First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Multiple Spouses
1394 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 5/23/10 , edited 5/23/10
If a person can afford to provide for more than one spouse, why shouldn't he? I don't see any reasons for objection provided that all parties are fine and dandy with the arrangement.
17 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / F / china
Offline
Posted 5/23/10
i dont think so. sometimes it has to consider moral and other ethics
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 5/23/10
Well why can't the other spouses go get a job ? Why does the man have to solely provide for everyone ? If the other wives go a job, money isn't an issue. Then it should be fine.
Posted 5/23/10 , edited 5/23/10

cinderella933 wrote:

i dont think so. sometimes it has to consider moral and other ethics
The Islamic faith has no such moral dilemma, when the Muslim society encourages the women to stay home and don't work for a living via acid burning. True story, BTW.


Allhailodin wrote:

Well why can't the other spouses go get a job ? Why does the man have to solely provide for everyone ? If the other wives go a job, money isn't an issue. Then it should be fine.
Agree, when financial stability is genderless by making job offers to all genders, there's no reason that a woman needs a man other than for emotional and moral support in a relationship. And that should go both ways.

Therefore it's mathematically impossible to sustain a polygamous relationship while abolish homosexuality in a society, especially when some societies don't even allow the women to get a job and earn a living.
299 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Samsara
Offline
Posted 5/24/10
Multiple spouses sounds like hell.

Marriage to one person is already a difficult thing. There are already many compromises, financial woes, and fights. By bringing in multiple partners you multiply the problem, so I ask is polygamy really worth it?
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 5/24/10

DomFortress wrote:


cinderella933 wrote:

i dont think so. sometimes it has to consider moral and other ethics
The Islamic faith has no such moral dilemma, when the Muslim society encourages the women to stay home and don't work for a living via acid burning. True story, BTW.


Allhailodin wrote:

Well why can't the other spouses go get a job ? Why does the man have to solely provide for everyone ? If the other wives go a job, money isn't an issue. Then it should be fine.
Agree, when financial stability is genderless by making job offers to all genders, there's no reason that a woman needs a man other than for emotional and moral support in a relationship. And that should go both ways.

Therefore it's mathematically impossible to sustain a polygamous relationship while abolish homosexuality in a society, especially when some societies don't even allow the women to get a job and earn a living.


"Treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers." From the last sermon of Prophet Muhammad

Type on google 'Women converts'. Most of the links says women are converting to Islam. Make it difference from extremists that hold their ancient tradition from religious teachings.

As for the topic, Is it possible for woman to have multiple spouses? lol
Posted 5/24/10

Ryutai-Desk wrote:


DomFortress wrote:


cinderella933 wrote:

i dont think so. sometimes it has to consider moral and other ethics
The Islamic faith has no such moral dilemma, when the Muslim society encourages the women to stay home and don't work for a living via acid burning. True story, BTW.


Allhailodin wrote:

Well why can't the other spouses go get a job ? Why does the man have to solely provide for everyone ? If the other wives go a job, money isn't an issue. Then it should be fine.
Agree, when financial stability is genderless by making job offers to all genders, there's no reason that a woman needs a man other than for emotional and moral support in a relationship. And that should go both ways.

Therefore it's mathematically impossible to sustain a polygamous relationship while abolish homosexuality in a society, especially when some societies don't even allow the women to get a job and earn a living.


"Treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers." From the last sermon of Prophet Muhammad

Type on google 'Women converts'. Most of the links says women are converting to Islam. Make it difference from extremists that hold their ancient tradition from religious teachings.

As for the topic, Is it possible for woman to have multiple spouses? lol
That's only within the context of Islamic faith, when the rest of the world is treating women as "equal". So are you saying that Islamic women don't want to be treated as equal? When the fact is before the time of Prophet Muhammad, it was the women who were the more cultured and radical than men in the Muslim society.

So are you ready to take on a spouse like me? Well I don't think you've got want it takes to be my equal, and I've got nothing to do with it because unlike yourself, I'm not a Muslim.
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 5/24/10

DomFortress wrote:

That's only within the context of Islamic faith, when the rest of the world is treating women as "equal". So are you saying that Islamic women don't want to be treated as equal? When the fact is before the time of Prophet Muhammad, it was the women who were the more cultured and radical than men in the Muslim society.

