Hey, there! Log in / Register
Polyamory gets official nod in Somerville
By adamg on Thu, 07/02/2020 - 11:19am
Wicked Local Somerville reports Somerville may have just become the first city in the country to formally recognize domestic partnerships of more than two people. It potentially matters for such things as hospital visitation rights, sick leave and health-insurance coverage.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Ain’t Love Big?
Will Somerville become a haven for renegade Mormons now?
Polyamory and Polygamy aren't the same thing
Just adding that bit.
Philatelist vs Philanderer
different, but one thing in common.
I'm sure they have different names for a reason
Could you elucidate the difference? Is polygamy a subset of polyamory?
Polyamory is a consensual
Polyamory is a consensual intimate relationship between multiple individuals.
Polygamy is one person being married to multiple other individuals.
That's the really simple definition of each.
Well...
Domestic partnership, in the days prior to universal recognition of same-gender marriage, was sold as being virtually equivalent to marriage. So in essence this would be a municipality recognizing a multi-party relationship as being virtually equivalent to polygamy.
If the Mormons had thought of this in the 1800s they could have just done polyamorous domestic partnerships.
Among
So then you are agreeing that polygamy is a sub-category of polyamory? Because your definition "a consensual intimate relationship [among] multiple individuals" describes polygamy too.
That would make polygamy the subset of polyamory where:
1. There are multiple women in the relationship;
2. There is only one man in the relationship;
3. The participants consider each other husband and wives;
4. Sexual intimacy is only shared between a husband and a wife.
And maybe, 5. Polyamory is cool, and polygamy isn't.
If you can think of a distinction that makes polygamy not a sub-category of polyamory, I'd be interested to hear it.
Don't mind my asking...
but what is your point? Sure, one is a certain form of the other.
Is there something else, or are you genuinely concerned about the definition? In which case, you seem spot on.
Partly it's about everyone
Partly it's about everyone involved consenting to that shape of relationship--not a man telling his wife "I'm taking another wife" whether she likes it or not. And it isn't "I get to have three girlfriends, and none of them better look at another man."
A woman might have a husband and a girlfriend, who aren't family to each other but not romantic or sexual partners. Or three people might each be involved with both of the others.
Interesting cultural assumption
It seems like you're saying it's not possible for women to consent to polygamy.
Fundamentalist Mormons don't get consent mostly.
Since you started with Mormons....
Most of the polygamist Mormons are members of the fundamentalist sect where the standard practice is to take girls as wives before the age of consent so in the case of Mormons*, no, they can't legally consent. This is why people like Warren Jeffs are in prison.
Read this book for more info: Jon Krakauer, Under the Banner of Heaven
https://www.amazon.com/Under-Banner-Heaven-Story-Violent-ebook/dp/B000FC...
* Mormon leadership strongly denies the sect members are Mormons but these creeps are basically following the playbook of Joe Smith so YMMV.
Women can, of course, consent to polygamy but in most instances over history, it is done within the framework of deeply inequitable societies where women are subservient in all ways to men. So they might consent within that context but only because all their choices are shit.
And
Women never consent to polyamory in the context of deeply inequitable societies because all their choices are shit?
I’ve read the book. Good book. It doesn’t make any argument that polygamy is not a subset of polyamory. Somerville is taking steps to legalize the creepiness that disturbed you in that book.
Basically. In strictly
Basically. In strictly definitional terms, polygamy is a subset of polyamory. One is multi-partner marriages, the other is multi-partner relationships, married or not.
The word polyamory however has a lot of historical and cultural baggage associating it with men who take multiple wives or concubines, and from time periods when society was patriarchal and marriage entirely in the control of the man.
Anthropologists and the like would use the term polygyny (one male, multiple females) to describe most historical examples of polygamy, and the term polyandry (one female, multiple males) exists also.
Polyamory is a relative new word invented by people to describe multi-partner consensual relationships, and the term has come about in a culture much more concerned about consent and equality than what polygamy historically described.
Will Moe Larry and Curley qualify?
Soitanly.
Nyuk
Nyuk Nyuk.
So good!
So good!
It's amazing
The people's republic has been outflanked on the left. By Somerville.
There's nothing leftist about polyamory
It's about one's private life not one's politics. Swingers, for instance, tend to be Republicans.
Hokey smoke Bullwinkle
we should move to Somerville.
odd
Your first sentence claims it's nonpartisan. Then your second sentence gives a partisan example.
Horrible Move
The government needs to get out of the business of sanctioning people's romantic relationships without exception. Marriage and civil unions should have no legal meaning.
For hospitals, people already has the ability to declare a health care proxy. (For obvious reasons, this needs to be a single person.) For visitation, they already shouldn't be limiting it to just one person. Why is a family member seen as more deserving than a close friend?
For taxes, the governments need to abolish joint filing. It serves no purpose beyond penalizing people who aren't married.
For inheritance, that's what wills are for. If you don't have a will, let the probate court decide based on factors such as sharing a household and shared ownership/responsibility before the death.
Uh huh
"If I have to share my toy, then no one can play with it."
When it comes to the co-mingling of naughty bits...
All sorts of insecurities, real and perceived, seem to bubble up.
Health insurance and hospital
Health insurance and hospital visitation should have nothing to do with marriage.
Health insurance should be a universal right.
Hospital visitation should be available to anyone the patient chooses. If someone wants their brother-in-law or a close friend to have these rights, it shouldn't be a problem.
Health insurance is already a
Health insurance is already a universal right.
The government can't prevent you from having health insurance.