You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘wives’ tag.

I think a man, when courting a woman, should prove that he is financially able to provide for her to some extent, if she should warrant that.
I think that should happen in all relationship dynamics. This isn’t being a gold digger — it doesn’t mean she’s asking for riches and big houses and luxury items.
Men are the providers. They provide. They go out, they face the outside world, they do the hard things it takes to bring wealth to the family.
Why is he not supposed to prove that to a woman he’s trying to bring in as a wife? Why should that woman just “trust” that he’s got it all together? Because he MIGHT NOT.
I see men asking “What does she bring in, other than her vagina?”
-_- That certainly belittles what a woman typically brings in.
No one’s going to like what I’m saying on this.
But I’ve said it before.
Wives are luxury items.
Not every man deserves a wife if he can’t take care of one.
Think of wives as luxury items. She’s gonna come in, she’s going to be pretty to you, she’s gonna smell good, she’s gonna be soft, she’s gonna be sweet. You’re going to want her softness and you’re going to want to smell her, you’re going to want her companionship, her sensuality. She’ll clean, she’ll cook, she’ll mother and nurture your children. She’ll nurse all of you when you’re sick.
And yes, she comes with a vagina.
Wives — good ones — are luxury items.
Don’t belittle that position. And don’t think you just deserve one just because you want one. Don’t think she just has to take your word for it that you can provide well for her. SHE DONT KNOW YOU and wont know you until she’s apart of your household, monogamous OR polygynous.
You want her to do her job and prove she can do it? Fine.
But you do your job and prove you can do it, too.
And don’t give me all that “I can cook for myself and nurse myself” Nonsense. Alot of women can change their own flat tires and fix the leak under the sink these days, too.
But it’s SOOOO much nicer when you have a woman that can cook and nurse you; just as it’s soooo much nicer when a woman can depend on a man to fix her flat, change her oil, and get that leak under the sink.

(This is all in the traditional sense of man and woman and their stations — if you’re not into that, ignore me)

Our businesses have us parents (mommies and daddy) working almost around the clock — my co works at the store most days, and I work from home for my husband’s company. Before the summer came, I was still trying to homeschool AND do the work the company required, but I became overwhelmed. My husband’s suggestion was to let the children have summer break — “Other kids break for the summer; they can, too.” So we did that. Now summer’s done for public school children, but I still have the same workload I had before.
But today, I just had enough. I MISS MY KIDS. I miss educating them, I miss talking to them about fundamental things. This summer we’ve had a blurb here and there — we’re an education-on-demand kind of family, so if a child asks an educational question, we stop everything, look it up, and discuss it. But I miss having that carved out time to our day.
So I forced myself to carve out some time — even though I was stopping to take phone calls, work on spreadsheets, and send and receive important emails. I was happy to find that the remembered pretty much everything from where we left off — that made ME happy, it means to ME at least that I’m doing a good job.
You want to open a business in order to generate income to make it easier for your family, you want to open a business in order to give you more time with your family, you want to open a business in order to leave a legacy of some sort to your children — but that business has to be BUILT.
My sister in law is coming on board to assist with husband’s company — that will free me up slightly but it will probably be another month after she comes on before she is acclimated and I can fully step away from the portion she’ll be taking over. I expect that. But after THAT, I expect to be able to give homeschooling more time — we can unschool, and that’s okay, but I’ve never wanted to fully unschool. I believe little structuring and guidance is needed.

That’s all I wanted. We’re so very busy around here! *I* think we’re pretty much a blended family. We’re getting there. Nobody’s perfect around here! But we’re striving to become one unit. That requires patience on one part, and discipline on the other. It also requires us to WANT for that to happen.

She (my co-wife/sister-wife) is probably my best friend right now. I have my best friends but we’re all so busy and our lives aren’t exactly looking the same these days, so we don’t talk often, although we love each other very much. But she and I are living the same life, pretty much, everything we have and everything we are is intertwined, because we are loving the same husband.
She’s actually under the weather today (VERY — she threw up a few times this morning and NO IT’S NOT MORNING SICKNESS, it’s a bug because the kids have all had some form of it in the last couple of weeks). I’m not a doter, I’m not a helicopter type of person, but I’m trying to make sure she’s hydrated, and make sure she’s okay to go to the store. She went to the store, but I was willing to go, AND take my laptop with me to work from there, if I needed to.

Okay it took me all day to type this up because I’m so busy so let me get back to it! I gotta find out the dates for Yom Teruah and Yom Kippur!! I hope I’m not too late…

Blessings!

