Do you think that process might have evolved differently if you were elevated immediately to the same status as the other two wives?
Yes. The likelihood of failure would have been much higher. I think it would have been an insult to Shari and Christie for Steve to say I was their equal when I was just coming into the family and it wasn't yet certain if I'd see it through.
On that point alone I was not their equal. Shari had demonstrated her commitment to Steve and Christie had demonstrated her commitment to both Steve and Shari. With me I had serious doubts about everything including myself. Leaving was a possibility for me up until I got pregnant. Then it was a lot less likely. Then I found out I had twins coming and while I wasn't going to leave I also felt trapped. Looking back this was a good thing. It made up my mind for me and I had choices taken away from me.
So the new woman having a defined lesser status would ease some of that?
Yes. First is because it's realistic. If your first wife is still with you after you take a plural then her commitment is less in doubt than the plural's commitment. It's also a recognition of your first wife's commitment and it also takes some pressure off the second wife to measure up to the first one.
I know for myself I have a special kind of respect for real first wives because they've had to go it alone. I've never had to go it alone. There's always been support for me from the other women in the family. I think of trying to manage nine kids in Cody with Steve in the hospital in SLC and doing that alone! And so many women do this! That's amazing to me that they handle everything and manage the crushing responsibilities that they have in such situations.
I think of
@Joleneakamama who has done so much for so long on her own before taking in a plural and I am in awe of her. I'll admit being a bit intimidated too. Who wouldn't be?
Yes! Don’t coddle anyone or try to smooth their path! This is so important for men to learn. I mean, concubines always have a use….
Pardon my putting these two comments into the same context but I believe they belong together. It also dovetails to Nick's comment:
As with all things, the question of whether or not a second should be brought along as a "concubine" or not is extremely situationally dependent. Some women might respond better to that kind of mentality. Others would suffer greatly at the thought.
I kinda understand how men roll with new women in the house.
That's a
reality and not a theory. Granted that a new plural may not be a 100% concubine boink bunny but to some degree
she will be. That's normal. It's normal for a man to want to get to know his new wife and maybe even have children with her. Liberated women might recoil at being called a concubine at the outset but I bet most would also recoil at being taken for granted and not treated as someone special and new.
A plural family is not a convent and patriarchal men are not monks. Society doesn't approve of plurals and patriarchy and I just don't see any room to tolerate their rules and expectations in our families.
I feel a post coming on here.
I think that it seriously does bother them a lot - just not enough to actually divorce over it in many cases. It is truly a very upsetting thing for a woman who has been led to believe in monogamy culturally - but it is very upsetting simply because all her life she has been trained to find it very upsetting. There is not a core biological reflex underneath it. While when it comes to women committing adultery, that's just as culturally upsetting to a man - plus there is a core biological reflex underneath it that also makes it repulsive to him. The existence or lack of this core biological reflex is hidden under many layers of cultural programming, but yet it is still present underneath it all, and ultimately has a strong influence on the final decision in situations of adultery, even though those involved may not even realise that is why they made the decisions that they did.
You always amaze me with how you can pack so much into so few words! You truly have a gift!
I've done tons of reading about all of the above and here you come along and take tens of thousands of words and distill it all down to its essence.
Bravo.
I'm going to start responding with the
women committing adultery because a topic right here on BF led me down the rabbit hole of reading more and more on this subject. As I have read the common theme is of women who married nice, effeminate men who respect them and treat them well and then these women run off to find a manly man and they have an affair. This is a case of women
getting what they want when they marry a man who will submit to them because such a thing is unnatural. Thus they're never happy with the guy who is so nice to them.
Then they seek satisfaction of their need for an actual man by seeking out the wrong kind of manly man who just wants an affair. Or perhaps they're suited to each other and they end up together.
I do think there is a core biological reflex under this where a woman might marry this guy because he's 'safe':
But when it comes time for her to feel that reproductive or mating urge she seeks out the guy who satisfies her biological imperatives:
The first man in IMHO designed to be revolted by all of this and he abandons the cheating wife and she takes up with the second guy.
On the other side of all this is the woman/wife whose man finds a plural or a mistress and she doesn't leave him. Because even though she might put on a show about how hurt she is she's also getting a lot of validation about her choice in man because the other woman likes him too.
From the
other woman's perspective (been there, got the maternity dress!) there is something undeniably
smokin' hot about the man who has more than one woman and who has had babies with them AND is committed to them! This IMHO is why so many women are attracted to married men.
The failure of the women who want the mono-married man is when they want what the first wife has.
And they can never have that. I find it ironic that the
other woman wants the trustworthy, loyal, and committed married man but the very second she takes possession of him all those qualities about him go POOF! and are gone. Now he's just a cheater and philanderer and that's what the
other woman gets.
The poly woman will want what the patriarchal man has provided for his family and guess what? She can have it!
Building on what you said here poly squares with how God designed women.
This is why the process from "concubine" to "wife" for you was gradual. There was no point where you had to re-marry Steve to become a "real wife" - because you already were a real wife. But you were a wife on the lowest rank in the household. You gradually moved "up the ranks" among the wives, taking on more and more responsibilities. But from the start you were Steve's woman (wife) and he was your man (husband). You were just the concubine-woman. You eventually became the legal-wife-woman, which was a greater role with higher expectations. But all along you were his woman.
Nicely stated! (And thank you!)
People adding to their household should be patient and not expect someone new to be instantly anything. Time to learn, adapt, and get accustomed is reasonable.
Here is wisdom.
This seems like the danger, that the “concubine” is a second class citizen and is only a temporary fixture in the home.
Not if as Samuel says the role of concubine leads the plural into becoming a wife. In which case the role is temporary but the wife is permanent.
I agree that my opinions aren’t popular.
But they are an attempt to deal with a problem honestly.
Honesty is the best policy. Especially within your family.
Not feeling like a guest in the new family is something to talk about. If the subsequent wife hasn't spent much time with the whole family, I doubt you can escape this guest feeling. Making that shift to being fully invested involves the positive actions of the first wife and the direction of the husband to delegate things to her so she has a sense of usefulness and value. I believe that the understanding of the special gifts and abilities of the subsequent wife are revealed, encouraged and matured as the above is walked in.
Part of why over the years I have seen the wisdom behind patriarchy and especially quiverfull patriarchy. Speaking for myself, I stopped feeling like a guest (or interloper) when I had my twins. The girls were Steve's daughters and they were related to all of Steve's children. And now I had a bond with all of the kids and all of the wives and especially Steve. Granted, It took me more time to shake off my doubts and insecurities and anxieties but seeing everyone loving on my girls and loving on me for simply being their mother went a long way for me feeling a part of the family and not just a guest who might be asked to leave some day.
you picked a good one right there.
