Sister Wives is Back

Sunday's season premiere is 9 p.m. EDT. Set your DVR or plan to watch.

Many months ago I was sitting back and collecting coverage of TLC’s “Sister Wives” to gauge the show’s portrayal of polygyny and the public reaction to it, but I have yet to get around to writing up a reaction to the first season. If you have watched the show, please comment with your thoughts.

It has definitely raised awareness, which is a good thing as long as that awareness is not manipulated by the bigots. Reality television shows don’t exactly have a great track record when it comes to how marriages are portrayed, or perhaps marriages don’t have a good track record of surviving such productions.

I’m sure that if the Browns experience a split, someone will cite them as an example of how polygyny doesn’t “work.” But the same people will be unlikely to cite “Jon and Kate” as proof that monogamy doesn’t work.

From the Associated Press…

It's easy to see that Kody Brown and his four wives share a closeness and a comfort zone and, yes, a sense of humor that keeps the conversation at a gallop.

Good!

They were tired of keeping secrets and living in fear. They were tired of the misconceptions and stereotypes that defined polygamy in many people's minds (including HBO's extreme polygamy drama "Big Love," which some of the Browns say they have watched and enjoyed).

"I went through high school hiding who I was," says Robyn, who wed Kody on last season's finale, bringing three children from her previous marriage into a brood that now numbers 16. "I shut people out because I didn't want to be labeled and made fun of."

How sad and unacceptable.

"We're not trying to proselyte our faith or our lifestyle," says Kody, who is legally married only to Meri, his wife of 20 years. "We're just looking for acceptance."

"And I think we're getting that," says Meri, with whom Kody has a 15-year-old daughter. "People will tell us, 'It's not for me. There's no way I could share my husband with somebody. But I am totally for you doing it, if that's what you want to do.'"

That’s good news.

"There have been a lot of people who have opposed it," Kody acknowledges. "They say they still think it's creepy."

There will always be bigots.

Whatever the seeming oddities (and super-sized proportions) that set the Browns apart from "normal" families, "Sister Wives" is most striking in the way it charts common ground with any other loving, busy family.

Going about their daily lives, sharing chores and outings, with bumps in the road, but also laughs, the Browns are relatable on many levels.

Tear down the walls of prejudice. We need more shows and more movies that portray banned marriages in a positive way.

"Kody maintains a good marriage with all of us - each one of us, individually," says Christine.

"He's a gentleman and he's very fair with us," says Meri.

It is outrageous that this family would be investigated. It is not acceptable that they are denied their freedom to marry before the law.

Wish I'd Found This Blog Sooner

The blog A Nadder refuted arguments against consanguineous sex and consanguinamory (consensual incest) two and a half years ago, and has returned with an update. I wish I had found the earlier write-up before. First, the earlier refutations of objections, which I’m sure will look familiar…

1. It’s unnatural — the same old line’s been used to prove the immorality of homosexuality, interracial marriage, contraception etc. Sorry. The answer’s always “so what?” (being unnatural doesn’t make something bad) and “no it isn’t” (eg. 10–15% of college students reported some childhood sexual contact with a brother/sister).

Yup. Discredited Argument #5.

2. It’s universally condemned — this was also used against interracial marriage etc. Again: so what? And again: no it isn’t. It’s universal to have some kind of incest taboo, but the limits vary a lot. In many cultures it’s common for first cousins to marry (with up to 50% of marriages being between first cousins).

See #2, 3, and 4.

3. It causes birth defects - finally a somewhat true statement (although apparently the best strategy is to actually marry your 3rd cousin). But if that’s reason to outlaw incest we need to outlaw drinking/smoking during pregnancy (which we don’t and it would be a big deal to do this). We’d also need to prevent 2 carriers of a genetic diseas from procreating. Finally despite what you hear on the news, we’re not living in the 12th century. Sex ? babies. 2 sisters having sex, or a heterosexual incestuous couple using contraception will demolish the argument.

See #18.