Sometimes in polygyny you hear of the initial couple having a “fail-safe” of sorts, where, should any feelings change about this lifestyle at some point in the future, they will revert back to their monogamous relationship. The fail-safe is made due to the fact that the couple in question is knowingly getting into uncharted territory, and are unsure as to whether or not they’ll like it once they get in it — so they are attmepting to reserve the right to stop it and revert to monogamy simply based on if polygyny becomes emotionally stressful on them.
Sometimes this reversion happens when the couple is about to add or has added another wife to the family. This fail-safe, when enacted, has the potential to leave the subsequent wives/wives-to-be SOL. It doesn’t hinge on whether or not the subsequent wife has done anything wrong — it hinges on the feelings and desires of the initial COUPLE (which isn’t always based on reason and logic). This fail-safe indicates that the relationship between the husband and the initial wife is the most important, and that the relationships between the husband and any other subsequent wives is less important.

“Couple’s privilege” is something the polygynous world has yet to define. Polyamory/Non-monogamy/open-relationships have already established this as a “thing” that is in existence in some situations.

Let’s look at the definition from “those people” (lol) and convert it to relate to us polygynous folk, shall we?
Because it’s here, already. Whether explicit or implicit — it’s already here and for some of us seeking polygynous relationships, it is an active part of these relationships.

This is the base definition from this blogger “Solopoly.net” — Couple’s Privilege is “The presumption that socially sanctioned pair-bond relationships involving only two people (such as marriage, long-term boyfriend/girlfriend, or other forms of conventional intimate/life partnerships) are inherently more important, “real” and valid than other types of intimate, romantic or sexual relationships.” (http://solopoly.net/2013/02/05/couple-privilege-having-it-doesnt-necessarily-make-you-an-asshole-but-it-can/)

… “couple’s privilege” runs rampant in our “first-generation polygyny” community. Those of us that were not raised around polygyny, but are accepting of it or want it for ourselves, see this exhibited in our circles all the time — women who thought they were wives are kicked out because the first wife as pulled out her couple’s privilege card at some point during the family’s polygynous journey, and the husband has responded and has asked the other wives leave. Or a sister is being courted seriously by the husband in a family, then the husband cuts it off because — no matter how he likes her — the existing wife has pulled out her card, woman-be-damned.
And OFTEN, the existing wife doesn’t feel WRONG, the husband doesn’t check her in her wrongness, and a wife/potential wife is left out there like — what happened, who did it, and why.
Subsequent wives/potentials are expected to UNDERSTAND why this would happen, and are made to feel as if they are in the wrong for feeling hurt and betrayed (OFTEN by a man who’d said he LOVED her…).

The existing wife sometimes uses this privilege as leverage in the selecting of other wives, using it as a tool that allows HER to decide which woman she’s going to “let” into “her” family.
What she’s actually doing is leveraging someone ELSE’S marriage, whereas her own was never done like that — no one was there to successfully change the husband’s mind on the existing wife’s marriage to him, based on “feelings” and “emotions”.

How, then, can the incoming women be sure that this will never happen to them? Can she ask if the couple has this fail-safe in the deck for a J.I.C. (just in case) situation BEFORE she gets in deep with them? And will the couple be HONEST about having such a thing?
Because to have that sort of agreement does not benefit an incoming wife and her security in HER relationship with this man, or her position in the family, AT ALL.
It’s unfair. Subsequent wives/potentials are asked to consider the existing wife’s stance, when the other woman’s/women’s stance needs to be considered as well.
It’s like everyone initially seems kind and good and loving and selfless —
— until the situation gets a little uncomfortable —
— then people find they aren’t so kind.
They are not so selfless.

This should be discussed! Is it EVER a good thing?

"Hm...now that he's all up on her, I'm a tad uncomfortable...ah-heh..."

“Hm…now that he’s all up on her, I’m a tad uncomfortable…ah-heh…”

‘I Would Never…Go Back to Being a Monogamous Wife’
Polygamous women speak out in defense of their lifestyle.

In April 2000, the authors contacted more than 700 plural wives, asking them about their experience. They were promised anonymity because it is against the law and currently being prosecuted in Utah. Within six weeks, they received more than 100 responses. The comments were reprinted, organized according to the age of the respondent. Here is one from RS, a woman between 41 and 50 years old.

“I would never ever, worlds without end, even if I could control all events, willingly go back to being a monogamous wife. Even if I were to discount the possibility of eternal blessings, the blessings I enjoy here in this sphere are enough to cause me to become a she-bear when someone threatens them.

