FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "Is polygamy sexist?"
m (→Conclusion: bot - tag "Questions") |
m |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
==Question: Is polygamy sexist?== | ==Question: Is polygamy sexist?== | ||
===Introduction to Question=== | ===Introduction to Question=== | ||
| − | + | Some worry that the historical practice of polygamy as well as contemporary theology about polygamy is sexist. | |
| + | |||
| + | At least a few fear that Church doctrine implies or teaches that a spouse might have to practice plural marriage in the eternities without the approval or desire of their first spouse. This stance has been most passionately argued by Latter-day Saint poet Carol Lynn Pearson in her book ''The Ghost of Eternal Polygamy: Haunting the Hearts and Heaven of Mormon Women and Men''.<ref>Carol Lynn Pearson, ''The Ghost of Eternal Polygamy: Haunting the Hearts and Heaven of Mormon Women and Men'' (Walnut Creek, CA: Pivot Point Books, 2016). For reviews that expose the weaknesses of Pearson’s position and approach, see Allen Wyatt, “[https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/scary-ghost-stories-in-the-light-of-day/ Scary Ghost Stories in the Light of Day],” ''Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship'' 23 (2017): 137–160; Brian C. Hales, “[https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/opportunity-lost/ Opportunity Lost],” ''Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship'' 23 (2017): 91–109.</ref> | ||
The observation that allegedly grounds this assertion is that polygamy fragments women's emotional and sexual opportunities as a wife. As Brian C. Hales has argued: | The observation that allegedly grounds this assertion is that polygamy fragments women's emotional and sexual opportunities as a wife. As Brian C. Hales has argued: | ||
<blockquote>In the case of a new plural wife who would have remained unmarried if monogamy was exclusively practiced, her “emotional and sexual opportunities as a wife” are increased from zero to some fraction depending on how many other wives the man has. However, the other wives’ opportunities are diminished as a result of the new plural matrimony.<ref>Hales, "Opportunity Lost," 97n4. Hales has repeatedly made this assertion in his publications. See another instance in Brian C. Hales and Laura H. Hales, "[https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Lending-Clarity-to-Confusion.pdf Lending Clarity to Confusion: A Response to Kirk Van Allen’s 'D&C 132: A Revelation of Men, Not God']," ''FairMormon Papers and Reviews'' 1 (2015): 4</ref></blockquote> | <blockquote>In the case of a new plural wife who would have remained unmarried if monogamy was exclusively practiced, her “emotional and sexual opportunities as a wife” are increased from zero to some fraction depending on how many other wives the man has. However, the other wives’ opportunities are diminished as a result of the new plural matrimony.<ref>Hales, "Opportunity Lost," 97n4. Hales has repeatedly made this assertion in his publications. See another instance in Brian C. Hales and Laura H. Hales, "[https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Lending-Clarity-to-Confusion.pdf Lending Clarity to Confusion: A Response to Kirk Van Allen’s 'D&C 132: A Revelation of Men, Not God']," ''FairMormon Papers and Reviews'' 1 (2015): 4</ref></blockquote> | ||
| + | |||
| + | <!-- I've blocked this part off for now. I've had considerable experience helping people troubled by plural marriage, and I worry that this approach will confirm their worst feels and not be helpful. I think we should emphasize instead that | ||
| + | |||
| + | a) polygamy is not required for exaltation | ||
| + | b) no one will be forced into any sealing arrangement which they cannot wholeheartedly embrace | ||
| + | c) leaders have indicated that they do not believe plural marriage will ever be again required of the Church in mortality. | ||
| + | |||
| + | I worry that things like "a woman might even be being selfish if they need to raise up seed quickly and she doesn't go along." | ||
| + | |||
| + | I think this misunderstands the nature of "raising up seed." There are at least two issues: | ||
| + | |||
| + | 1) In Jacob 2, it may well be that this is a Levirate marriage scenario, so not really applicatble save in rare cases. | ||
| + | 2) Polygamy has not shown itself to be a more efficient way of producing a lot more children. Yes, more women enter the birthing pool than would otherwise, but they also had less time with husbands, which tended to reduce the number of children. As far as I know, there is no evidence that polygamy dramatically increased the Saints' numbers beyond where they would have been. | ||
| + | |||
| + | What it DID do, however, was create a very dedicated _core_ of men, women, and their families who were utterly dedicated and showed themselves to be so. Much of the Church's leadership continues to grow out of those family. So there was seed to the Lord, but it's a question more of calibre and quality, not quantity. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ~~~~~ | ||
Do these assertions hold? This article will present at least one argument that they do not. | Do these assertions hold? This article will present at least one argument that they do not. | ||
| Line 59: | Line 78: | ||
===Conclusion=== | ===Conclusion=== | ||
It is the author's hope that this article will serve as a important insight into the moral thinking of men and women everywhere whether in or out of the Church and/or applying knowledge of sexism to the Church and its doctrine, practice, and history. Further philosophical work on this question may reveal additional, important insights into it. | It is the author's hope that this article will serve as a important insight into the moral thinking of men and women everywhere whether in or out of the Church and/or applying knowledge of sexism to the Church and its doctrine, practice, and history. Further philosophical work on this question may reveal additional, important insights into it. | ||
| − | </onlyinclude> | + | </onlyinclude>--> |
{{endnotes sources}} | {{endnotes sources}} | ||
[[Category:Questions]] | [[Category:Questions]] | ||
Revision as of 23:10, 17 May 2024
- REDIRECTTemplate:Test3
Question: Is polygamy sexist?
Introduction to Question
Some worry that the historical practice of polygamy as well as contemporary theology about polygamy is sexist.
At least a few fear that Church doctrine implies or teaches that a spouse might have to practice plural marriage in the eternities without the approval or desire of their first spouse. This stance has been most passionately argued by Latter-day Saint poet Carol Lynn Pearson in her book The Ghost of Eternal Polygamy: Haunting the Hearts and Heaven of Mormon Women and Men.[1]
The observation that allegedly grounds this assertion is that polygamy fragments women's emotional and sexual opportunities as a wife. As Brian C. Hales has argued:
In the case of a new plural wife who would have remained unmarried if monogamy was exclusively practiced, her “emotional and sexual opportunities as a wife” are increased from zero to some fraction depending on how many other wives the man has. However, the other wives’ opportunities are diminished as a result of the new plural matrimony.[2]
Notes
- ↑ Carol Lynn Pearson, The Ghost of Eternal Polygamy: Haunting the Hearts and Heaven of Mormon Women and Men (Walnut Creek, CA: Pivot Point Books, 2016). For reviews that expose the weaknesses of Pearson’s position and approach, see Allen Wyatt, “Scary Ghost Stories in the Light of Day,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 23 (2017): 137–160; Brian C. Hales, “Opportunity Lost,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 23 (2017): 91–109.
- ↑ Hales, "Opportunity Lost," 97n4. Hales has repeatedly made this assertion in his publications. See another instance in Brian C. Hales and Laura H. Hales, "Lending Clarity to Confusion: A Response to Kirk Van Allen’s 'D&C 132: A Revelation of Men, Not God'," FairMormon Papers and Reviews 1 (2015): 4