4. People who were brought up together shouldn’t be together — umm, because…? I’ve heard this one before. It’s priceless, the ultimate non-sequitir. This suggests that two childhood friends should avoid romantic relationships. This of course happens very often. I’m not aware of studies suggesting such couples are psychologically/emotionally worse off than the average couple. This argument is grasping at straws.

See #19, 21.

5. It makes me personally uncomfortable - at last, the truth! Yes, it certainly does.

See #1

So, there’s no reason not to legalise it.

Nope, there isn’t. It should be legal. The more people think through this, they more they will see that.

Here’s the recent follow-up.

My 2.5 year old post on consensual incest continues to be the most popular post I’ve ever done.

That’s because there is a lot more of it going on, and going on in the fantasies of some, than we publicly admit.

He looks at the statements of those who clung to their prejudice.

Kohl wants the consanguinamorous to stay in the closet and adhere to a “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” guideline. Should they sit in the back of the bus, too?

Man Sentenced to 15 Years in Prison For Consensual Sex

This news from Ghana…

Robert Akpanaga, a 59 year-old Corn mill operator who slept with his 21 year old daughter resulting in pregnancy has been sentenced to 15 years imprisonment.

Why?

Akpanaga, who pleaded guilty to the charges of incest under section 195A (1) of Act 29/60, was convicted on his own plea.

This was apparently consensual. Why is this a crime? If it wasn’t consensual, he could have been charged with rape.

Inspector A.A. Ahor, the prosecutor, narrating the facts of the case said the Police on February 28, 2011, received information that the accused, who operates a corn mill at Dunyo, near Mayera, a suburb of Accra, had impregnated his biological daughter.

The police should have replied, “So what?” Why tear this family apart? Can you believe that people go to prison for consensual sex with other adults?

Looking For Women Who Have Experienced Genetic Sexual Attraction

Here’s another opportunity to get the word out about Genetic Sexual Attractions (GSA). I found this over at the GSA website…

My name's Ash and I'm a freelance journalist writing for publications in the UK and Australia. I'm looking to interview British, American and Australian women about their experiences with GSA, for articles to dispel some of the misconceptions around it and to raise awareness of its existence.

Please be assured that articles will be written up sensitively, you'll be able to make any changes you wish to my final draft and interviewees will be paid a fee for their time. Ideally I'd like to interview women who are happy for their photo to accompany the feature, but I can, in some cases, work on anonymous stories - if you contact me, I can work through this on a case by case basis.

Feel free to email me if you'd like to find out more, have any questions or would like to see examples of my previously printed work.

Many thanks, Ash
ash.anand35@gmail.com

If you fit the description, especially if you have had a positive experience, contact Ash and help show the world that those experiencing GSA should not be stigmatized, persecuted, or prosecuted.

Legislators Should Go For Full Marriage Equality

I wrote earlier about how full marriage equality was briefly considered in Maryland before the bill was reverted back to only extending the freedom to marry to (some) same-sex couples.

Whether amendments to legalize polygamous and consanguineous (incestuous) marriages along with same-sex marriages are offered genuinely or cynically, lawmakers who support marriage equality should seize such an opportunity to adopt full marriage equality, so that an adult can marry any consenting adults.

Why?

1. The bigoted and cowardly legislators are going to vote "no" with or without the amendments.

2. There won't be any constituent who will withdraw campaign funding or their ballot box vote based on the amendments who will not already be doing so based on the legislator’s support of the bill without the amendments. Lawmakers, you are not going to get any more people pissed off at you for your support of full marriage equality than you will for your support of just the same-sex freedom to marry.

3. While there are supporters of the same-sex freedom to marry who throw polyamorous people or consanguinamorous people under the bus when bigots attack, they’re not going to drop their support of legislators for supporting full marriage equality. It's not like a same-sex couple is going to say, "Thanks for legalizing marriage for us, but I now oppose you because you also legalized marriage for other people, too!"

