Is it really competition? Does Tinder also have a polygny matching service?
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Hello from the owners of ModernPolygamy.com
- Thread starter ModernPolygamy
- Start date
It's matching service. May be enough for Tinder to care. Like they wouldn't care if it some other niche.
And who owns Tinder? It could be just one of brands in stable of matching service. If they have any other brand for "ethnical non-monogamy" they would see it as competition. It wouldn't help your case claiming you are more specialized.
Microsoft would see your PrivateWordProcessor as competition to Excel.
Tinder gave me warning, so I took it down. You were right.
If there was category of polygyny or polygamy I would have selected but it was not an option. I would hate to suggest that I am swinger. But in the profile I mentioned polygyny.
I did not realize that this was a menu pick that you were referring to.
Yuck
It is funny all the various and sundry categories of degenerates that are welcome. Not so much with not just marriage minded but hyper marriage minded
Yeah, as a woman that has used Tinder, to basically say what you are looking for is typed modern day hieroglyphics. Yet if I am match, almost 9 times out of ten, it’s a couple looking for a unicorn.
Yet looking in state where I am is almost impossible.
Unicorn...
You will forgive my skepticism about the term in general terms.
The entire notion being predicated on the idea that a single woman willing to consider pairing with a couple is inherently vastly more valuable in the dating marketplace than a couple...that a single individual is the most valuable potential puzzle piece. Oh well.
With respect to your needing to consider looking farther afield, even though Texas seems to have just a boatload of pligs as well as families wanting to get on the bandwaggon, I have always just assumed that if/when we meet someone that goes beyond messaging and phone calls, that there would be trips ba k and forth on both parts and loads of extra hassle that you don't encounter with someone moderately nearby.
Personally I don't understand why we are so thin on the ground and that matchmaking is such a process. This is a period in history where every possible brand of promiscuity as well as some things that remain criminal are actively promoted as cultural norms and birth rates are absolutely cratering, you would think that plural marriage would finally loose its taboo status. That more would see the obvious advantages...especially the advantages to women with a more traditional mindset or those who want to get into the mom'ing business.
Unfortunately, I think we all need to look quite far outside of our own bubble to find honorable matches seeking for the right reasons.
Last edited:
Great point.
I'm convinced that the number one reason why polygyny remains a taboo is the fact that polygynists and polygyny supporters vigorously keep themselves in the closet. I never keep my beliefs or intentions a secret, and the majority of those who initially decry what I'm saying eventually come around to not only accepting it but, at least to some extent, embracing it.
Biblical Families exemplifies this, given that the organization bends over backwards to keep everything it does (most especially the in-person gatherings) a complete secret, even to the extent of coaching participants to use code language at many facilities in order to prevent malingering staff from getting a clue. This just isn't necessary in this day and age.
If a person or an organization acts like it's ashamed of what's being promoted, then that just encourages everyone else to continue believing it's shameful.
Agree.
Pretty much the only time in my plural marriage where we were less than open about things was when I had to deal with commercial or residential property brokers. Mainly because I did not want a local Mrs Grundy micro-cephalic pseudo moralist to cause waves in my business dealings.
None of my friends of family took issue and a few coworkers were aware and pretty much shrugged their shoulders...other than the occasional comments about not understanding how that big ugly bastard managed it.
Agree in principle. In practice as well I suppose.
My desire for the most part is to not be bothered and not be terribly public about my relationships in broad terms. That would hold whether I were single, mono or plig.
Jeremy Kauffman of Free State Project said something similar.
You need to treat your beliefs with respect if you want to be taken seriously by others.
Regarding Tinder. When I added photo of my wife I did not get any additional likes. As result I deleted my profile. I think a lot of women on Tinder they are not really searching for relationship but are there to boost their egos (men are there for same reason but probably that boost happens only when hook up has been realized). So I was convicted that I should not feed the system that promotes this form of idolatry (and I am probably too ugly for Tinder).
If I ever will return there I would only "like" those who have liked me first after they have seen that I am looking for polygamous relationship (but you have to pay for this ability).
So my hope that ModernPolygamy.com breaks the internet and it will be great place to find relationships.
If I ever will return there I would only "like" those who have liked me first after they have seen that I am looking for polygamous relationship (but you have to pay for this ability).
So my hope that ModernPolygamy.com breaks the internet and it will be great place to find relationships.
The only reason I had Tinder is for trying to find people locally but yeah, it is 95.5% ego versus real relationship. Profile doesn’t match what they say.
Never been on the site.
Not so much because people have negative things to say about it... lots of inculcated people who either can't/don't/won't apply critical thinking to the issue, think we are all bad people for our commitment to plural marriage.
I just happen to have a broad spectrum low agreeability (opposite in personal relationships) that results in being suspicious of popular cultural phenomena. They all seem as if they are just the results of gaslight, information manipulation and in the end whatever shiny exterior it presents, it is generally hollow, ugly or dumb.
