Come Follow Me (April 1-7) - Talk about chastity, no mention of polygamy

[MustardSeed]

Just now, Calm said:

While some women will be lonely, others will shine.

My mom wondered if her dad died when he did (right when he retired of a heart attack) because he was giving his wife the life she really wanted.  Grandma loved living alone and having a life full of clubs and church and getting together with her friends in similar situations.

That will be me when my husband passes. I watched both my grandmothers live that life, both into their mid 90s

[The Nehor]

48 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Are concubines sex slaves?  The definition I have found is "(in polygamous societies) a woman who lives with a man but has lower status than his wife or wives."  It does not have to mean a sex slave.

The word concubine has been used to describe many kinds of sexual relationships. Has it been used to describe what amounts to “sex slaves”? Yes, and other kinds of relationships.

[carbon dioxide]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

The word concubine has been used to describe many kinds of sexual relationships. Has it been used to describe what amounts to “sex slaves”? Yes, and other kinds of relationships.

I guess if that is the standard of being used to describe something, I suppose someone could use it for regular monogamy as well.   Some might describe any woman being married to a man as a sex slave to that man.  

[The Nehor]

18 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Its even worse today.  At least in polygamy, if a man has a children with multiple women, the man has responsibility and duty to care for those kids and generally will.   Today a guy can spreed his seed around like a dog and have little worry about it.   Its a weird view of morality.  A man is married to 5 women.  BAD.  A man has sex with 200 women and maybe fathers children with 40 of them.  No big deal. 

It is actually better today. We can establish paternity whereas in the past a fornicator could easily get off the hook.

The idea that there is a binary choice between polygamy and philandering is just wrong. People philander even when polygamy is an option.

This is just polygamist Utah apologetics that didn’t make a lot of sense at the time. It certainly doesn’t make sense now.

Also the idea that there is SO much more fornication going on now compared to the past is not something I am convinced of. Even if it were true development of mostly reliable contraception has done more to make sure more children are cared for by their parents than probably any other innovation in history.

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, carbon dioxide said:

I guess if that is the standard of being used to describe something, I suppose someone could use it for regular monogamy as well.   Some might describe any woman being married to a man as a sex slave to that man.  

Those “some” are called political lesbians.

Fun Fact: Most of them aren’t lesbians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_lesbianism

[The Nehor]

36 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

That will be me when my husband passes. I watched both my grandmothers live that life, both into their mid 90s

Can’t you do that now?

Agree to have one or two nights a week where you both go and do whatever with whomever you want with no need to clear it with your spouse and no requirement to get advance approval or coordinate about anything?

[Benjamin McGuire]

29 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Its even worse today.  At least in polygamy, if a man has a children with multiple women, the man has responsibility and duty to care for those kids and generally will.   Today a guy can spreed his seed around like a dog and have little worry about it.   Its a weird view of morality.  A man is married to 5 women.  BAD.  A man has sex with 200 women and maybe fathers children with 40 of them.  No big deal. 

Why is this worse today? Let's see - alongside this, we have a major drop in sex work (prostitution). Genetic testing has led to the coinage of a new term - the non-paternity event. Because of the way that our society has changed dealing with this, the reality is that more non-married men are simply forgoing sex. And of those that are sexually active, that study showed a significant increase among men in single partner sexual activity (from 57 percent in 2002-2004 compared with 67 percent in 2016-2018). In that same time span, the number of men having more than 3 partners remained largely unchanged. You are throwing around this idea here that has no foundation in reality - it's like you are trying to use it for shock value. It doesn't really work.

Are there men who have "spread their seed around like a dog" and had dozens of kids? Sure. Some of them seem to healthcare providers working on infertility. Of course, there wasn't any sex involved there ... and many of these instances are coming to light because of DNA testing.

At any rate, there is always a problem when someone wants to say that something isn't bad because we can find something way, way worse. Which is your argument here. Polygamy is better than X because at least under polygamy, we had Y.

It's not a good argument.

