if the shoe was on the other foot.

←

Begood2,

Your post caught me off guard...All this time I thought you were female.

←

No lol, I'm definitely male. About 4 months ago another poster had thought that and I posted a correction that you must have missed.

Also around that same time we had two young girls posting and they wanted my e-mail address and I told them that it was not safe/wise to talk by e-mail, but I would talk to them in the forum.

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Strawberry Fields@Oct 28 2005, 11:44 AM

Shanstress,

I agree with most of what you said but for all women to be OK with polygamy? To me what happens here in this life is quite different to what will happen in the hereafter. If I am to pass before my husband and he finds another woman to marry in the temple I will be ok with that. If he were to try that one here, today, while I am still alive,  that would not settle well at all. After having his head examined, he would lose me forever.

←

Of course I meant to say "all LDS women" should be OK with it. The reason I think this is because your church believes that polygamy was instructed by God. If it was practiced once and it was acceptable, whose to say it won't be again? I believe it was only stopped because it became illegal. IMO, the stage is being set for it to happen in the LDS afterlife with multiple sealings being allowed for men, but not for women. "If we can't do it in this life, no one can arrest us for doing it in Heaven!"

I know this is a tough issue for some LDS women, as I was never comfortable with the church's history with it, even as a member, and even when I acted as though I WAS OK with it. Everytime it came up, I would get a sick feeling in my stomach and try to push it out of my mind.

And Fiannan, I'm not trying to speak for ALL women. I'm generalizing. But I know a lot of women, and I don't know any of them who would be OK with polygamy, even young ones... though I'm sure there are some out there. And of course YOU think it should be an option... you are the one who'd get to have 'relations' with different women and it would be OK!

Now, if you guys bring back polyandry, and I might just re-join! JUST KIDDING... sheesh!

[Maureen]

Originally posted by BenRaines@Oct 28 2005, 10:43 AM

As said earlier in another post.  "Society would be ok with me living with a bunch of women and having relations with them and having the govt. provide for my offspring but I had better not be married to all their mothers or that is a crime and I could go to prison for it"

I would disagree with this society, and in fact I don't think our society that exists now would be OK with this type of family situation. I'm sure it does exist (I can even think of how it exists in Canada) but believe me, society does not approve.

M.

[Ray]

Personally, I think the only thing wonderful women find difficult about accepting the LDS idea of polygamy is the idea that more than one wonderful woman would be having “sex” with their husband. Or in other words, it’s all about the “sex”.

For instance, would any wonderful woman really have a problem with other wonderful women helping them take care of their children?… or their house?… or their household chores? Or would any wonderful woman really have a problem associating with other wonderful women living in the same house, or area, if it was a big enough house for everyone to have their own “space”?

Let’s face it. The only problem is with the “sex”, and if wonderful women could only find a way to handle the idea that it’s “okay” for other wonderful women to have “sex” with their husband, it wouldn’t be a problem.

And btw, I’m saying “wonderful” women because every woman worthy of living in the Celestial kingdom would necessarily have to be a “wonderful” woman, so please don’t associate the worst of women you have ever known with the type of women you might imagine your husband having as additional wives.

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Ray@Oct 28 2005, 02:12 PM

And btw, I’m saying “wonderful” women because every woman worthy of living in the Celestial kingdom would necessarily have to be a “wonderful” woman, so please don’t associate the worst of women you have ever known with the type of women you might imagine your husband having as additional wives.

You know women can be wonderful individually but once you get them in a pack, all hell usually breaks loose. I was an acting supervisor many years ago for about 8 women. I wouldn't wish that job on my worst enemy - when women congregate in groups of more than 4, any number of crazy and unthinkable events could happen.

M.

[StrawberryFields]

Originally posted by Ray@Oct 28 2005, 03:12 PM

Personally, I think the only thing wonderful women find difficult about accepting the LDS idea of polygamy is the idea that more than one wonderful woman would be having “sex” with their husband.  Or in other words, it’s all about the “sex”.

