Are Triad Marriages Next ?

[GreenEyedLady(GEL)]

http://www.thehopeforamerica.com/play.php?id=1047

Thought I would bring this topic up, maybe get some opinions. As someone who hopes for same sex recognition, would allowing a 3rd person into the marriage open a pandoras box ?

[Holmes]

Relationships with 2 people are difficult enough adding a third in the mix is trouble. We as a species can barely managae ourselves as individuals, when we marry we add anothers issues, baggae and what not to our own issues, and bagge. Does anyone think a third will actually help anything?

[llllllllll]

only in the bedroom on occasion

[GreenEyedLady(GEL)]

My first thought on this is that it would really be pushing the idea of marriage into the ground redefining completely what marriage is all about. But then I think , well I'm asking for the same thing when it comes to same sex marriage. It has to be redefined. Who am I to judge , but where do we draw the line ? Should a line be drawn ?

[darkeyes]

My first thought on this is that it would really be pushing the idea of marriage into the ground redefining completely what marriage is all about. But then I think , well I'm asking for the same thing when it comes to same sex marriage. It has to be redefined. Who am I to judge , but where do we draw the line ? Should a line be drawn ?

..open Pandora's box huh Gel..ooo.. sounds yummie..tee hee:bigrin::tong:

[Long Duck Dong]

in my eyes... yes and no....there are some people that could have a 3 way union that is balanced and working..... then there are the people that would try it and see it doesn't work...... and the arguement that its a step away from legalised polygamy and harem style marriages....

but honestly its a sticking point.... who amongst us has the right to decide what is right for the other people.....

I have no issues with free will and open relationships / triads...I do struggle with the idea of religion / non religion based marriages like the grooming of brides ( communes and sects )...but thats a opinion based around the fact that it can be ingrained that its what they are there for....to be a good wife along side the other 6 wives, for the one husband.....

to me, a triad should be free choice and acceptance...and that would be fair in my eyes... as for the longest time, people have been told that a union is only for 2 people..... but in many failed marriages... you hear about the 3rd person..... it is possible that a open relationship with the 3rd person, could save a lot of marriages, by providing that extra lil support and help and comfort..... but I do not know for sure..... I have never been in that situation....

[rissababynta]

I don't reallly agree with it but I fell that as long as no one gets hurt, people should be able to do what they want with they're lives and be happy.

[PolyLoveTriad]

The way I look at it is this.

You have a husband and wife, the husband is bi the wife is straight. They find a boyfriend to satisfy the husbands needs. They all 3 fall in love and end up living together. They decide they want to be together for life. Why not allow them to marry the boyfriend? I know triads who have been living together for more than 20 yrs. They arent going out and getting a harem. They have been living together as husband and wife and husband for over 20 yrs, peacefully, not hurting anyone, they have grown children. They did have a ceremony but its not the same as actually being able to marry the one you love.

Keep in mind that back in the day it was completely normal in society for a 12 yr old to be married and have children by the time they were 13-14 yrs old. Society has told us what is right and what is wrong, what we can and cant do. Steve cant marry Bill because they say so. But laws dont govern our hearts. If you arent hurting someone, then you should be able to do what you want.

[Trinity-Fl]

We lived as an MFM triad for almost 4 years. And we've known some long term triads both MFM and FMF. As a triad we wore matching rings (the clauddaugh ring plus we had some animal rings we wore when we went out.) We had a "honeymoon" in the Bahamas. Our first triad purchase was a big screen TV. :) Later we bought a house together. We slept in the same bed almost every night. When the fem partner had to travel we two guys still slept in our bed. They were the married couple but I was never the third person. Guests would ask which bedroom was mine and I say, "That's our room." We ate dinner together, went to the movies and shopped.

Could we have "married" we might have. I remember one Christmas when my employer had a party and informed me that I could bring one other person. We three talked about it and I ended up going alone.

We were out to family and friends. After all, we lived together. I didn't have a room of my own and I did the laundry for everyone. :) Their daughters were a little funny about it but my two girls were very accepting.

So let people marry whom ever and in what quantity they want. Let them contractually agree on what happens with children and property. If you're in a church and find disapproval, leave the church or change it. Marriage became the purview of the law to protect property and inheritance. The "one man - one woman" thing protected wives from the claims of mistresses. :) I don't think god cares one way or the other.

When we broke up it was much like any couple's breakup. Painful but bearable and it passed. Two of us are still an M/F couple. We look at our daughters and wonder how different their lives would be if they could embrace a more tolerant view of marriage and traditional sexual roles. We wonder how ex-spouses can be so mean spirited and how the fathers of our grand children can't share. If life really is like day-time television, it's really sad. But that's a whole different thread. :)

Please don't beat me up about "poly." By saying that poly doesn't work, you imply that monogamy does. We're in a segment of the wedding industry and we just cringe when we hear those vows. But that's another thread too.

Thanks,

[Bi_Druid]

I feel that whether or not a triad is successful is down to the people involved. Much the same with whether or not a couple/marriage is successful. It's really down to the people themselves.

I feel that if the right people find each other, be it a couple or triple or however many way marriage it can work.

Whether or not such relationship models become recognised under the marriage type laws is the next step. I feel that given time they shall and rightly should.

[rissababynta]

The way I look at it is this.

You have a husband and wife, the husband is bi the wife is straight. They find a boyfriend to satisfy the husbands needs. They all 3 fall in love and end up living together. They decide they want to be together for life. Why not allow them to marry the boyfriend? I know triads who have been living together for more than 20 yrs. They arent going out and getting a harem. They have been living together as husband and wife and husband for over 20 yrs, peacefully, not hurting anyone, they have grown children. They did have a ceremony but its not the same as actually being able to marry the one you love.