So are you ready to take on a spouse like me? Well I don't think you've got want it takes to be my equal, and I've got nothing to do with it because unlike yourself, I'm not a Muslim.


Funny, the fact that more modern woman are converting to Islam today. Just try to type 'women converts' in both youtube and google. Most of the links and videos will tell us they're converting to Islam. As I've explained before many times.

It doesn't matter if you are Muslim, Christian, Atheist, or any different beliefs you belongs to when it comes to love. But it's pretty irrational for woman to live with arrogant man who can't listen to others.
Posted 5/24/10 , edited 5/24/10
This is dangerously close to being a polygamy thread.

http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-69742/polygamy/
Posted 5/24/10

Ryutai-Desk wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

That's only within the context of Islamic faith, when the rest of the world is treating women as "equal". So are you saying that Islamic women don't want to be treated as equal? When the fact is before the time of Prophet Muhammad, it was the women who were the more cultured and radical than men in the Muslim society.

So are you ready to take on a spouse like me? Well I don't think you've got want it takes to be my equal, and I've got nothing to do with it because unlike yourself, I'm not a Muslim.


Funny, the fact that more modern woman are converting to Islam today. Just try to type 'women converts' in both youtube and google. Most of the links and videos will tell us they're converting to Islam. As I've explained before many times.

It doesn't matter if you are Muslim, Christian, Atheist, or any different beliefs you belongs to when it comes to love. But it's pretty irrational for woman to live with arrogant man who can't listen to others.
You do know that mass marketing is way overrated in the age of web 2.0, correct? Why do you think that regardless of what religions are, everyone will convert to new technology sooner or later? When it's due to the tipping point of diffusion of innovations.

Whatever, you just think that Islamic faith is all that. But take away information technology, and it's just an useless meme without any medium to hijack itself with.
8742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Scotland, Aberdeen
Offline
Posted 5/25/10 , edited 5/25/10

Ryutai-Desk wrote:
Funny, the fact that more modern woman are converting to Islam today. Just try to type 'women converts' in both youtube and google. Most of the links and videos will tell us they're converting to Islam. As I've explained before many times.


I want reliable statistics from a secular, unbiased source, acknowledged by academia. That or your claim will carry no weight.

I don't see a problem with multiple spouses either. Marriage is a human creation and entirely arbitrary and hardly necessary for anything, other than the legal aspect of it, which not not be considered marriage itself. As seen in practice, a minority of people will go on to have regular sexual relations with a number of persons they consider related by affinity. If a pair of persons is allowed to formalise such a relationship before the law, why should it be denied to a larger group of persons? And please, give me none of the slippery slope arguments about how it will escalate into horrible atrocities and whatnot. Polygamous marriage can be regulated and kept in control the same way that monogamous marriage is currently being regulated. A human male is able to fulfil his reproductive role with very short intervals of incapacity in between, and to not recognise that some may wish to take advantage of this would be quite unreasonable. On the other hand, to disallow females to have several male spouses or to prohibit the same with same sex couples would be discriminatory and contrary to principles of equality, so just allow it for them as well.
1288 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
A small place in...
Offline
Posted 5/25/10

DomFortress wrote:


cinderella933 wrote:

i dont think so. sometimes it has to consider moral and other ethics
The Islamic faith has no such moral dilemma, when the Muslim society encourages the women to stay home and don't work for a living via acid burning. True story, BTW.


Allhailodin wrote:

Well why can't the other spouses go get a job ? Why does the man have to solely provide for everyone ? If the other wives go a job, money isn't an issue. Then it should be fine.
Agree, when financial stability is genderless by making job offers to all genders, there's no reason that a woman needs a man other than for emotional and moral support in a relationship. And that should go both ways.

Therefore it's mathematically impossible to sustain a polygamous relationship while abolish homosexuality in a society, especially when some societies don't even allow the women to get a job and earn a living.

I am not sure whether the issue of acid burning encouraged by Islamic faith is true, I highly doubt it. From reading past newspaper articles, this generally happens due to abusive husbands and this happens to all other religions, even those who do not follow religion, so it is not really based on faith. There are unfortunately still plenty of abusive husbands and men out there in this world despite the larger role and freedom women have in society now as compared in the past ages where women were generally regarded as mere commodity.

