Post edited 1:25 pm – May 7, 2010 by jbash

Here, for discussion, is one of the suggestions that have been made for the CPAA's basic policy position.

THIS IS NOT ADOPTED POLICY. In fact, many CPAA members and volunteers have not seen it. We are also unsure, so far, of the factual basis for some of what it says. It's here to stimulate community input. Is it on the right track? If so, what should be changed? If not, where should we go?

Position on Patriarchal Polygyny

Patriarchal polygyny is probably associated with certain harms to women and children. We attribute these harms to patriarchy mediated through polygyny, rather than to polygyny itself. Certain isolated communities are at special risk and should receive special services.

We use the phrase “patriarchal polygyny” to refer to multiple-partner conjugal relationships wherein:

1. The participants see it as appropriate for men as a class, or for some subgroup of men, to have multiple female conjugal partners, but not for any woman to have multiple male conjugal partners, and/or
    

2. The participants believe that men and women should adhere, within their relationships, to preset gender roles, with women's roles usually subordinate to men's roles.
    

Polyamory in all current definitions requires the knowledge and consent of all involved. Patriarchal polygyny without valid consent is not polyamory. However, any patriarchal polygyny with valid consent may be a form of polyamory, depending on the outcome of our consultation on the definition of polyamory.

Patriarchal polygyny has historically been the most common form of multiple partner conjugal relationship throughout the world, and remains so today. Whether patriarchal polygyny is more common than egalitarian polyamory in modern Canada is not known.

In the same way, patriarchal monogamy has historically been the dominant form of monogamy throughout the world, and remains so in many parts of the world. The idea that husband and wife should be fundamentally equal in all spheres of life is relatively new, and is by no means universally accepted by monogamists.

Patriarchal polygyny is, by its definition, a patriarchal phenomenon, and is generally associated with patriarchal cultures, values, and practices. These typically include a limited role for women in the public sphere, and a perception that men should head households, women in those households being under the men's authority. The scope given to women's freedom of choice is generally less than that given to men. Women may be infantilized. Their reproductive choices may be limited, and they may be effectively denied access to contraception or choices about when to use it. In extreme cases, women may be denied nearly all choices, excluded from most or all public activity, stripped of most or all recourse to authority beyond that of their male “protectors”, subjected to corporal punishment at the discretion of their husbands or fathers, or even treated fundamentally as if they were items of property.

All of these values and abuses have historically been common in monogamy as well as in polygyny; the liberation of monogamy from oppressive patriarchal norms has been fairly recent in historical terms, and is by no means universal on this planet. Patriarchal monogamy exists in Canada today.

Social science research associates patriarchal polygyny, particularly when practised in the context of generally patriarchal cultures, with a variety of negative material, emotional, and perhaps spiritual outcomes, for the women involved, for the children raised in these environments, and indeed for many men. Although methodological concerns exist, and although many of the studies involve cultures very different from Canadian culture, the phenomena appear to have some basis in fact.

Not all of the mechanisms by which these negative outcomes come about are clear from the research. Based on our experience with egalitarian polyamory, the CPAA is of the opinion that the negative outcomes of patriarchal polygyny are in fact caused by the “patriarchal” aspect, rather than by the “polygamy” aspect. In particular:

1. Patriarchal structures can force women into unsuitable arrangements, including polygamous ones.
    

   Although practitioners of egalitarian polyamory are happy without conjugal exclusivity, the CPAA recognizes that we are a minority, having an unusual emotional makeup and/or unusual strategies for managing our emotions and relationships. Most people in fact prefer exclusivity, and many or most are miserable without it. Forcing such a person into a polygamous marriage may not be dissimilar to forcing a heterosexual person into a homosexual marriage.

   In patriarchal cultures which deprive women of choices, women who are personally unsuited to multi-partner relationships, again the majority of women, can easily be forced or manipulated into those relationships against their will.

   For example, in a highly patriarchal culture, a wife may have no realistic alternative to acceding to her husband's plan to take another. Particularly if there has been a breakdown in their relationship or if he considers women's opinions beneath his notice, her husband himself may give little or no consideration to her feelings. Even if divorce is technically available to her (whether independently or “granted” by her husband), exercising that option may subject her to social ostracism, may impoverish her, or may deprive her of access to her children or to others who are important to her. She herself may have internalized values which would make seeking a divorce unacceptable to her. Indeed, in a sufficiently patriarchal society, a woman may prefer being an unhappy plural wife to being an ostracized and impoverished divorced woman, and may actively petition her husband to take a second wife in preference to divorcing her.

   Similarly, in a highly patriarchal culture, a young woman being asked to join an arranged marriage, whether monogamous or polygamous, may have few realistic choices. She may lack the social or economic support which would enable her to defy, or even to question, the wishes of her parents or of the community. She may lack skills and education to provide for herself, and independent economic opportunities may in any case be unavailable to women in her circumstances. She, too, may have internalized values which would make resistance unthinkable.

   Being forced into unsuitable relationships will predictably have negative consequences. While it is clear that polygamous relationships are unsuitable for many people, this is equally true of many other things, including many monogamous relationships. Free adults are capable of choosing appropriate relationships for themselves. Patriarchal structures which permit women to be manipulated and coerced, or which deprive them of viable alternatives, are the root cause of this problem.