For instance, would any wonderful woman really have a problem with other wonderful women helping them take care of their children?… or their house?… or their household chores?  Or would any wonderful woman really have a problem associating with other wonderful women living in the same house, or area, if it was a big enough house for everyone to have their own “space”?

Let’s face it.  The only problem is with the “sex”, and if wonderful women could only find a way to handle the idea that it’s “okay” for other wonderful women to have “sex” with their husband, it wouldn’t be a problem.

And btw, I’m saying “wonderful” women because every woman worthy of living in the Celestial kingdom would necessarily have to be a “wonderful” woman, so please don’t associate the worst of women you have ever known with the type of women you might imagine your husband having as additional wives.

←

Yeah I bet you could go for many wonderful women couldn't you?

For me it isn't only about the sex. It's much more complex then that. I don't believe that anyone else should be involved in the relationship (which means many things) of me and my husband. What happens in the hereafter I am sure I will be wonderful enough to handle it.

[Ray]

Originally posted by Strawberry Fields+Oct 28 2005, 03:58 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Ray@Oct 28 2005, 03:12 PM

Personally, I think the only thing wonderful women find difficult about accepting the LDS idea of polygamy is the idea that more than one wonderful woman would be having “sex” with their husband.  Or in other words, it’s all about the “sex”.

For instance, would any wonderful woman really have a problem with other wonderful women helping them take care of their children?… or their house?… or their household chores?  Or would any wonderful woman really have a problem associating with other wonderful women living in the same house, or area, if it was a big enough house for everyone to have their own “space”?

Let’s face it.  The only problem is with the “sex”, and if wonderful women could only find a way to handle the idea that it’s “okay” for other wonderful women to have “sex” with their husband, it wouldn’t be a problem.

And btw, I’m saying “wonderful” women because every woman worthy of living in the Celestial kingdom would necessarily have to be a “wonderful” woman, so please don’t associate the worst of women you have ever known with the type of women you might imagine your husband having as additional wives.

←

Yeah I bet you could go for many wonderful women couldn't you?

For me it isn't only about the sex. It's much more complex then that. I don't believe that anyone else should be involved in the relationship (which means many things) of me and my husband. What happens in the hereafter I am sure I will be wonderful enough to handle it.

←

What makes you think that any other wife of your husband would need to be involved in YOUR relationship with your husband?

[Ray]

Originally posted by Maureen+Oct 28 2005, 03:55 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Ray@Oct 28 2005, 02:12 PM

And btw, I’m saying “wonderful” women because every woman worthy of living in the Celestial kingdom would necessarily have to be a “wonderful” woman, so please don’t associate the worst of women you have ever known with the type of women you might imagine your husband having as additional wives.

You know women can be wonderful individually but once you get them in a pack, all hell usually breaks loose. I was an acting supervisor many years ago for about 8 women. I wouldn't wish that job on my worst enemy - when women congregate in groups of more than 4, any number of crazy and unthinkable events could happen.

M.

←

All women are not the same, so I would try to imagine women who are more wonderful than that by somehow being able to get along together better than that.

Or are you saying that a lot of wonderful women couldn't possibly get along together if they all loved and had "sex" with the same man?

And btw, I do not believe it would be appropritate to have "sex" with more than one woman at the same time, so please dispel any vile thoughts you may have from your mind.

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Ray@Oct 28 2005, 04:15 PM

All women are not the same, so I would try to imagine women who are more wonderful than that by somehow being able to get along together better than that.

I never said all women are the same. I'm saying a multitude of women working together can cause havoc and chaos - I can't imagine what it would be like for a multitude of women to live together.

Or are you saying that a lot of wonderful women couldn't possibly get along together if they all loved and had "sex" with the same man?

And btw, I do not believe it would be appropritate to have "sex" with more than one woman at the same time, so please dispel any vile thoughts you may have from your mind.

No such thoughts crossed my mind until I read your last paragraph, which obviously came from your mind, Ray.

M.