[juliann]

1 hour ago, carbon dioxide said:

Are concubines sex slaves?  The definition I have found is "(in polygamous societies) a woman who lives with a man but has lower status than his wife or wives."  It does not have to mean a sex slave.

Are modern doing just fine without husbands in the modern age.   The trend is about 45% of middle age women will be single by 2030.  When this lot of women get older, not many will have husbands, not many kids and they will get into their retirement years and be pretty lonely.   A lot of western men are doing the passport thing to find women in other countries because they are tired of having to deal with the modern, western women.  The trends do not look good for women in modern life today.  

 

So if you are literally given to some dude for whatever he wants you for, you aren't a slave? What would you call it?  Like Hagar, she was already a slave. 

I'm actually chuckling at your belief that being old makes you lonely. What makes you lonely is not having a social circles. And the likely reason these loser men are going overseas is because women here won't have them. Women are single because there aren't attractive options. It may take awhile before a lot of men stop your kind of thinking and realize they are going to have to step it up. They do much worse being single than women do. 

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

You are missing the point.

We can talk about real empirical data that points to the fact that child marriages are bad. Not perceptions. Not context driven discussions. Real empirical data. This is not about Joseph Smith. This is about the harm that comes to children when they are married. So let's stop worrying about trying to defend Joseph Smith. I could care less about trying to attack (or to defend) that particular example. As I noted earlier in this thread - we don't have to be critical of individuals or societies that engaged in bad practices. We have a moral obligation to reject those bad practices. Let's keep the two discussions entirely separate.

I got the first point more than 60 years ago. And clearly you don’t wish to talk about Joseph and Helen right now; I did not realize that at first.

You chose to use this thread to post about the harm that comes to children when they are married. “OK”. Good luck controlling the flow and scope of replies to your posts to your liking!

[bluebell]

Just now, juliann said:

They do much worse being single than women do. 

I love my mom and dad equally but I pray my dad dies first.  My mom will be ok but he will suffer.

For those interested, here is an article that talks about Juliann's point.

[ZealouslyStriving]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

I love my mom and dad equally but I pray my dad dies first.  My mom will be ok but he will suffer.

For those interested, here is an article that talks about Juliann's point.

Stop putting women on a pedestal! 😤😁🫣

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, carbon dioxide said:

A man has sex with 200 women and maybe fathers children with 40 of them.  No big deal. 

I am curious as to which social circles you think would find this man’s behavior acceptable.

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I am curious as to which social circles you think would find this man’s behavior acceptable.

It worked out well for Hugh Hefner (though I'm pretty sure he made sure he was creating children willy-nilly).  

Edited April 6, 2024 by bluebell

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, carbon dioxide said:

Are modern doing just fine without husbands in the modern age.   The trend is about 45% of middle age women will be single by 2030.  When this lot of women get older, not many will have husbands, not many kids and they will get into their retirement years and be pretty lonely.   A lot of western men are doing the passport thing to find women in other countries because they are tired of having to deal with the modern, western women.  The trends do not look good for women in modern life today.  

And a lot of those passport marriages end with the woman divorcing the husband.

The idea that women have gone bad is something men tell themselves. Trust me when I say that most of the women aren’t sad about these guys leaving the dating pool. The general sentiment is something like:

”You women won’t take care of me the way my mom did. I won’t date you!”

”Okay.”

”Seriously, I am going to take my ball and go home now.“

”Bye.”

”Really, you will die alone and unloved without me.”

”Okay, have a good day.”

”This is your last chance.”

”Didn’t you say you were leaving? GO!!!!!”

[The Nehor]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

It worked out well for Hugh Hefner (though I'm pretty sure he made sure he was creating children willy-nilly).  

Hefner only had four children by two women.

Some circles are much more tolerant of open relationships and polyamory and the like but cheating and/or abandoning your children are considered scummy by most social circles. The social circles that are okay with it tend to also be really scummy.

[bluebell]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

Hefner only had four children by two women.