2. Patriarchal structures can promote poor marital relations. The man in a patriarchal relationship may be culturally encouraged to behave autocratically, to ignore the wishes of women, and possibly to treat women simply as breeding stock, or as objects or trophies to be collected. Such bad behaviour contributes to marital strife and estrangement. A man conditioned to treat women as property may react to estrangement by acquiring a second wife, rather than by divorce, just as a man who finds his car uncomfortable may acquire a second. This may result in an excess of polygynous relationships among those with marital problems in such cultures.
    

3. Some patriarchal cultures treat men as “breadwinners”, discouraging some or all women from acquiring or exercising marketable skills, or paying women poorly for their work. If acting as sole support for several wives and their children, most men will find it difficult to maintain a standard of living above the poverty level.
    

4. Cultures which strongly value polygyny, but not polyandry, implicitly result in competition among men for limited available women, and possibly in populations of disaffected men who have lost this competition. Although multiple-partner relationships of any kind are sufficiently rare in Canada to render this an insignificant effect for Canada as a whole, there is evidence that it is significant in isolated communities practising patriarchal polygyny. The effect is particularly severe because young men forced out of these communities by this competition may lack the cultural and social background required to integrate well into outside Canadian society.
    

Recommendations

1. Higher levels of government should undertake special oversight of local governments in isolated, at-risk communities espousing strongly patriarchal values, in order to ensure that women's rights under Canadian law are properly respected in those communities.
    

2. Governments should make special efforts to provide outreach to women and girls in isolated patriarchal communities, emphasizing clear explanation of their legal rights and exposure to the diversity of values present in Canadian society. This should not include direct attacks on community values or ways of life.
    

3. Services should be provided for people, and especially for minors, who are seeking to escape social pressure to enter inappropriate relationships. Special emphasis should be given to minors in isolated communities. These services should include material support, medical and psychological services, legal assistance including assistance in emancipation or changes of guardianship, and assistance in reintegration in more appropriate community settings.
    

Counterproductive Strategies

Attempting to challenge patriarchal cultures directly is likely to result in resistance from all members of those cultures, including women and children at risk. This resistance may take the form of hardening of personal attitudes, increased insularity, and group cooperation to reject or counter the attack.

Legal sanctions which directly address culturally valued practices represent an extreme form of attack, and should be avoided whenever possible. When used, they must be crafted with great care. In addition to the need to respect freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, personal autonomy, cultural diversity, and the fundamental equality of monogamous and polyamorous relationships, there is a high probability of creating very strong backlash. In an insular and cohesive community, it may be impossible to enforce even a reasonable law which runs against the strongly held convictions of community members.

Patriarchal communities may specifically be likely to reject direct approaches to women or children.

Any strategy which criminalizes potential victims or moderating forces is especially unwise. In particular, Section 293 of the Criminal Code provides for criminal penalties for all participants in polygamous marriages, including those who may have participated under overwhelming social and cultural pressure, or who may now regret their former choices. Indeed, anyone who has participated in a ceremony celebrating such a marriage is criminalized.

This makes it more difficult for polygamists, including women abused in patriarchal polygamy, to change their circumstances. They may see a patriarchal polygamist community as their only protection against prosecution, and find it unthinkable to leave. As officially recognized criminals, they will certainly be hesitant to seek outside help. In addition, people abused in, or simply beginning to question their place in, patriarchal polygynous communities may be unwilling to seek outside help because of the risk of bringing prosecution on other community members.

Kimmie said:

Personally, I don't think that patriarchal polygyny could be a form of polyamory, because the woman, from what I understand, doesn't get a say when another woman is brought in to the family unit.

That depends on the patriarchal system and the people involved in the situation. In the original Mormon doctrine as theoretically adopted by the FLDS, an existing wife must consent to a man's bringing in a new wife.  I don't believe that most forms of polygynist Muslim doctrine have such a requirement; there, it's officially just the man's decision. I assume that other patriarchal polygynist traditions are split on the issue.

On the other hand, it's very easy to find presumably knowledgeable people who say that the FLDS as an institution doesn't enforce the requirement for women's consent in any meaningful way, and that many FLDS members apply overwhelming pressure to existing wives to accept new wives against their will. Similarly, it's not hard to find Muslim institutions and social groups that seem to put a lot of pressure on men to have existing wives' consent before taking new wives, and might heavily penalize a man who didn't. You can also find Muslim polygynist men who apparently did in fact give existing wives vetoes over new ones. And if you look at places like sisterwives, you can certainly find "independent" patriarchal polygynists who say they consider existing wives' consent a prerequisite for any new marriage, and who seem to live by that.

So there's diversity among the patriarchals on the issue of who consents to what. And you could even make an argument that consenting to enter into the system in the first place is valid consent to what happens afterwards, although I'm not personally comfortable with such a view.

So, I don't think we can easily claim that valid consent to patriarchal polygyny isn't possible.

Ivo said:

I also assume that you are proposing its use in some kind of public manner, including media and public consumption, which is guiding my comments.