4. Last but not leas, it is the right thing to do. Equality just for some is not equality.

So go ahead… be bold, make history, and vote to adopt full marriage equality when the amendments are attached.

Polling the Clergy in Indiana

The Indianapolis Star asked clergy for guidance on marriage equality in Indiana.

Kevin R. Armstrong, Pastor, North United Methodist Church…

King David had several wives, while King Solomon was commended for his 700 wives and 300 concubines.

Despite this, he goes on to write…

Marriage is not for everyone, but Christian marriage is fundamentally about how the shared gifts of two faithful people witness God's love for the world.

Why does he limit it to two?

Rabbi Benjamin Sendrow, Congregation Shaarey Tefilla…

Monogamous homosexual relationships should be recognized by the government as civil unions.

Monogamous or not, same-sex relationships should be recognized as marriage if that is what the participants want.

There are other kinds of relationships between loving adults, but only a man and a woman make a marriage.

Why not any two loving adults? Why not any number of loving adults? An adult brother and sister, or parent and adult child, or three loving adults -- why cannot these be marriages?

Virtually everyone is opposed to incestuous and plural marriage. But why? There are no secular reasons to oppose them -- certainly not the risk of birth defects from incest, which generally do not appear in the first generation of an incestuous union. Even if they did, we allow marriages between carriers of fatal diseases such as Tay-Sachs. The only reasons to prohibit incestuous or plural unions are Judeo-Christian values that have influenced society even if the source goes unacknowledged.

We have separation of church and state in the US. So there's no reason, then, to deny full marriage equality.

Donald Stikeleather, Dharma Ocean Indianapolis…

The Vajrayana Buddhist view goes beyond removing the dualistic "good and bad" labeling of the world and vows to see all parts of life as sacred, not attempting to control parts that frighten us, that appear aberrant, or are simply different.

We desire to balance and merge our feminine and masculine energies, creating a partner relationship by employing an equal, balancing force to match one beautiful energy with another. Gender is simply a construct to manage how we see the world. This commitment to another is one of awareness, learning and appreciation.

I’ll count on Stikeleather as an ally for full marriage equality.

Full Marriage Equality Briefly Considered in Maryland

According to this article about a bill for the same-sex freedom to marry…

Del. Neil Parrott, R-Washington, offered a defeated amendment to allow polygamy and later withdrew one to allow incestuous marriage.

So it is back to a piecemeal approach to marriage. Looks like Maryland will be getting increased freedom to marry, but not full marriage equality, yet. It will be nice when some same-sex couples can marry in Maryland. It will be even better when an adult can marry any consenting adults.

Yes We Kant

This blogger, who is in a monogamous marriage, ponders a hypothetical and makes a case for the moral superiority of polyamory, should a spouse request it.

It’s not a short read, because the blogger carefully thinks things through, including appealing to Kant.

Some Poly People Cuddle, But…

A UK poly person explains an ordeal of dealing with sensationalistic media poorly portraying polyamory.

As an accidental activist, one of the things I've learned over the past couple of years is that a lot of people out there are just grateful for anything that brings polyamory to their attention, making it clear that there is an alternative way to have relationships, even if the medium is some stupid chat show. And as someone who can afford to be out, I figure it's my duty to be just as out as possible.

Since neither filming people dating or living together on an ongoing basis, nor having group sex will work well for a one-shot television piece, the producers of the television show set up a... cuddle party as a metaphor.

They asked more and more leading and disinguous questions about the sexual things that they thought a cuddle party might turn into. Because it’s people cuddling! It has to be sexual right? Makes me wonder how boring these people must find their own sex lives that they have to make them up for other people. Sure, we’re poly. We have plenty of sex, with our existing partners. We don’t need to have parties for that.

I’m usually a pretty good sport, but they managed to push it way too far, far too often. I stopped the interview several times to interject “that’s nothing to do with poly", and to put my foot down when we were being asked to perform for the camera in ways that were totally unnatural. Hm... I wonder if that’s why I wasn’t called back to do that interview after all?