“As the only wife of a good man, I had a good marriage. We got along well, and our children were emotionally healthy. But at times I felt an unspoken demand to be all things to my husband: a great cook, an organized housekeeper, an inspired home-schooler and an individual who kept up with current events, pursued her talents, never fatigued, always remembered details, kept the family social calendar, emptied the mending and ironing baskets daily, never overspent, looked appealing at all times and looked forward anxiously for the moment he walked in the door. I tried to be all things, and my husband told me constantly that I was loved and appreciated. But I worried privately that my lapses stood out more vividly than my achievements.

“After a second wife entered the family, I saw my husband’s eyes full of new respect and approval as he looked at me. This approval came NOT from my willingness to let him have another wife, but from his deepened comprehension of who I was as a woman, what strengths and gifts I had that were not an automatic part of simply being female genetically but were uniquely mine. Suddenly, I was seen as I had always wanted to be seen.

“Our relationship improved in other ways. Simultaneously with the second marriage, we had to revamp the way we spent our time together. I couldn’t be more cheerful tomorrow after a good night’s sleep because tomorrow he’d be elsewhere. He could’t vegetate in front of the TV tonight and spend time with the kids tomorrow because tomorrow there would be different kids. We couldn’t make tomorrow special as we were too busy today, since tomorrow wouldn’t be there for us. So we instantly found ourselves putting aside less important things to make time for the more important.

“Then there were the nights he was gone. At first I felt socially embarrassed trying to make new friends and having a “single’s” social life; but as I did, I found myself feeling more connected to all of God’s people on this earth than I ever had. I found that I hadn’t become a part-time wife, I had become a full-time human being.

“For years I prayed to know true joy, to have my marriage become the one I had dreamed of in my youth, and to understand myself and my place here among humanity. I would never have believed, had someone told me, that all my answered prayers would be wrapped up in one gift called plural marriage, but indeed they were. When I hear threats of our way of life being driven out of existence, the grief twists inside me. Please, please, don’t try to take away the thing that has made my life whole!

“I have no confidence that were I to be my husband’s only wife again, that the lessons learned here in plural marriage could successfully be applied in a monogamous relationship. I have the marriage of my dreams (No, that’s not true because I have never dreamed it would be this good) and two sweetheart sister wives who are my best friends and who sacrifice so that I might have happiness. So, my friend, this is no pretense. This principle is my happiness.”

Read more at: ‘I Would Never…Go Back to Being a Monogamous Wife’

arranged marriage

Wikipedia definition: Arranged marriage is a type of marital union where the bride and groom are selected by a third party rather than by each other. It was common worldwide until the 18th century.
In a society where divorces and affairs are common strains in life —
— where people are left to choose their own spouses for themselves, for “love” and “romance” —
— where people fail to do their due diligence, and investigate the person, their family, their pasts, their childhood, etc —
— sometimes we look at other societies where arranged marriages are common, and we wonder — would it be better if we did it that way?

I think arranged marriages should have their place among us.
Now — allow me to post a disclaimer — I don’t believe in forcing anything upon anyone. So no, I don’t believe in forcing people to marry. But I do believe that parents (and elders, and older family members and friends) should be able to look at an individual and assess who would be a good match for that person.

I remember, years ago, watching a documentary on arranged marriages around the world. One couple, in particular, was from a lower caste system in India. They’d been chosen for one another in childhood — maybe about age 7 or 8, and had mostly been kept from knowing or even seeing one another, until the time came for them to be married.
They were able to see each other on the day of their wedding. In the excitement, the documentary asked the young groom how he was feeling about his bride-to-be. He said, in essence “I don’t know her, but I love her. I love her, because she will be my wife. So I love her already.” He had a big smile on his face and hope in his eyes. And from that moment on, I concluded that for many of us, arranged marriage should be allowed.

Some of us don’t like our parents (and some of us, our parents don’t like us). We don’t like their ways and so we don’t want them choosing our mates. And that’s fine. I fully believe a person should be able to decline a marriage offer if they see fit — and no harm should come of it for anyone.

But for me, I mostly trust my parents, and when I was late teens-early twenties, I fully trusted them because for the most part, I was following their path, and I rarely disagreed with anything they were.

My mother had a man chosen for me — a young, black, mainstream Christian pastor. A rising star in the firmament. My mother was always good at knowing what men were best for me, even when I was dating. If she didn’t like a guy, I would drop him quickly.
She was always right about them, it would turn out. 