[Ray]

Originally posted by Maureen+Oct 28 2005, 04:29 PM-->

I never said all women are the same. I'm saying a multitude of women working together can cause havoc and chaos - I can't imagine what it would be like for a multitude of women to live together.

I know that's true of some women, but I have known many wonderful women who are wonderul enough to live and work together in harmony.

<!--QuoteBegin-Maureen@Oct 28 2005, 04:29 PM

No such [vile] thoughts crossed my mind until I read your last paragraph, which obviously came from your mind, Ray. 

Just covering the bases, because I know how some people think and I wanted to make it clear that I wasn't referring to "that".

And it's good to hear that you don't think of thoughts like that, Maureen. Good for you. :)

[shanstress70]

All I can say is, "STOP IT WITH THE WONDERFUL WOMAN CRAP!" Just because a woman has a problem with polygamy does not make her anymore 'WONDERFUL'. How 'WONDERFUL' would you be if your wife wanted to have many husbands (or if your prophet wanted her to)? Would that be OK, Ray?

[StrawberryFields]

Originally posted by Ray+Oct 28 2005, 05:13 PM-->

Originally posted by Strawberry Fields@Oct 28 2005, 03:58 PM

<!--QuoteBegin-Ray@Oct 28 2005, 03:12 PM

Personally, I think the only thing wonderful women find difficult about accepting the LDS idea of polygamy is the idea that more than one wonderful woman would be having “sex” with their husband.  Or in other words, it’s all about the “sex”.

For instance, would any wonderful woman really have a problem with other wonderful women helping them take care of their children?… or their house?… or their household chores?  Or would any wonderful woman really have a problem associating with other wonderful women living in the same house, or area, if it was a big enough house for everyone to have their own “space”?

Let’s face it.  The only problem is with the “sex”, and if wonderful women could only find a way to handle the idea that it’s “okay” for other wonderful women to have “sex” with their husband, it wouldn’t be a problem.

And btw, I’m saying “wonderful” women because every woman worthy of living in the Celestial kingdom would necessarily have to be a “wonderful” woman, so please don’t associate the worst of women you have ever known with the type of women you might imagine your husband having as additional wives.

←

Yeah I bet you could go for many wonderful women couldn't you?

For me it isn't only about the sex. It's much more complex then that. I don't believe that anyone else should be involved in the relationship (which means many things) of me and my husband. What happens in the hereafter I am sure I will be wonderful enough to handle it.

←

What makes you think that any other wife of your husband would need to be involved in YOUR relationship with your husband?

←

Oh Ray, you silly, silly man. It's clear that you don't understand that when a couple has a marriage like I do, we are tight and there is no room for another

Good point Shanstress, How wonderful of a husband would you be Ray if your wife was allowed more then one husband? B)

[Lindy]

Originally posted by Strawberry Fields@Oct 28 2005, 03:58 PM

For me it isn't only about the sex. It's much more complex then that. I don't believe that anyone else should be involved in the relationship (which means many things) of me and my husband. What happens in the hereafter I am sure I will be wonderful  enough to handle it.

←

Very good point SF!

I see the women here making some very good comments, very strong, educated, WONDERFUL women

I have off the wall thoughts on the matter myself... I don't think it was all about sex at the time it was "accepted", I think it was much more than that. BUT I think that polygamy downgraded itself TO being about sex...and the need/want for more. And THAT is disgusting ...I don't mean the want/need is disgusting...but a married man taking on another woman to fulfill it. If a man needs/wants more than normal...he just needs to find a woman who can satisfy that desire. ONE woman, not 4 or 5 (and I'm not talking about looking outside of marriage for "something on the side" either).

I think that there was a time and place for a lot of things, and who knows what will come up in the future, but I'm sure that God knows that even "wonderful" women in this day and age will really have heartburn sharing their man, with anyone else living on earth.

And with the compassion level of most women I know....it would be a scary thought to live with "other wonderful" women sharing the same man....The rat poison should be hidden well ladies....knives are just too messy.