I know we have the gatherings here on occasion but that they are explicitly not for matchmaking but fellowship and biblical study.
I have been thinking for some time and just mentioned this to a new friend last night...I want actual matchmaking. Thinking that when I get out on land and get the right infrastructure to host a few families.. That a couple days worth of picnicking, round tables and introductions is a good idea.
Lots of details and organizing would be required obviously. No idea if it will ever happen but it seems a worthwhile way to advocate for plural marriage and people who are in earnest about their desire to live this life as opposed to playing reindeer games.
I bring that meandering bit up because of @USDutchkitty making reference to it all being about ego. It strikes me that to be successful in a plural marriage, one of the most important factors for success is the ability to take your own ego out of the mix. To put the family and the others in your family first.
'But Scott...that doesn't make sense. Everyone knows heaving sexual access to a harem of women is entirely to support a man's massive ego! And thst is why men want polygamy. Duh!"
Why thank you imagined character for that massive strawman claim to help me make my point.
To my way of thinking, a husband should be thinking first about his children and wives. Making sure he can ensure their safety and prosperity above all. That beyond certain minimums with respect to making sure he is fit to continue, a husband should be considering himself last. The idea of a big ego about having managed the herculean task of attracting multiple woman because he is just such a puffed up giga-Chad is gross. Should be the last sort of guy attracting multiple wives.
Only ego stroke I can see being justified from a polygamamist man is pride in what he has built. Pride in a large happy family. Pride in what will continue beyond his years.
You know, there should be some kind of match making for this. I mean, in western civilization, we tend to look down on it because “have the freedom to choose” but at times, I think there should be a mediator for both parties. We see this in Hindi culture, even outside of the family, and it just shows that if it is the right people as the neutral party that can bring people together, some of the stress would be lifted.
Oh, ego not just the man’s side but the first wife’s side too. Ego and not being able to put jealously aside when meeting.
Agreed. Though I don't see how matchmaking (reality vs perception issue I imagine) changes the freedom to choose equation.
You and I could look great on paper but not click in person or vice versa naturally...but wow wouldn't it be great if someone knew all of us fairly well and who could say how great this guy and this girl would be for each other.
Ah, that makes sense.
I have heard that tale many times. My mind just didn't go that way as I am blessed to have a wife who supports the idea of plural marriage and doesn't have jealousy issues. I take it you have had irl experience in that regard. Can't be fun.
We have had our rug yanked out more than once. Definitely no fun and to my mind, yet another confirmation that matchmaking is valid
Using the Hindi example, there is still a choice. Just looking, pretty much on paper, for all things about the people and cross-referencing and pretty much go "I think this person might be up your alley, let me tell you about them and see if you want to meet".
But that is the problem, in THIS community and lifestyle, is that it is rolled with the other polys so trying to separate the swingers, the throuple seekers, etc is the hard part for in-person meetings.
On the wife jealously? Oh yes. Now that I am more familiar with "red flags", that was it but it only came up once we met in person. Mainly disguising herself, me thinking I was befriending her to show I was not "a threat", and I was hung up to dry after I was in the sky going home.
On paper...hmm
intriguing notion. I know(or imagine at least) all the matching sites will have various menu picks that they can opt in or out on the back end of their software that they can use for matching two people that are fairly standard. Would like the opportunity to put the group heads together for a moderately exhaustive plig focused one that while not as good as the intermediaries possibility, might be a helpful tool.
No idea if you have seen any of my extended advocacy come rants on the topic of "poly" and why i beat the drum for the term plural marriage or to say Polygamy and completely reject the term poly because of those creepy bloody swinger freaks...not that I have particularly strong opinions on the topic. If you have not had the pleasure, I will spare you the wall of text.
Saying yuck or that sucks is not sufficient. My condolences I suppose is accurate.
I don't know if this is how it would work out with my wife as she has been burned in something like the reverse of what you describe multiple times and is gunshy about getting hurt again. My ideal though is that she drive a bit of the getting to know you process. Would like the women to spend at least as much time getting to know each other as I spend getting to know the woman.
If I bumble my way in front of a bus in ten years, I like to think my wives and children would stay together...still be a family.
So, that means to me that the wives loving as well as liking each other is pretty important.
Not sure beyond that how else to ensure the match is real and that all parties are on board and on the same page
Because matchmaking in West is done informally. Friends and family. I know someone, you should meet them.
If we all had 50 acres down the same farm to market dirt road and our kids played together thst would work.
Unfortunately...
Y'all apparently live all bloody over the country and planet. Lame
How are we suppose to form children's teams to compete in local kids sports leagues? We could call the team the Fighting Pligs.
Not sure a lot of informal matchmaking goes on now days.