Had I not met my husband one day, living thousands of miles away from home, I would have given in and married the man she’d chosen. I would not have been unhappy. But it would not be the life I have now.
I’d be a super-Christian, a model first-wife, a corporate powerhouse, with children who were more than likely excelling at some school somewhere. I’d have a PERM, lol, I’d have some luxury vehicle (A Lexus, Benz, BMW), a tailored church-suit/business-suit wardrobe, heeled shoes that were not too high or too low. My nails would be done every two weeks.
I’d probably be a pastor, myself.

But I met my husband.
And I liked him.
And my parents liked him, too.
So that possible, “okay” reality went out the window, because I happened to stumble upon my husband on my own. Which, in my opinion, was pure Yahweh — pure kismet, pure The Universe doing what IT wants with you, whether or not that was your intent.
And when I compare the two realities, I like this one better. Of course.
My mind is freer and personally I feel “larger” and “more grand” than I would be, had I not chosen to respond to that young man that day in the snow.
To me, today — that other, “okay” life — is REALLY a life of pretentiousness…

I plan to do a level of arranged marriage with our children — I want them to meet people that are similar to them — have similar lifestyles and backgrounds, hopefully from happily married households where the children see both husband and wife/wives, father and mother/mothers and how they relate to each other. I want them to meet young people from families that don’t eat pork, or don’t eat meat.
I plan to mold them into good mates, and to guide them on how to choose a good mate (because, as I said, the final choice will be up to them).

 

wife
/wīf/
noun
noun: wife; plural noun: wives
  1. a married woman considered in relation to her spouse.

In Hebrew, the word “isha/ishah” means both woman and wife, interchangeably.

con·cu·bine
/ˈkäNGkyəˌbīn/

noun

historical
noun: concubine; plural noun: concubines
  1. (in polygamous societies) a woman who lives with a man but has lower status than his wife or wives.

Pilegesh (Hebrew: פילגש‎) is a Hebrew term for a concubine with similar social and legal standing to a recognized wife, often for the purpose of producing offspring.

Zonah(Hebrew:זונה) is a Hebrew term for a prostitute. (there is a female AND male pronunciation — FYI)

Often, Hebrew Israelite women and men are in a battle over concubinage. Men are quick to say that a woman’s virginity is a factor as to whether or not she is a wife or a concubine. The women are made to feel shame for any past they may have; it seems that there is no area for repentance and teshuvah in this topic.
Many who are Hebrew Israelites now were not always awake to who they were. They were born and raised Christian or something else. They lived their lives however they saw fit , and then found out they were Hebrew. Then they turned away from their old ways, striving for righteousness.
But often, a woman is told that, if she is not a virgin when she marries, then she is not a wife — she is a concubine.
When you ask what a concubine is, you may receive a variety of answers — a concubine is a slave-wife, a concubine is a woman who is not a virgin, a concubine is a wife without covenant, a concubine is a girlfriend, a concubine is a woman who has children from another relationship, a concubine is a woman that’s not good enough to be a wife but you still want to bed her.
Whatever the case may be, there is scriptural evidence implying some of these. Others are simply personal opinions of the masses often accepted as fact.

Concubine as a slave-wife: Often in scripture we see a slave girl being taken and lain with, and children are made from that woman. A slave has no choice to consent to or decline to do what is their master’s wish — if a man had a slave girl, and he wanted to lay with her, he could and she would become his concubine. If a woman had a slave girl and she wanted her husband to lay with her, he could and she would become his concubine.
Female slaves were given over to any man to whom her master wished to gift her.
Slavery is not legally done today, so this idea is archaic among us, at best.
(A female slave can become a concubine, but being a concubine does NOT mean you are suddenly a slave! We are all to be dutiful servants of our husbands if we observe the Torah or the Quran, but you are NOT a slave. Even queens were servants to their kings.)
Concubine as a non-virgin: You will hear that a woman who is a non-virgin is only able to receive concubine status with her husband, and not full-wife status (thereby conversely saying that virgins get full-wife status). You will hear many reasons why — some will say if a woman had sex with a man and lost her virginity, then she is THAT man’s wife. The reasoning behind this is because to many Israelites, sex equals marriage. They will pull out verses to support this claim. But they are neglecting other verses on the matter — while sex is needed to complete the marriage “ceremony”, you also need an agreement between parties that this is what you will be to each other, and you need witnesses to the agreement. When a man took an unmarried/unbetrothed Daughter of Israel in a field, he had to pay her father the bride price and basically complete the ceremony. If not, he was seen as having defiled her and messed with her status in society. Sex is not ALL you need to do to be considered a wife.
So think about people’s younger sexual conquests — no, sisters, you are not married to those men if there was no agreement with them that that is what you were doing. No, brethren, you are NOT married to those women if there was no agreement with them that that is what you were doing. (and you know that was not the agreement you had with those people — outside of the righteous Hebraic construct, many things occur and sexual promiscuity is had by both genders.)
Let me point out some non-virginal women in scripture that, when married, were described as wives and not concubines (because scripture is very explicit in titles — what’s there is there and what isn’t there can only be speculated on) —
Ruth (Book of Ruth — widowed; she becomes a wife of Boaz in the end)
Abigail (1 Samuel 25 — widowed; becomes a wife of King David)
Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11)
Bathsheba is a particularly interesting case — while being married to Uriah, Bathsheba committed adultery with King David, which is a sinful act, and became pregnant. Then David had Uriah killed so that he could have Bathsheba as his wife. Never was Bathsheba referred to as his concubine. …and scripture was very clear as to who was concubine and who was not.

