Re: [UUPoly-L] Poly reality

["Kelly Cookson" <kc62301@hotmail.com>]

> The problem is not polygamy -- we should [not] demonize it -- the problem 
> is women[men] abusing men[women] -- and that's what we should oppose.

One way of opposing men abusing women is to not support the legalization of 
multi-partner marriages without specific bills that would protect women in 
those marriages from abuses. I'm not opposing multi-partner marriage per se. 
I'm opposing the legalization of multi-partner marriage without accompanying 
legislation to deal with anticipated abuses.


> Furthermore, in polygyny one man is married to several women -- and it 
> seems to me that would make it *easier* for the women to counter abuse, 
> since they outnumber the husband.

It might work out that way for egalitarian polyamorists.

But it doesn't always work out that way for traditional polygamy. Ask the 
Mormon polygamist wives who feel their marriages were stifling and abusive. 
Ask the women in women's rights movements of countries where polygamy is 
allowed. Ask the United Nations, which is actively trying to eliminate 
polygamy as a step towards equal rights for women.


> One of the reasons for the abuse to begin with is the idea the the man 
> somehow *owns* the woman -- which, again, is what we should fight against 
> -- not against polygamy per se.

It's not like you have to make a choice. You can fight the idea that men own 
women (or more generally that any spouse owns another spouse). And, at the 
same time, you can oppose the legalization of multi-partner marriage unless 
it comes with bills to safegaurd women in those marriages. There is nothing 
inconsistent with doing both.

Let me state my position in the positive: I will support the legalization of 
multi-partner marriage (polygamy) when I see a package of bills that: 
legalizes multi-partner marriage, protects participants in those marriages 
from anticipated abuses, and modifies family laws and business laws to 
accomodate the new marriage structure.

All I'm doing is tying my support of legal multi-partner marriage to the 
hard work of creating a legislative package that would help reduce suffering 
and confusion when the change takes place. If the advocates of multi-partner 
marriage are not willing to engage in the hard work necessary to make the 
change less costly for our society in human and financial terms, why should 
I support these advocates or their cause?

Hope I'm not pushing this too far on a poly list. It's just a debate. :-)
Kelly

_________________________________________________________________
More photos, more messages, more storage?get 2GB with Windows Live Hotmail. 
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_2G_0507