Keep in mind that back in the day it was completely normal in society for a 12 yr old to be married and have children by the time they were 13-14 yrs old. Society has told us what is right and what is wrong, what we can and cant do. Steve cant marry Bill because they say so. But laws dont govern our hearts. If you arent hurting someone, then you should be able to do what you want.

AMEN!

[jamieknyc]

Historically, American and other Western society has always been violently opposed to polygamy. Some countries do allow it, but people from those countries would not be allwoed to bring their multiple wives into any Western country.

[bityme]

This is exactly why government should be out of the marriage business. Marriage should be governed only by your religion.

Government's position should be to maintain a framework of contract for people. Call in Civil Union, Domestic Partnership, the "Get It On Agreement" or what ever you want. Individuals should be able to contract for any type of relationship they want. Actually, we already can. It is just that the use of the word "marriage" may or may not be part of the government sanction.

You can hold property, provide for inheritance, power of attorney, health care directives, etc. without a "marriage". The dicy part is medical coverage and tax breaks. Everything else we can do with a civil contract.

The drive should not be to allow gays, etc. to marry, it should be to eliminate marriage from civil law.

[jem_is_bi]

This is exactly why government should be out of the marriage business. Marriage should be governed only by your religion.

Government's position should be to maintain a framework of contract for people. Call in Civil Union, Domestic Partnership, the "Get It On Agreement" or what ever you want. Individuals should be able to contract for any type of relationship they want. Actually, we already can. It is just that the use of the word "marriage" may or may not be part of the government sanction.

You can hold property, provide for inheritance, power of attorney, health care directives, etc. without a "marriage". The dicy part is medical coverage and tax breaks. Everything else we can do with a civil contract.

The drive should not be to allow gays, etc. to marry, it should be to eliminate marriage from civil law.

Medical coverage and tax breaks and job advancement opportunities, etc. are some really big items.

Also, even if totally legal, I am not so sure that threesome marriages would be very common. In atomic physics, certain combinations of protons and neutrons are very stable and others are not stable at all. I am not sure if their is a similar such (law?) about combinations of males and females, but I suspect three (2 + 1) is not a golden number state.

[Realist]

Jem, I think it is all a matter of compatibility. I have been in two long term poly relationships that were remarkably rewarding and exciting. I've also attempted a couple that did not work out...basically for reasons you surmised. However, when things click, it can be, and was, stupendous!

[jamieknyc]

This is exactly why government should be out of the marriage business. Marriage should be governed only by your religion.

Government's position should be to maintain a framework of contract for people. Call in Civil Union, Domestic Partnership, the "Get It On Agreement" or what ever you want. Individuals should be able to contract for any type of relationship they want. Actually, we already can. It is just that the use of the word "marriage" may or may not be part of the government sanction.

You can hold property, provide for inheritance, power of attorney, health care directives, etc. without a "marriage". The dicy part is medical coverage and tax breaks. Everything else we can do with a civil contract.

The drive should not be to allow gays, etc. to marry, it should be to eliminate marriage from civil law.

The only Western country that does that is Israel (if you consider it a Western country), and left-liberal types there are agitating to have the state take over marriages instead.

[bret5668]

This is just my personal thought on the topic, in no way is it intended to assume the opinions of the masses, but here goes...

From my perspective it would work for a few , and not work for most. People by nature are jealous and possessive, therefore unless there are VERY specific perameters established prior to engaging in such a situation I have my doubts whether it would work for as many as it doesn't work for. Then again just like anytthing else in this world, it's a learning experience.

[PolyLoveTriad]

This is just my personal thought on the topic, in no way is it intended to assume the opinions of the masses, but here goes...

From my perspective it would work for a few , and not work for most. People by nature are jealous and possessive, therefore unless there are VERY specific perameters established prior to engaging in such a situation I have my doubts whether it would work for as many as it doesn't work for. Then again just like anytthing else in this world, it's a learning experience.

You get the same jealousy and possessiveness in couples where its one man one woman, 2 men, 2 women... those are personality traits, not relationship traits. I do think it takes certain types of people to make triads work out. But there are hundreds upon hundreds of triads out there that do make it work without jealousy or being possessive. But the only difference between a triad relationship and a 2 person one, is one more person.

I agree that civil law needs to be removed from marriage or vice versa. If the government would stay out of our personal lives maybe they could focus on more important things.

[FalconAngel]

Polygamy is okay, if the people want it, then who cares?

The whole argument of "we need to allow it because we allow Gay marriage" is pure BS, though, and here's why;
They are comparing people who are born with a specific sexual orientation to people that just have a desire to have multiple spouses. So the comparison is nothing more than apples v oranges.

[curious44]

Why not? Caligula married his horse and his sister. A friend recently told me of a secret desire to marry his Harley. Go for it!

[jamieknyc]

Why not? Caligula married his horse and his sister. A friend recently told me of a secret desire to marry his Harley. Go for it!

Caligula did not marry his horse Incitatus, nor did he make the horse a consul. However, he did issue invitations to parties at which Incitatus was listed as the host.

[curious44]

Jamieknyc, you are correct. My bad. I remembered that part of the Caligula story incorrectly. I was telling myself to check that before I posted and just didn't do it.

[hudson9]

Well, for all those who oppose gay marriage because we have to adhere to traditional marriage and "God's will" -- the Old Testament is full of polygamy (only one-way tho, 1 man w/ many wives...).

So, I say any God-fearin' man or woman should be for it!

;)