Concubine as a wife without covenant:The Babylonian Talmud (the Talmud being a Jewish book that doesn’t hold any one rule for or against anything, and is largely a book of debate and opinion) states that a concubine is a wife without covenant: (from Wikipedia:)”the difference between a pilegesh and a full wife was that the latter received a marriage contract (Hebrew:ketubah) and her marriage (nissu’in) was preceded by a formal betrothal (“kiddushin”), which was not the case with the former. According to R. Judah, however, the pilegesh should also receive a marriage contract, but without including a clause specifying a divorce settlement. (this final line I can agree with — I believe people should understand the nature of their relationship and that things should be clear and concise to the point that it could be written out and both parties would be in agreement on what’s written on that paper)

Concubine as a woman who has children from another relationship: This belief has no foundation in scripture. I can’t find evidence anywhere — a woman who was a widow and had children could be made a full-wife to a man if he wished it.
Kohanim have restrictions on who they can and can’t marry, but not every man is a priest. If you are a Kohan/Cohen, you should be fully aware on your marital restrictions according to Torah, and you should abide by them. A Kohan cannot marry a zonah or a divorced woman (Lev. 21:7) and a kohan gadol (A HIGH priest) cannot marry a widow, a divorced woman, a zonah, a non-Hebrew or converted woman, OR a non-virgin (Lev. 21:13-15). Notice there’s a difference between a priest and a HIGH priest — not every priest is a high priest (the rules in this chapter for the high priest begins at verse 10).

As I mentioned earlier, scripture is very clear on what women were concubines or not. It did not hinge on whether or not that woman was a virgin, it hinges on what that woman’s agreement was with that man. The Most High never frowned on a woman being a wife OR a concubine. And in Hebraic society, being a concubine was NOT seen as a bad thing — she was a wife, she respected and submitted to her man as her husband and her head.
What a woman must do is make sure she understands the relationship she has with her man. I am big on things being clear and concise — I don’t like to be confused as to what we are to each other. I think a woman should request clarity and transparency, and if she agrees with the terms of that relationship, those two are able to do whatever it is they chose per that agreement according to Torah. (of course there are prohibited marriages, but the only one that hinges on a woman’s virginity is that to a Kohan gadol)

KNOW YOUR TORAH IF YOU’RE GOING TO LIVE BY IT, AND YOU WON’T EVER BE DECEIVED.

Women have a big problem with submission. Alot of the time they don’t want it brought up; they’re immediately defensive off the bat when the subject is broached.
I keep wondering what the big deal is. I know someone likes to walk around the world and call me “ultra-submissive” (which is funny because on one side that’s what she said, while on the other side, she said my husband was just a working bee and I’m ruling him, lol — so which one is it? Then on the OTHER hand she wants to write me and tell me how much she LEARNED from me on how to deal with the husband she has now…Which one is it, exactly? Which one am I? Whatever MOVING ON I just think it’s funny), but I think people’s ideas on what submission is and what it looks like differs depending on the person.
Here’s how I am — I don’t argue with my husband on petty stuff.
If he has a problem with what I have on, I MAY grumble, yes — but I go and I change what I have on. It’s not a big deal, and I have other clothes. I’d rather be attractive to him (if that’s the reason) than him find me unattractive. And to say I don’t CARE about being attractive to him — then who do I care about being attractive to? (Note: It should either be HIM or YOURSELF but of course it should not matter whether or not people outside of your union find you attractive)
So I don’t care to argue about the little stuff.