Some circles are much more tolerant of open relationships and polyamory and the like but cheating and/or abandoning your children are considered scummy by most social circles. The social circles that are okay with it tend to also be really scummy.

Agree on the abandonment of children.  I was speaking more about the sleeping with as many women as possible, sometimes at the same time, most of them very young, while you control their careers.  Society was pretty a-ok with that.

[The Nehor]

7 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Agree on the abandonment of children.  I was speaking more about the sleeping with as many women as possible, sometimes at the same time, most of them very young, while you control their careers.  Society was pretty a-ok with that.

Yeah, but only if you were wealthy. I am not defending. I am just pointing out that this is not an option for most men. To be clear I don’t think it would be good for it to be an option.

Edit: I know a guy who has had sex with over a thousand people. He is bi. He doesn’t lead anyone on. He has had a vasectomy. By some standards he is a villain. By others he is fraysexual and handling it well and living a pretty fulfilling life.

Edited April 6, 2024 by The Nehor

[bluebell]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

Yeah, but only if you were wealthy. I am not defending. I am just pointing out that this is not an option for most men. To be clear I don’t think it would be good for it to be an option.

I'm out of rep points but I agree.  Wealth and power are what often determine what society will accept.  In our culture morality is extremely malleable.  

[Benjamin McGuire]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

I got the first point more than 60 years ago. And clearly you don’t wish to talk about Joseph and Helen right now; I did not realize that at first.

You chose to use this thread to post about the harm that comes to children when they are married. “OK”. Good luck controlling the flow and scope of replies to your posts to your liking!

Look - I made my position clear right from the get go. This is what I wrote:

On 4/5/2024 at 11:46 AM, Benjamin McGuire said:

We shouldn't judge people in the past by modern sensibilities. We don't need to judge historical 'times'. On the other hand, it is completely acceptable to judge past practices when those practices conflict with a better understanding of ethics and human rights.

On the other hand, what you are doing is creating an argument for relativism. It's an odd sort of position because I get the impression that in any other context, you would be ridiculing that sort of argument. I didn't actually start with the idea of harms that come to children when they are married. The first time I mentioned it at all was here (this morning) - long after our discussion started:

7 hours ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

No. Actually, they were all evil the past. We have had this discussion numerous times on this forum. The fact that something in a specific context may be the lesser of two evils doesn't actually change if from being evil to being good. But this is what you seem to be suggesting. You are trying to redirect the discussion by bringing in modern conditions - but we don't base what makes these things wrong on ideas that we think are solely rooted in cultural and societal attitudes. We base them on things that we can look at empirically - and with that empirical understanding, we can expect that in every instance in the past it was bad, not just the ones that we can look at. This is true whether we are talking about child marriage, or slavery, or say, serial killing.

And there isn't anything in my discussion that leads back to Joseph Smith - that's all your interpretation and reading into it. I have very little interest in that discussion right now (it just doesn't go anywhere). It's obvious at this point why you want to introduce this relativism into the discussion because your interest really isn't over the question of whether something is good or bad but engages the assumption that every criticism of polygamy must be an attack aimed at Joseph Smith ...

[webbles]

16 hours ago, PortalToParis said:

Since the website is so short (only about two hours) it doesn't go into detail of any period of early Church history. But it does mention Hyrum's brother-in-law's (Joseph Fielding's) post-martyrdom account that the women's voices against polygamy had "risen to a very high pitch, saying it is abomination, whoredom, etc. A passage in the Book of Mormon is quoted in opposition to this Doctrine where it is said that a man should have but one Wife and no concubines." It also makes reference to William Smith's (Joseph and Hyrum's brother's) published post-martyrdom denunciation of polygamy, 

Joseph Fielding is actually condemning those women.  The full page says:

Quote

A Passage in the Book of Mormon is quoted in opposition to this Doctrine where it is said that a Man should have but one Wife and no Concubines, I feel sorry for our Women for it is plain that if this be of God as I believe it to be, their Conduct in the Matter is very wrong, and but for the sealing Power and Ordinance by which they are sealed to their Husbands many would cut themselves off from the Kingdom, my Wife is much opposed to it, I desire to the Will of God and to obtain all the Glory I can some say that it was because of this Abomination that Joseph and Hyram were cut off I understand that a Man's Dominion will be as God's is, over his own Creatures and the more numerous the greater his Dominion, but how true that straight is the Gate and narrow is the Way that leadeth unto Exaltation and the eternal Duration of Lives and few there be that go in thereat.

