There were more Males than Females.

[_Jason Bourne]

It REALLY frustrates me when guys seem to somehow think women would be fine without sex, or with maybe sex one a month or whatever. AARRGHHH.

Guys that continually discuss how wonderful polygamy would be seem TOTALLY unconcerned with women, their needs, desires, or cares. (Yeah, I think this is largely because this is taught).

The reality is women can enjoy sex much more frequently than men.

If one wants to use nature to prove something it would be that WOMEN have evolved to have several partners, not men. Men are much more limited in this area. (smile)



~dancer~

Oh this is soooo true. The woman's biologocal capacity for sexual pleasure is far greater than a mans. And I think it is so unfair! :-)

[_truth dancer]

Hey Jason,

The main reason for eternal marriage in LDS eyes is it is required for exaltation. In LDS doctrine men and women must be sealed to receive God's highest reward. So if there really was an abundance of faithful women to men then that could be one reason for polygamy. The woman needed some man to be sealed to to be exalted.

I heard an interview last night discussing how in the FLDS church women and children add to the exaltation of the men... I thought I was listening to Gaz. ;-)

This is likely one reason why today a woman who is sealed then divorced is not granted a sealing cancellation until she is ready to be sealed again to another man. Maybe that sealing, even though she is divorced for this life, somehow sticks to exalt her.

Also listening to the polygamous women, one stated that she is not the wife of the father of her children, nor does she live with him (she is a polygamous wife however). So, what is the difference between this and the LDS church? Seriously what?

Also if polygamy is legalized should the Church practice it again. It sure seems like there are still more faithful single women in the Church then faithful single men.

In the same interview, a woman stated that there are not a lot of great men.

I had to shake my head... so the great men are those who sleep around? Who are unfaithful? Who don't care for their children? Who want women and children to glorify him?

It baffles me. Really it does.

~dancer~

[_Jason Bourne]

The main reason for eternal marriage in LDS eyes is it is required for exaltation. In LDS doctrine men and women must be sealed to receive God's highest reward. So if there really was an abundance of faithful women to men then that could be one reason for polygamy. The woman needed some man to be sealed to to be exalted.

I heard an interview last night discussing how in the FLDS church women and children add to the exaltation of the men... I thought I was listening to Gaz. ;-)

I listened to a Mormon Stories pod cast of a woman who is an ex Mormon polygamist but independent and not part of the FLDS or other such group. She talked about the Manifesto and how it was wrong, Adam God and how it is true as well as blood atonement. She bore a testimony about these things and wept while she did it. She sounded just like and LDS bearing testimony the first Sunday of the month in any ward anywhere.

[_guy sajer]

Hey Jason,

The main reason for eternal marriage in LDS eyes is it is required for exaltation. In LDS doctrine men and women must be sealed to receive God's highest reward. So if there really was an abundance of faithful women to men then that could be one reason for polygamy. The woman needed some man to be sealed to to be exalted.

I heard an interview last night discussing how in the FLDS church women and children add to the exaltation of the men... I thought I was listening to Gaz. ;-)

I'd like to hear one, just one, good explanation as to why polygamy is necessary for exaltation, other than something like "because God says so." For all you polygamy apologists out there, please explain this by appealing to an actual rationale.

[_guy sajer]

The main reason for eternal marriage in LDS eyes is it is required for exaltation. In LDS doctrine men and women must be sealed to receive God's highest reward. So if there really was an abundance of faithful women to men then that could be one reason for polygamy. The woman needed some man to be sealed to to be exalted.

I heard an interview last night discussing how in the FLDS church women and children add to the exaltation of the men... I thought I was listening to Gaz. ;-)

I listened to a Mormon Stories pod cast of a woman who is an ex Mormon polygamist but independent and not part of the FLDS or other such group. She talked about the Manifesto and how it was wrong, Adam God and how it is true as well as blood atonement. She bore a testimony about these things and wept while she did it. She sounded just like and LDS bearing testimony the first Sunday of the month in any ward anywhere.

Yes, but we all know that her testimony isn't as valid as the LDS testimony.

The unreliability of "spiritual witness" as an indicator of truth is so self-evident that even the smallest smidgeon of critical self-reflection should make it plain.

A question to all believers on the board, why is this lady's testimony less valid than yours?

[_Sethbag]

I'd like to hear one, just one, good explanation as to why polygamy is necessary for exaltation, other than something like "because God says so." For all you polygamy apologists out there, please explain this by appealing to an actual rationale.

With tongue firmly plantedin cheek, I think I'll do my best to offer up this rationale.