When it comes to cooking and cleaning — I was a stay at home mom/housewife for 6 years. The house was my domain. I cooked every meal, more or less. Every day, 3 times a day, for 6 years. Meanwhile my husband went out of the house to work. His work has always been physical work (and I LIKE that — I just don’t like pencil-pushers, cubicle guys. ugh), and he always had long days at work.
I never asked him to help me around the house. There was NO WAY I’d ask, unless I was at my wits’ end and was about to be overwhelmed. But majority of the time, I did not ask him to participate in housework in the house. Still, when he came home, he didn’t just take off his work clothes and sit on the couch with a beer, watching sports. No — when he came home, he got on “men’s” housework — mowing lawns, washing cars, cleaning up the back yard, cutting our sons’ hair, fixing leaks, mending holes, building things for the kids, putting together bikes, changing breaks, changing oil on cars — you name it. He would do it. He’d use up all his daylight hours doing these things.
So yeah, there was NO WAY I was going to ask him to lift a FINGER helping me with my duties as a wife.
That all may look “ultra-submissive” to you, but I just find it rude and insensitive to ask a person that’s been working all day to help in that.

I rarely tell him no on anything he wants. Why should I? The man works hard, makes his money — he should be allowed to do with it whatever he likes. He’s not unreasonable in his wants; why can’t I let him do whatever he wants on that? When he wanted a motorcycle, so many of his friends said their wives had ALWAYS said no to that. Family members TOLD me I should put my foot down and tell him no. Why?? For what??? Because he could DIE?? Well — MAYBE, he might have crashed and died, perhaps, but he would have died doing something he’d WANTED to do! It’s not a crime to have a bike, and many people have had bikes their entire lives and have survived it. I had no interest in telling him no on that or anything else.
No, CONVERSELY, he may tell ME no — but I know myself — compared to alot of people I’m VERY reasonable and logical, but SOMETIMES I’m just not reasonable in my wants. And it makes sense to me.

I pretty much do what he wants me to do. Why not? He’s not asking me to do anything evil or wicked. He’s not asking me to rob people, he’s not asking me to leave my kids outside in the cold or let them starve. He’s not telling me to do crack. I married a man whose family’s best interest is at the forefront of everything he does. I married a man who’s track record for what accomplishing what he needed to accomplish to be what and where he wanted to be at life is 100%. My point: I can TRUST him to lead me well. He won’t let me fall. He won’t cause me to hurt or do wrong. I have no idea why I’m supposed to not do what he says. He’s not going to cause me to die from doing what he’s asked me to do.

I really think… women’s lack of submission is ludicrous. All throughout history, whether the beliefsystem was Abrahamic or Eastern and polytheist etc etc, men have been heads of households. I OVERstand the fact that women have often been oppressed throughout the history of the human world, and have been treated as cattle. I get it.
But today, in an age and in a country where women DO have choices as to what they can do and what they can do, they have rights to all levels of education, and all fields of employment — what’s so hard about finding a man you can trust that will allow you to have your careers, if that’s what you want, and allow you to reach your levels of education, if that’s what you want? And let him lead?
If you married a man who won’t let you do what you like about these things (and you yourself are not being unreasonable in wanting whatever it is you want), why did you marry that man?
If you married a man that can’t be trusted to handle the finances properly, why’d you marry him?
If you married a man that can’t be trusted to make smart life decisions that benefit your family WITHOUT your input (and even WITH your input), why’d you marry him?
Why marry a man who has different ideas of his goals or successes than you?
You don’t do that.

When a man is trying is damnedest to lead his household and you keep bucking and saying no for no reasonable cause, it’s you who are the problem, not him. You calling him aggressive or controlling, when he’s simply doing his job as a man who wants inherently to be the head of his household — that’s you being the problem. If he hasn’t told you to do bad things, painful things, evil things, and you just bucking for the sake of bucking… you’re the problem.
He’s being a MAN. A REAL man. And men, at many different levels of class, economics and education, are going to want to head up their households however they see fit.
If you don’t like the way that man heads his household, or the direction he’s trying to go — then dont do it. You’re only going to cause everyone pain because to be honest, that’s not what you want. Find a man that wants what YOU want, and is going where you’d like to go. And be happy.

But men are men and that’s how men are.

