Monday, October 4, 2010

Marsha Marsha Marsha

As you may know, Canada has been considering the poly freedoms. The Toronto Star printed a letter from a Marsha Vandergaast of Newcastle, inspired by recent coverage, including the paper’s coverage of “Sister Wives.”

It is disturbing to see the media's growing acceptance of polygamous marriages.

Polygamous marriages exist. The media has been reflecting that. What is wrong with that?

Although often denied by those within a bigamous marriage, women in these situations are not treated the same as men.

This is a broad brush. There are women who freely choose a polygynous situation.

Our Western culture's emphasis on freedom has made us hesitant to judge any other culture or lifestyle.

Where is the harm is letting people have the freedom to marry?

Yet, by doing so we have allowed groups of people to believe that women are inferior to men.

I support gender equality and marriage equality. They go hand in hand.

It is equally appalling that the police have stated that they avoid prosecuting these types of relationships.

Why should the police get involved when consenting adults choose a life together? We know the letter writer doesn’t want people to have that freedom, but she hasn’t given as a reason why.

Yes, there are dangers out there that may keep police busy, but allowing these lifestyles is teaching our society to accept the subservient role of women.

It seems to me that if you have two or more women and one man, then the women are collectively going to have more power than the man. They may choose not to exercise that power. But I suspect Marsha would still oppose polygamy even if it was two men and two women.

How often do the media show relationships of one woman with three men?

Not often enough. (I think we may have found Marsha's true desire.) But how many of those relationships exist? Marsha may see the women in the news as subservient, but what she sees is a function of cultural elements other than being able to marry more than one person. She has not made a good case for denying this freedom to marry.
— — —

No comments:

Post a Comment

To prevent spam, comments will have to be approved, so your comment may not appear for several hours. Feedback is welcome, including disagreement. I only delete/reject/mark as spam: spam, vulgar or hateful attacks, repeated spouting of bigotry from the same person that does not add to the discussion, and the like. I will not reject comments based on disagreement, but if you don't think consenting adults should be free to love each other, then I do not consent to have you repeatedly spout hate on my blog without adding anything to the discourse.

If you want to write to me privately, then either contact me on Facebook, email me at fullmarriageequality at protonmail dot com, or tell me in your comment that you do NOT want it published. Otherwise, anything you write here is fair game to be used in a subsequent entry. If you want to be anonymous, that is fine.

IT IS OK TO TALK ABOUT SEX IN YOUR COMMENTS, BUT PLEASE CHOOSE YOUR WORDS CAREFULLY AS I WANT THIS BLOG TO BE AS "SAFE FOR WORK" AS POSSIBLE. If your comment includes graphic descriptions of activity involving minors, it's not going to get published.