My advise on the current topic and this is generally for men who tend to fantasize about having multiple partners. Women are shaped very differently in their thinking and they are very very possessive of their loved one. The woman may say she is ok with it or not say anything should you choose to have multiple spouses but it would take a great deal for a woman to share her love one with another woman.

Why do you think there are mistresses who wanted the husband to divorce their wife so as to marry them?
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 5/26/10

DerfelCadarn wrote:


Ryutai-Desk wrote:
Funny, the fact that more modern woman are converting to Islam today. Just try to type 'women converts' in both youtube and google. Most of the links and videos will tell us they're converting to Islam. As I've explained before many times.


I want reliable statistics from a secular, unbiased source, acknowledged by academia. That or your claim will carry no weight.


If you think youtube and google are biased media, that's okay.
8742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Scotland, Aberdeen
Offline
Posted 5/26/10 , edited 5/26/10

Northboundsnow wrote:
I am not sure whether the issue of acid burning encouraged by Islamic faith is true, I highly doubt it. From reading past newspaper articles, this generally happens due to abusive husbands and this happens to all other religions, even those who do not follow religion, so it is not really based on faith. There are unfortunately still plenty of abusive husbands and men out there in this world despite the larger role and freedom women have in society now as compared in the past ages where women were generally regarded as mere commodity.

My advise on the current topic and this is generally for men who tend to fantasize about having multiple partners. Women are shaped very differently in their thinking and they are very very possessive of their loved one. The woman may say she is ok with it or not say anything should you choose to have multiple spouses but it would take a great deal for a woman to share her love one with another woman.

Why do you think there are mistresses who wanted the husband to divorce their wife so as to marry them?


I agree that domestic abuse is by no means limited to Islam and this should be born in mind. Severe abuse and its 'practitioners' are in the minority and religion is not the cause in triggering severe abuse but may be a cause, one of the many. I simply cannot think of a religion that would provide that 'Thou shalt liquefy thine companion's countenance!' What I would blame for the abuse some women have to put up with is a very old aspect of manliness stemming for tribal, patriarchal values. The macho man stereotype, in other words. The tribal morality of the common man that still survived somehow, hiding behind societal values and the consensus of the average and common people. It is this ignorant tribal thinking from the days of yore that still guides men in certain aspects of their behaviour. It would be difficult to deny that men easily succumb to emotions that drive them to alter the existing state of affairs. Most have the willpower, the intellect and willingness to put a leash on their impulses, but the ignorant minority are like rabid dogs, they simply give in to their tribal selves and perpetrate all sorts of spineless act without self-control. A minority of Muslim men in the past allowed their impulses to take over and decided it would be beneficial for their control over their spouses if they could rip off the Byzantine Greek and voila, thus the burka was reborn within the frame of Islam. It is this sort of thinking and behaviour that needs to be targeted, not religion. I dislike religion from the bottom of my heart, but nevertheless, I cannot deny that religion need not be oppressive towards women and most religious men ought not to be severely abusive husbands if they follow the teachings of their religion. Again, I am talking about major sects here, not small offshot cults.

As for the views of women on having to 'contend' with other women for their husbands: well, that should be no impediment. If there is a willingness to contend and consent freely given that will continue into the marriage arrangements and remain voluntary consent to them, then that should suffice. I would be unwilling to contend for a spouse with my current mind and so I would not become part of such an arrangement if my hypothetical spouse wanted additional men in the marriage arrangement, but if I was an entirely different person and weighing the merits and demerits I would arrive at the conclusion that such a polygamous arrangement is beneficial from my perspective, why should I be denied the right to enter into the type of marriage in question? Parties should not be allowed to take unfair advantage of each other, but a small advantage, especially if wilfully provided, is hardly unfair.


Ryutai-Desk wrote:
If you think youtube and google are biased media, that's okay.


Youtube and Google are not academic sources. They may provide a path to academic and reliable sources, but telling me to Google the sources in question is tantamount to not providing any justification for your claims. You are making the claims and it is your duty to disclose the specific sources. If you cannot or will not do that, I won't be doing it for you, I can't be expected to argue against myself.