…I have tried to write this for a month now. Here it is. (I have so many other drafts that I think are boring)

Going through some old posts written by my husband, and felt they were worthy of being put in the blog.
They were to a much smaller audience, and while it does mention some people by name, if you don’t know their last names, you have no idea who they are, so… hakuna matata.
…at the request of an interested sister…

Enjoy!
DreamGyrl360

The basis for my argument in the discussion that went south-

By now most of you have realized who my wife’s alter ego is. You won’t believe the amount of emails she receives from (mostly) women seeking advice in their disastrous poly relationships. Many (not most) are subsequent wives who are being ill-treated and abused by the 1st..under the guise of “showing respect to those before you”. We’ve seen that too many times. Men, it is absolutely unfair to any woman for you to woo her into a relationship with you, have her expecting the securities of a MAN in her life, and then subject her to the emotional whims of your current wife/wives. No woman wants to be dominated by another woman, just as no man wants to be dominated by another man.

We call this the “boss wife” syndrome, and you won’t believe how prevalent it is in Western polygyny. It happens when the man is dominated by his wife in (at least) the decision-making aspect of their monogamous relationship, whether she does it profoundly or via a stress-inducing series of complaints (nagging). Like all decisions (which she’s already accustomed to making), she dominates the courtship of the potential. This manifests a dynamic in which the 1st profoundly dominates the subsequent wives throughout the relationship. When a woman decides to place herself under the authority and leadership of a man, in order to reap the benefits therein, she is not expecting to nor does she want to deal with his woman on that level. If she did, she would go after a butch.

When discussing “proper structure”, we have to analyze the practical science of it, which is embedded in its definition. Polygyny is not a woman allowing her husband to take on a second wife. It is a man engaging in the social institution of marriage (whether state sanctioned or not) with multiple women. When discussing the “primary” entity in the agreement, we go deeper into the practical science and analyze the predominating element… the most necessary element- THE MAN HAS TO BE CAPABLE OF IT! Therefore it is the man who is primary in the arrangement and he should have the reins all the way through. For harmonious polygyny to work, each woman needs to have a personal relationship with the man, which is independent of the other relationship dynamics in the mix. And it should not be driven by another wife from the back seat. However, because of the conditioning of us (against it, in the west), the catalyst for harmonious polygyny is the ability of the women to get along. But still, a poly man — a REAL poly man — would be able to take care of that.

A healthy transition from monogamy to polygyny begins with the monogamous household being in the right order. That order begins with the man being a man as a man should, and not his wife’s bitch. He has to fully assume the HOH (Head of Household) rank, which is being the ultimate (but not absolute) authority under his roof. If not, the subsequent wives will never be fulfilled in the social purpose of polygyny, or worse – deal with the mess that Lily spoke of earlier, that so many others have had to deal with. Like Donald stated, it is the man’s role to balance and guide. He should know what is best for his family, and if he doesn’t, then he has not fully assumed the HOH rank. And when choosing a subsequent, he should hold the authority of that decision, just as he had with the first. It is his wife, not hers, as Yolanda mentioned earlier. We live in a world where spouses choose each other and this has become one of the cornerstones for spousal relationships in this day and age. To propose otherwise, in order to satisfy the current wife’s selfishness, reeks of feminism.

Every single scenario that was brought up to support the opposing argument was due to a household not being in the right order. Folks have lived so long in Babylon, with their way of thinking perverted with the methods of their conquerors, that their perception of what is “proper structure” and the “right order” has long been twisted. The purpose of polygyny, as it was sanctioned in every society of civilized man, both past and present, was not to allow a wife to have another woman to share wifely duties with. Neither is it to allow a man to have multiple women. It has always been to allow every woman the opportunity to have the securities and comforts which comes from having a responsible man in their life.

Sisters

I already said on my facebook fanpage that the experience of first wives will not be the same as the experience of second wives, and neither of the two will share the same experience as the third wife. Wives coming in after #3 tend to share similar experiences, and the FINAL wife will have her own experience.
In order for Wife-to-wife (W2W) interactions to be positive, all of the wives must understand that they aren’t having the same experience, and they should TRY to put themselves in the other wifes’ shoes and think of the type of behavior THEY would like out of someone in their place.
It’s called empathy. A level of understanding between two people.
Alot of the time that’s where the issues come in. We come into these relationships (and it happens in monogamy all the time!) and we want to continue to be an individual, dwelling in the same time and space as another individual or set of individuals.
So when it comes to benefiting the unit, we are mainly focused on self and what WE are getting from the unit, and not on what others aren’t getting.

