The stupidest myth: Polyamory is a all about rich men taking multiple wives

[Kurska]

Personally, I've never met a straight guy in my life who has been in a relationship with multiple women at once (that the women knew about). It doesn't seem that common. I'm sure it happens and I know it happens, but polyarmory isn't all about them.

As a gay man, I've met rather a lot of gay people who are. This is what causes me to find the whole argument of "polygamy is just about men controlling women" offensive and idiotic. Most of the polygamists I know are gay men, no women involved. Can't speak to anyone else's experience, but that has been mine. Somehow I think it is rather unlikely that most people on DU have ever personally met anyone involved in a polyamorous relationship, I've met a number of wonderful, kind and great people who are. Frankly, I find it disgusting how many people are willing to paint these peoples' relationships as fundamentally manipulative and wrong without ever bothering to know a single one of them.

[HassleCat]

1. Polygamy enables crackpots

Polygamy and polyamory refer to different concepts. Polygamy involve marriage, while polyamory may or may not.

Historically, polygamy in the United States involved rich, powerful men using the institution of marriage to subjugate women. It was pretty bleak. Now we have Mormon offshoot cults that practice polygamy. These organizations are highly patriarchal and exploitive. Allowing polygamy, the official kind, where the government recognizes multiple marriages, would breathe new life into these cults, and we have an interest in preventing that. As things stand now, social services agencies can sometimes rescue some of the women and children from abusive situations, but that becomes much more difficult if the state recognizes the women as legally married to the man who abuses them.

[Kurska]

2. So punish gay people for the actions of straight people.

Maybe we can just make it legal for gay people then.

[treestar]

4. What difference does it make?

It is actually an issue that would be common to both straight and gay people.

If polygamy became legal, the recent SCOTUS ruling would mean it would have to apply equally.

[Kurska]

5. I'm mostly joking

People use marriage rather frequently to subjugate other people especially women. I fail to see how this is different.

Again, I think argument is very hetrocentric. As if gay people never do this.

[treestar]

7. They probably do

The first thing that comes to mind, because it has been more common in other cultures. Same with women, there has been polyandry but rare compared to polygamy. Polygamy with men with more than one wife has been sanctioned legally more often. But you are right in that it doesn't mean there's no polyandry or polyamorous gay people. It takes all kind to make a world.

[Kurska]

12. I think it is fair that is what most people think of.

I think "open relationships" or multiple relationships are becoming more and more common among young people. At least that is my experience of it.

[treestar]

3. Such people are likely to be rare

Most people do not want to be not the only one for the person they love. They will abandon a relationship rather than put up with "polyamory."

[Kurska]

6. Love how you put it in quotes.

Could be coming off as more of a judgmental person? I know plenty of people who are happy in such circumstance.

[treestar]

9. I wouldn't be judgmental against them

but would hate to find myself in that position and I think most people wouldn't want to do it. Most people have a sort of romantic idea to being the only one. So I don't think it is a lot of people and they don't seem to care whether the state sanctions it legally - is there some group out there advocating it? I think it's mostly right wingers using it as a slippery slope argument, and not some genuine support for it somewhere.

[Kurska]

11. I do genuinely support it.

I've been advocating for same sex marriage for years.

And yes, It is obviously not for everyone. A lot people couldn't handle the jealousy or just not always having their partners affection directed at them. Nothing wrong with that, people are comfortable with different things. My concern is that people don't try to project what they personally want on what other people want.

[smirkymonkey]

14. Bingo!

The right-wing slippery slope argument.

[Bluenorthwest]

8. Polygamy and polyamory are not synonyms, so your post is confusing.

Example, the polygamists in most religious communities are mostly monogamous in that the wives are dedicated to a single husband. He's 'polyamorous' but they are not.

I of course have known lots of people who are polyamorous. I have not known many long term relationships with more than two actual partners, plenty in which one or both partners has other lovers but not in which three or four partners are taking a mortgage on a house. They are polyamorous, but not polygamist.

I have also, by the way, never ever met a polyamorist or pansexual person who saw the polygamist marriages in religious communities as similar to what they do or what they want. I have never met a sexually liberated, multiple partner sort of person who advocated for polygamy. In fact, the majority had a rather poor outlook on any marriage or covenant that might restrict their own sexual liberty.
Do your polyamorous gay friends feel a deep connection to Islamic or Mormon polygamists? The ones I have know sure as hell don't. They are the opposite of those polygamists, not the counterparts.

[Kurska]

10. I think the entire terminology behind it is confusing at times.

But yes, I think a distinction really does need to made between what happens in many other countries with the multiple wives stuff and what many people in the US do.

I do know people in committed long term relationships with more than one person. I especially know of situations where a person loves more than one person and their partner loves the same person or is okay with that person having an additional romantic relationship.

[Bluenorthwest]

13. Additional is not the same as incorporated. Additional romance = polyamory, additional partner to

the entire living situation is polygamy. An open marriage is not the same as polygamy. It's one thing to say 'it's ok that you love another person too' but very different to say 'that other person is also my equal partner, sharing my property, heart and custody of my children which will now be our children'.
How many multiple partner households do you know? Not couples who do other stuff. Households with equal partners numbering more than 2? I have known a few, but none of them sustained, also none of them were calling for the right to marry as a group. Very much the opposite. And to repeat, none of these people would ever advocate for polygamist religious community style marriages, they do not have such marriages themselves and do not believe in such things. It's just not possible to make a link between people who say 'I should be free to make sexual partnerships as a I please' and those who say 'a man has the right to several wives who must each be dedicated to him'. Polyamory and polygamy are not the same thing.
It's just not right to conflate these two words.

[geek tragedy]

15. There have been no gay polagymists because there has

been no gay marriage of any kind.

There have been gays who have been polyamorous, and they can keep on keeping on.

But polygamy is not something the state needs, or ought, to recognize by attaching legal consequences.

[ljm2002]

16. This DUer knew a polyamorous family...

...one guy, two women. He ruled the roost. They had several children.

He used to be a professor at a prestigious university, but when I met them none of them exuded that vibe -- rather more hippie but not that exactly, either. They made a good living. The women took turns caring for the children. They ate well -- homemade chapata (sp?) bread, vegetarian fare. The children were well behaved but not old enough to be into their teenage rebellion years either.

All of the children were born at home and none had birth certificates. For one reason, they did not want the boys to ever be drafted.

Historically, of course, polyamory almost always meant one man and several, or even dozens of women -- and historically, it has indeed been a very patriarchal setup where the women are controlled and the men involved are kings of their little worlds -- even to the point of kicking out the young men when they become possible rivals -- or have you not been following the sagas of the polygamist Mormons, who even now practice the custom?

[hobbit709]

17. I knew some people whose polyamorous setup lasted about 20 years.

3 women, 3 men, and about 6 children. They shared everything. None of them even thought of being the head honcho. They finally split up after different career paths came into play, but the splitup was quite amicable, in property, children, and in partners. Even today they communicate with each other and the kids-who are now grown and became quite well adjusted adults.