If you think patriarchy is a problem, I’m with you. Let’s dismantle patriarchy. But keep in mind that polygamy is just a modality of patriarchy, not patriarchy itself.
If you don’t like inequitable sealing practices, I’m with you. Let’s allow multiple sealings to multiple persons of any gender, if they so choose.
If you don’t like the requirements for a sealing cancelation, I’m with you. Persons who no longer desire to be sealed together should not encounter unnecessary difficulties in getting a sealing cancelation.
If you think coercion, manipulation, religious fundamentalism and fanaticism are problems, I agree. We should fix these problems regardless.
If you think underage participants are a problem, I agree. They should not enter into polygamous or monogamous marriages.
If you think polygamy is “one big mistake,” then you’re going to have difficulty convincing me that my nine generations of polygamous Mormon family members and descendants are a “mistake.” And no, I don’t believe God would have sent me to a “better” monogamous family if polygamy didn’t exist. I am in this family, and my family and existence are not mistakes.
If you think monogamy is going to dissolve patriarchy, perhaps you should reevaluate the patriarchal forces in monogamous marriages. Monogamy isn’t suddenly going to make patriarchy disappear, nor your insecurities about your partner’s potential desires for others.
If you think all polygamous women are brainwashed victims without volition or autonomy, you’re not much different that the patriarchal forces you claim to be liberating women from. Women’s autonomy will never be respected until women respect women.
If your feminism doesn’t include non-monogamous women, you might reconsider your views on women’s liberation. Your cis-mono-hetero feminism has overstepped its bounds.
If you think monogamy is the highest form of marriage and should be universally applied, then you’re not much different from those who think polygamy is the highest form of marriage and should be universally applied. You’re still imposing your preferred form of marriage onto others and replacing the oppressor with your own oppressive mandates.
If you think celestial glory mandates polygamy, monogamy, heterosexuality, bisexuality, homosexuality, asexuality, celibacy, or any other orientation among consenting adults, you need a better myth. Your heaven sounds like hell. I cannot believe in a God who would universally mandate any of these practices.
If you think patriarchy is a problem, I agree. The problem is patriarchy, not polygamy.
Blaire Ostler
Blaire Ostler is a leading voice at the intersection of Mormonism, feminism, and transhumanism. She is a Board Member and former CEO of the Mormon Transhumanist Association, the world's largest advocacy network for the ethical use of technology and religion to expand human abilities. She is currently pursuing a second degree in philosophy with an emphasis in gender studies. Blaire and husband Drew reside in Utah with their three children.
All posts by Blaire Ostler
This is another silly over the top blog from Ostler who sounds like an extremist feminist. And a thorough examination of polygamy shows that it was a huge blessing to individuals and the Church as a whole. Without polygamy and the first harvest in England and Wales, the Church might not have even survived.
Is it really necessary to denigrate a person simply because you disagree with their thoughts and ideas? Just state your case without the negativity. Beside who have your history wrong. The church did not publicly practice polygamy until 1852 12 years after the 1st mission to England, and by the way 38 years later stopped its practice. At the time the church was dealing with the collapse of the Safety Society and fairly large scale apostasy of members and leaders alike. Concerned with how to save the church Joseph went to the Lord and received D&C 118 calling Heber Kimball and Orson Hyde to England. Granted the large number of new converts during the yearly earls were from Great Britain but reason was not polygamy, the reason was their receptiveness to the restored gospel and the hope of a better life. Beside the participation rate of members in the practice was only about 5%. I agree with Blair on all yer points but especially with, “If you think you think polygamy is “one big mistake,” then you’re going to have difficulty convincing me that my nine generations of polygamous Mormon family members and descendants are a “mistake.” I have a lot of polygamist in my family including the Kimball’s Whitney’s, Smoots, and Hart’s. From reading their histories and doing their genealogy I know that they were dedicated faithful and honest people. My great grandmother Hart divorced her husband because he took another polygamist wife after the manifesto. Polygamy is a difficult and complex issue and should not just be swept under the table for any reason.
My grandmother was a Hart and I believe her grandmother divorced out of a polygamous marriage. I wonder if she’s the same person?.
Frankly, the church’s sealing practices are a convoluted mess thanks to the interplay of plural marriage, monogamy, divorce, remarriage, abuse, bias toward males, falling out of love, etc.
In the next life, I suspect the real tie that binds people will be love—period. Forget the legalistic paperwork.
As I observe the church’s current emphasis on temples, family history, indexing, etc., it occurs to me that if Christ were to give the parable of the Good Samaritan in 2018, the priest and Levite would be replaced by a temple worker and a family history consultant.
Ken, I think you may have missed Blaire’s meaning regarding polygamy. She’s not against it. She said, “If you think you think polygamy is “one big mistake,” then you’re going to have difficulty convincing me that my nine generations of polygamous Mormon family members and descendants are a “mistake.” And no, I don’t believe God would have sent me to a “better” monogamous family if polygamy didn’t exist. I am in this family, and my family and existence are not mistakes.”
Nowhere in this bill of grievances could one conclude that it is Jesus Christ who oversees the Church. That God should even be consulted on any of this is unnecessary, since it is “we” and “us” who are in charge of making sure the Church conforms to whatever it is “we” decide is the current fashion. If “we” decide that we want to “allow multiple sealings to multiple persons of any gender”, then move over God – we’re in and You’re out. “We” will take over from here.
That God has anything to say about any of this hasn’t occurred to author – and why should it, since it is “consenting adults” who should be in charge of the Church (except of course, those adults who consent to follow the apostles), consenting adults whose will and wisdom, apparently, trump anything God has revealed. Any conflict between 6,000 years of scripture and revelation and what these “consenting adults” want is to be resolved in favor of the latter.
So, good-bye, Article of Faith 9, and hello, clear-headed 21st Century, which has (at last!) gotten everything right.
Let’s review Lehi’s dream: There is a path with an iron rod leading to the tree of the love of God, “most desirable above all things.” What are the other options? Well, there is an unstable Great and Spacious building, and “great was the multitude that did enter into that strange building.” As many as heeded that multitude, or “were ashamed” of the path and tree, fell away. Others who left the path “wandered off and were lost” or were “drowned in the depths of the fountain,” or were lost from view, “wandering in strange roads.”
From (the apparently outmoded) Elder Maxwell: “Those who insist on walking in their own way will find that all such paths, however individualistic in appearance, will converge at that wide way and broad gate – where there will be a tremendous traffic jam.”
Anyone waiting for consenting adults to deliver heaven are in for a long, disappointing wait. The Church was restored to rescue us from the “consenting adults” the author proposes to now put in charge.
Thank you, Blair for your thoughts which are unpopular on both sides.
Very wise and brave.