( see a transcript at page 154 in https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1924&context=byusq or pages 55-57 of his journal at https://catalog.churchofjesuschrist.org/assets/fed88dc9-9446-43bf-9fb2-5577ca690893/0/55 )

I'm assuming that Joseph Fielding was taught the "true" practice of sealing by Hyrum so how/why did he quickly change his belief to the "incorrect" practice of polygamy shortly after Joseph's and Hyrum's deaths?  It is also interesting that Joseph Fielding appears to be quoting from D&C 132.  Compare D&C 132:22 - "For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it".  It looks like Joseph Fielding was allowed to read the revelation, probably through Hyrum.

In addition to Joseph Fielding, there are others in Nauvoo who were taught by Hyrum and Joseph about the "true" practice of sealing but then quickly changed to the "incorrect" practice of polygamy.  I find it difficult to believe that they were so easily deceived to change their mind.  All the people who did fight back seem to fight back against both practices (eternal sealings to multiple people or polygamy).  This separation of the two practices feels like a modern invention and not one that actually occurred in Nauvoo.

[MustardSeed]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Can’t you do that now?

Agree to have one or two nights a week where you both go and do whatever with whomever you want with no need to clear it with your spouse and no requirement to get advance approval or coordinate about anything?

lol- ahhh if only you knew.  🤩

 

[The Nehor]

7 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

lol- ahhh if only you knew.  🤩

If your spouse can’t survive without you for that long that is what we call “weaponized incompetence”.

And sorry, I don’t mean to call you out specifically. I don’t know your life.

This kind of thing is why a lot of women are choosing to remain unmarried.

[carbon dioxide]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

And a lot of those passport marriages end with the woman divorcing the husband.

The idea that women have gone bad is something men tell themselves. Trust me when I say that most of the women aren’t sad about these guys leaving the dating pool. The general sentiment is something like:

”You women won’t take care of me the way my mom did. I won’t date you!”

”Okay.”

”Seriously, I am going to take my ball and go home now.“

”Bye.”

”Really, you will die alone and unloved without me.”

”Okay, have a good day.”

”This is your last chance.”

”Didn’t you say you were leaving? GO!!!!!”

Some are doing the passport thing.  Most men just can't afford that option.   So they just stay home and are just not dating at all.  That is why there are lots of videos on youtube of women complaining about where have all the men gone.   They are still around.  They are not dead.  They just are not apparently going to deal with the mindset of many younger women today.  They don't see the benefits being greater than the risks and they have their porn which is good enough for them.   We will see the day when half of all 50 year old women in the country will be childless and single.   It is coming.

[Calm]

15 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Some are doing the passport thing.  Most men just can't afford that option.   So they just stay home and are just not dating at all.  That is why there are lots of videos on youtube of women complaining about where have all the men gone.   They are still around.  They are not dead.  They just are not apparently going to deal with the mindset of many younger women today.  They don't see the benefits being greater than the risks and they have their porn which is good enough for them.   We will see the day when half of all 50 year old women in the country will be childless and single.   It is coming.

If men refuse to grow up and want a mommy as well as a wife, that is on them.

[MustardSeed]

38 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

If your spouse can’t survive without you for that long that is what we call “weaponized incompetence”.

And sorry, I don’t mean to call you out specifically. I don’t know your life.

This kind of thing is why a lot of women are choosing to remain unmarried.

I know you’re speaking in generalities, not intending to target me. 
 

I actually travel quite a bit to perform music, so husband makes his own sandwich while I’m away. No sex slaves here.  Except when we agree to be. 🤪