The blogger offers these links for better information about polyamory…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyamory
http://www.polyday.org.uk/
http://www.xeromag.com/fvpoly.html
http://www.xeromag.com/fvpolyrefrigerator.html
http://www.polyamory.org.uk/
http://emanix.livejournal.com/9670.html

I have some good links over there on the right side of the blog. The blogger concludes with this advice to poly people about dealing with the media...

A wise friend put it this way: "If you've got a story, go to the press. If they have come to you, they've already got a story & want to fit you in/up." My suggestion: write it yourselves.

Realistic, positive information on polyamory will advance our cause. Misleading portrayals can roll it back.

How Long Before Full Marriage Equality in the US?

Uri Smendrick asked. “Will polygamous marriages be recognized in the US anytime soon? Why or why not?”

One person was pessimistic in their response…

No. And there is no signs of any change into that direction.

Actually, there is. More people are recognizing that adults should be able to marry any consenting adults, and that includes recognizing the polygamous freedom to marry. Those mostly fighting for the same-sex freedom to marry have paved the way, and poly people, especially those who aren’t LGBT, should be thankful and show solidarity in pushing for same-sex marriage. Shows like “Big Love” and “Sister Wives” have raised awareness about polygyny in particular.

Why not: I'm not judging, but most of the population (in the US) is against polygamy for different reasons: like moral, religious and/or practical reasons. And it's a fact that any law needs the majority support to get passed or reversed.

We don’t need a majority of people to want polygamy. It would help if a majority would recognize that the fundamental right to marry includes polygamy, but it is possible by having courts lead the way, as has been done with various civil rights.

Mutt wrote…

I doubt it will be anytime soon.

But I'm all for it, as long as all persons involved enter the relationship with full knowledge of all the other spouses. What consenting adults decide to do between themselves should be no concern of the government.

Thanks for being an ally, Mutt.

We are rapidly spreading the same-sex freedom to marry. Polygamy can be right behind that. But what we really need is full marriage equality, which means an adult can marry any consenting adults. It is possible that the Supreme Court could bring this about, although it is more likely to only grant the same-sex freedom to marry first, then move on towards full marriage equality.

Congress could also do the right thing and get moving on a Marriage Equality Amendment, although I’m not holding my breath right now.

So how long before full marriage equality in the US? It’s going to happen. The only question is how long do we have to wait? A few years? Ten years? Let’s make it happen sooner rather than later.

Adoption Rights

At Yahoo Answers, someone asked, “Should incestuous couples be allowed to adopt children? Why or why not?”

The answer, of course, is yes. Of course consanguinamorous couples, or couples engaged in consanguineous sex, who some call incestuous, should be allowed to adopt children. Whether or not two people are having sex with each other, if they want to adopt, they should be allowed if they are able to take care of a child. The only reason I could think as to why this shouldn’t be allowed is that in some places, they are breaking the law. But such laws should not exist. It should not be illegal for consenting adults to have sex with each other.

Consanguinamorous couples may be especially strong in their relationship, providing a good, stable home to children in need of one.

But there is so much prejudice towards such couples that you’ll find answers that are against this idea. There were many responses favoring such discrimination, but no explanation as to why.

Yams was an exception…

Morally, I have problems with it. Legally, I see no reason why not. It seems quite discriminatory not to.

Consanguinamorous couples should have the same rights as any other couple.

Same-Sex Freedom to Marry and Broader LGBT Acceptance

Jos, a transgendered woman, notes the advancement of the same-sex freedom to marry, but worries about larger acceptance issues for LGBT people.

This graph shows a clear, steady victory for those who have been organizing for decades for gay marriage. I’m happy for their wins, but I’m ambivalent about what it means for broader social acceptance of queer and transgender folks.

She notes that those who choose not to marry should not be denied their rights. This is something I have said, too. Full marriage equality can only be so if the right to be unmarried and the right to divorce are included. Be sure to read the comments to see some balance to some of the points presented.