First wives have to remember that a new wife coming in is going to need to be able to create her own place in the family. That means you can’t expect them to come in and be EXACTLY how *you’d* planned for them to be. No — you HAVE to make allowances for her to have her own flavor, do things her own way. You have to be flexible to change…because adding someone to a family is a BIG change no matter HOW that person is added.
(Women that can’t do this probably need their own house/space)
The second wife is the first wife to be added to the already-existing unit. She’s like a guinea pig (UNFORTUNATELY and for lack of a better word at this moment, lol). It’s almost guaranteed that MOST mistakes will be made here, by all parties involved. This is the first time there were two wives, this is the first time the husband has had two wives. Often this is the first time the two women have openly “shared” the same man (hate that term), and so the entire thing is very new and very different for everyone involved. This wife has to remember that the existing wife is opening up her family and possibly her home to her. She should show herself to be a friend to the existing wife, by seeing the needs of the existing unit, and helping in whatever capacity she can.

After the second wife, every wife added on after her tends to have it easier (I’m going off of what I HEAR from a NUMBER of polygynous families from ALL walks of life — Islam, Hebrew Israelites, Mormons, pagans, Christians, etc. what I’m saying is almost universal here if people are doing their best to be “good” people, which the AVERAGE person is trying to be).
There ARE times where a family adds on alot of wives in a short time-period. This is a significantly harder situation — the kinks will not have been ironed out, lol, and so all these people are coming in without a solid base to hold on to…

All should understand that insecurities and sometimes even ugly, ugly jealousies may come up. It may all be misunderstandings, but that’s what communication is for.
I’m a strong believer in communicating; all of the relationships that do well have immense communication, truth and honesty. So even when it comes to these W2W issues, it’s fruitful to address it as soon as possible. It is WRONG to let things fester if they are in ANY way going to affect your interactions with each other, or by extension, the unit itself.

Every wife has to understand that other wives are not going to be cardboard cut-outs with no personality and no “ways” to contend with. They aren’t going to be how you are about things and they aren’t going to handle things the way you do. They are flesh and blood human beings, just like you, who, for the most part (– and I say that because there are WICKED people in this world and if you haven’t learned THAT while following this blog I’onno what else to tell you) deserve a peaceful, loving and happy home, where they are allowed to bring their characteristics to the table to blend in and mix with the other family members, to create something beautiful and successful.
This is why the title of that book is SO poignant — ‘We Want for Our Sisters what We Want for Ourselves’.
That’s so very important in polygyny.
If you don’t keep that phrase in the forefront of your mind doing this, problems will rear their ugly heads everywhere.

I had something written. Then I deleted it.
I don’t want to talk about that.

And THEN I wrote something ELSE. And deleted that, too.

I’m reading Octavia E. Butler this week. I’ve read quite a few of her books, but I took the kids to the library for the first time in a couple of YEARS a couple of Saturdays ago, and my library actually had her books (if you can believe it — my neighborhood isn’t the best place but it ain’t the worst, either).
I saw Parable of the Talents, but knew in order to read Talents, you gotta read Parable of the Sower, first. So I timidly asked the guy at the counter if they still ordered books from other libraries — he said sure and I gave him the name and they ordered it — in a couple of days they called me and I went and picked it up.
I like it.
I didn’t know it was sooo dystopian. Dystopian-survivalism, I like that genre of everything. Because, to be honest, I don’t see a bright future for America. I see us heading downhill — and I’m sure most of us see it.
So… it piqued my interest.
She didn’t even finish the story. You’ve got Sower, Talents, and she was supposed to do Trickster, but moved over to Fledgling. Boo.
Who will finish it?
Wish I cared enough to take up the torch.
I like to write.
I have books unfinished all over the place. I write fervently, chapters upon chapters, for months on end (or I used to). Then suddenly , I stop. My mind is like “Story dun!” I don’t have anymore.
So no I won’t undertake it. I’d never finish.
But it’s almost black survivalist fiction. Wow. NEEDED. MUCH needed.
I read survivalist fiction and most characters are white Republicans who, as luck would find it, have all the skills they need for surviving the Pockyclips and living on from generation until generation, forever and ever, Amen.
And that’s bull. It’s not going to be THAT perfect and predictable.
There’s more I want to say but I can’t put it into words.
I want to do a video. Because there’s more I Want to say on this subject.
…but people DIE in Butler’s books. Characters that you’ve become fond of, on some level. They die on you. They are killed. They make mistakes and are raped and beaten, murdered and burned, their charred bodies etched in your mind long after you’ve finished the book and wakened back into reality.
And that’s how reality is. People die and are killed. People DONT have everything together and have all that they need to survive.
There’s ALWAYS something more needed.

…and to make this about polygyny, wives are great preps. Groups of adults bound to a family unit work very well together. The more there are, the greater the chance that “The Family” will survive.

AIIGHT AIIGHT I’m done. *pushes keyboard off desk*
Peace, y’all.