As for Youtube, no, I don't want to watch a video. I want a written source, nicely laid out, the way you would construct an academic paper. I don't want to listen to 10 minutes of emotional propaganda rubbish with cheesy traditional music when I could read about the proposition it puts forward in a paragraph in 2 minutes.

Google indexes sites nearly indiscriminately and Youtube is entirely user submission based. If you think they're not biased or that these sources are in any way authoritative, you are wrong.
1288 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
A small place in...
Offline
Posted 5/26/10

DerfelCadarn wrote:


Northboundsnow wrote:



I agree that domestic abuse is by no means limited to Islam and this should be born in mind. Severe abuse and its 'practitioners' are in the minority and religion is not the cause in triggering severe abuse but may be a cause, one of the many. I simply cannot think of a religion that would provide that 'Thou shalt liquefy thine companion's countenance!' What I would blame for the abuse some women have to put up with is a very old aspect of manliness stemming for tribal, patriarchal values. The macho man stereotype, in other words. The tribal morality of the common man that still survived somehow, hiding behind societal values and the consensus of the average and common people. It is this ignorant tribal thinking from the days of yore that still guides men in certain aspects of their behaviour. It would be difficult to deny that men easily succumb to emotions that drive them to alter the existing state of affairs. Most have the willpower, the intellect and willingness to put a leash on their impulses, but the ignorant minority are like rabid dogs, they simply give in to their tribal selves and perpetrate all sorts of spineless act without self-control. A minority of Muslim men in the past allowed their impulses to take over and decided it would be beneficial for their control over their spouses if they could rip off the Byzantine Greek and voila, thus the burka was reborn within the frame of Islam. It is this sort of thinking and behaviour that needs to be targeted, not religion. I dislike religion from the bottom of my heart, but nevertheless, I cannot deny that religion need not be oppressive towards women and most religious men ought not to be severely abusive husbands if they follow the teachings of their religion. Again, I am talking about major sects here, not small offshot cults.

As for the views of women on having to 'contend' with other women for their husbands: well, that should be no impediment. If there is a willingness to contend and consent freely given that will continue into the marriage arrangements and remain voluntary consent to them, then that should suffice. I would be unwilling to contend for a spouse with my current mind and so I would not become part of such an arrangement if my hypothetical spouse wanted additional men in the marriage arrangement, but if I was an entirely different person and weighing the merits and demerits I would arrive at the conclusion that such a polygamous arrangement is beneficial from my perspective, why should I be denied the right to enter into the type of marriage in question? Parties should not be allowed to take unfair advantage of each other, but a small advantage, especially if wilfully provided, is hardly unfair.



I be lying if I didn't say it but I really enjoy reading your last post especially about the part "the ignorant minority are like rabid dogs, they simply give in to their tribal selves and perpetrate all sorts of spineless act without self-control". What can i say, I am in agreement to almost everything you say and I think my past post and your post are similar.

Regarding the issue of the Burqa, though I probably know very little about this, but from what I gather from asking my friends and reading, in the past. the Burqa was regarded a symbol of respectability and that peasant women do not even wear burqa. Now the symbol of the Burqa is a different thing altogether, a symbol of oppression of women yet you be surprised to know that the most staunchest defenders of the Burqa are actually women themselves.

If you are reading my past post, you realize that I actually deviated from the topic being discussed which was about financial ability to support multiple spouses, but I believe its a fair advice to give. When it comes to love. women and even some men, things become irrational, marrying many spouses takes out a lot from the woman. While we may think rationally and logically that with the financial means, thus we are able to support multiple spouses, but ultimately its up to both partners to agree to have multiple spouses. While its nice that everyone is thinking rationally and logically regarding the issue of multiple spouses but love is not a rational and logical thing. After all. its irrational that sometimes we see the smartest and most sensible of women marry some of the most rabid of men, that when they should have know better, they continue on inside a destructive marriage sometimes choosing to shield their destructive husbands. When it comes to love or multiple spouses what may seem ok when we think logically but is irrational.

There are special circumstances which I am not too critical towards multiple spouses, the issue of arranged or forced marriage but allowing another marriage for a true love and for women who are unable to give birth with consideration to adoption and surgery options. Also remember that marriage to one party or even to multiple parties is a lifelong commitment to one another and should never be taken lightly.
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.