Wednesday, May 25, 2011

Another Example of "Sister Wives" Changing Minds

The good that the show “Sister Wives” is accomplishing is again demonstrated by Jacqueline Bur’s “'Sister Wives' Episode Changes My Mind About Polygamy.”

I can't get through an episode of HBO's polygamy drama Big Love without yelling, "You women have been brainwashed!" at the TV, so I never thought I'd end up sympathizing with the cast of TLC's polygamy reality show Sister Wives: Patriarch Kody Brown and wives Meri, Janelle, Christine, and Robyn.

The difference, of course, is that "Big Love" was fictional.

Kody lost me right away when he called the idea of a woman with multiple husbands "vulgar."

It would be nice if he would express full solidarity instead of throwing polyandrists under the bus, but he isn’t alone. There are people in consanguinamorous relationships who throw poly people under the bus, there are LGBT people who throw the consanguinamorous people under the bus, and it is no surprise that there are polygynous people who would through polyandrists under the bus. We need solidarity so that we can get full marriage equality.

They seem like intelligent women, caring moms, and good friends to each other ... the only difference between us and them seems to be the mindset that husband-sharing is an acceptable option.

Polygyny, MFF triads, and other forms of “husband sharing” are acceptable options.

Last night's heartbreaking episode, however, made me realize that no matter how backward the notion of plural marriage may be, the legalization of polygamy seems like a good idea.

That’s very good! Thanks for the support of this freedom to marry.

She talks about the Browns enduring persecuting and having to flee law enforcement…

Watching those poor confused kids burst into tears every time they hear a police siren in the distance, well, that changed everything for me. Suddenly something clicked: Was this a present-day American reality show or a movie set in Nazi-era Germany? Hey, and wasn't the whole point of this country the escape of religious persecution?

It isn’t just religious persecution. It is denial of the freedom of association and an attempt to control our bodies. Neither the kids nor the adults should have to fear their own government will try to break up their family.

There were many comments left, some from allies, some from bigots, including people who say that grown women can’t possibly consent to polygyny.

Dannielle Richins is an ally…

The law does not belong in this situation. At all. Every adult in the Brown household consented to the lifestyle and they are committed and loving. No one is being hurt, no one is being exploited and the kids appear to be healthy, smart and thriving.

More families should love the way this family loves one another. This family is a beautiful thing in a country where divorce, hatred and the value of a family is diminishing rapidly.

Perfectly written.

Layne Johnson tries to defend the marriage ban…

If we were allowed to do anything that our religions allowed, then people could legally stone women for committing adultery, as the Bible states.

Isn’t there an obvious difference between the death penalty (or perhaps murder), and marrying someone?


Marriage is a legal contract between two people. It would not work with more than two people.

Why would someone say that? It can and it has.

Should all four of his wives get his social security?

There are three easy answers to this I can think of off of the top of my head:
1. Sure, split it up.
2. Let him designate.
3. Default to the first/longest married wife.

Honestly, are these people wearing blinders, or what? Would they accept an answer from their own teen child who says they can't clean up their room because the vacuum cleaner needs to be emptied first?

Should his company have to pay for all of them to have health insurance?

Does the company have to pay to insure ten children in one family while other employees have one child or no child?

This is Discredited Argument #14.

Jessica Moe…

I love that the Governator [Arnold Schwarzenegger] has a baby with an employee under his wife's nose and continues to employ her, has their "love child" around his own children but they aren't allowed to know he's their brother...and THESE people who are fully functioning members of society and by all accounts fairly mentally stable people have to live in fear that they might lose their freedom for something they all consented to. It's not criminal to have an affair and have a secret family (as long as you don't get married 2x's!) but it's criminal to have more than one marriage that everyone knows about and is ok with?

This is one of the great absurdities of our ban on the polygamous freedom to marry. It is legal for married men to have everything from mistresses to one night stands and have children with these women (or even just donate sperm), but marrying all of the mothers of his children is not allowed. How can that be right?


You know, I could never, ever, EVER, be part of a polyamorous relationship. It just sounds awful. But, what if four consenting adults want to make a life together? It doesn't affect me at all, and while I recognize there may be some legalities to figure out, but I don't see why it shouldn't be legal, it doesn't make a difference to my, or anyone else'ss, life. As long as everyone are adults and are fully consenting (the situation with some of those FLDS are not okay), its none of my business.

Thank you!

Chalon Jones…

To each their own and I thought they could not be prosecuted unless they try to get the other marriages legalized.

Why should that be illegal?

I personaly like the idea of theory...but like socialism or comunisim it never works like it should in the real world :)

No proof of this is given. It is just a narrow-minded assertion.


I don't believe that they should be prosecuted. They seem to be a loving family.

Thank you!

Momavanessa simply spews prejudice…

He is sick and I feel bad for the brainwashed wives and children who think it is okay to live life like that!

What is wrong with how they are living? She doesn’t say, possibly because she can’t say.


Laws again polygamy are meant to protect women from being taken advantage of by an extreme religion (not that it seems to make a difference). Yes, the people on the show are consenting adults but they do not represent everybody who practices it. We can't say poor creeper and his wives can't live in the open, let's legalize it, without taking into account the people who would take advantage of it.

Discredited Argument #15. The last sentence make no sense, because one could just as easily say that allowing any cohabitation at all makes domestic violence more likely. If we just keep men and women apart, men can’t abuse women, right?

We're going to bring homosexuality into this discussion? Just had to stick that little dig in, huh? We're talkling about religion, not biology so go find another thread. Being a polygamist is a choice. Being gay, not so much. You want to prove me wrong, choose to be gay. We'll see how far you get. Religion is a lifestyle choice, being gay is biology.

The polygamous freedom to marry is also about biology. We should not deny it just because it isn’t synonymous with same-sex freedom to marry. That would be Discredited Argument #8.
— — —

1 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.