Here goes:
A man must be considerate of his wife. Being a God entails ruling over a family of billions and billions of spirit children. It would be inconsiderate of a man to impose the burden of bearing these untold billions of children on one woman, since then she'd be more like a celestial baby factory. So, in order to be more considerate of his wife, the man shares this burden out to many wives, so they each only have to serve as celestial baby factory for 1/N babies, where N is the number of wives. The more the wives, the more tender his consideration for them by lessening the burden, and the more Godly he must be to be that considerate and loving.

How'd I do?

[_truth dancer]

With tongue firmly plantedin cheek, I think I'll do my best to offer up this rationale.

Here goes:
A man must be considerate of his wife. Being a God entails ruling over a family of billions and billions of spirit children. It would be inconsiderate of a man to impose the burden of bearing these untold billions of children on one woman, since then she'd be more like a celestial baby factory. So, in order to be more considerate of his wife, the man shares this burden out to many wives, so they each only have to serve as celestial baby factory for 1/N babies, where N is the number of wives. The more the wives, the more tender his consideration for them by lessening the burden, and the more Godly he must be to be that considerate and loving.

How'd I do?

LOL....

Yep, a guys desire for a harem is all about how deeply he cares for women, and has nothing to do with his male ego, sexual desires, and need for power.

;-)

[_ajax18]

The reality is women can enjoy sex much more frequently than men.

I don't disagree with this. I just don't think women are usually as wiling to sacrifice and go out on a limb to get sex as much as men do. I think women have some sex drive, but it's not proportionately as high as their other drives as it is for men. Otherwise women would be more aggressive in finding a mate, and more willing to settle quickly to make a marriage happen.

Human culture has not been friendly to women, and the myth that women don't have sexual needs and desires is a damaging belief started by some powerful men to keep women subservient and degraded.

Can we get into the real world...

First off, I didn't say that women have no sex drive. I just said that it was less than a mans. I don't think this belief/conclusion is designed to keep women subservient to men. It's not even really a belief. It's just a fact. This fact ironically, is partly what empowers women so much in relationships.

Perhaps your views can work to make sense of the world you live in, but I lived long enough to understand my own reality.

[_truth dancer]

I don't disagree with this. I just don't think women are usually as wiling to sacrifice and go out on a limb to get sex as much as men do.

Ever wonder if the fact that throughout much of history women would be killed for sex outside their owner, may have something to do with it?

Women may be more sneaky or have less opportunity but it doesn't mean they are less sexual. Really Ajax. :-)

I think women have some sex drive, but it's not proportionately as high as their other drives as it is for men. Otherwise women would be more aggressive in finding a mate, and more willing to settle quickly to make a marriage happen.

Again, look at how society has viewed sexual women compared to men? Men have been honored and celebrated for their affairs where women were (are in some cases) condemned and killed. Yeah, it just might make women more careful or less reckless.

Guys think nothing of having multiple partners (polygamy) but they go crazy thinking about their wives sleeping around with a bunch of guys.

First off, I didn't say that women have no sex drive. I just said that it was less than a mans.

It is just not reality and again, if you look at nature women are equipped to have much more frequent sex than are men.

I don't think this belief/conclusion is designed to keep women subservient to men. It's not even really a belief. It's just a fact. This fact ironically, is partly what empowers women so much in relationships.

Ajax, you are just really wrong about this. Look at the research. Look at how women have been treated over the last five thousand years. I know you don't like to go there but it is relevant. Men owned women and often killed them if they weren't faithful to their master/husband. Men OTOH were free to have as many women as they wanted, trade them, give them to their visitors to use and abuse (think the Old Testament here). Women were required to marry their rapist in the Old Testament. Men purchases women Ajax. Yes, the complete lack of care and concern for women resulted in part in the myth that women are not sexual beings.

Society may have punished women enough that they didn't engage in sex as often, this has nothing to do with the reality that women are sexual beings.

With all due respect, I think some guys want to believe that women are not very sexual to excuse the whole polygamy thing. So long as women aren't sexual beings (or have really low desires), the guys feel they are justified in having multiple partners while making sure their wives have only ONE man... himself.

In terms of the power of which you speak... it wasn't until the past few decades that a man couldn't rape his wife, right here in the United States of America. MEN had totaly control over their wives bodies. To pretend that women have some sort of sexual power over their husbands is really ridiculous.

~dancer~

[_Scottie]

It REALLY frustrates me when guys seem to somehow think women would be fine without sex, or with maybe sex one a month or whatever. AARRGHHH.

Hey, talk to Oprah. She is perpetuating this myth.

My ex used Oprah CONSTANTLY to not have sex with me, claiming she was in the vast majority.