So angry at my husband!

[2BGoodAgain]

21 minutes ago, mark clemson said:

 

2BGA, for clarity from what I understand MM lives in a polyamorous family relationship with one man and three(?) other women. Only one of the women is legally married to her Husband who is someone MM has known since her teen years(?) They are also members of what I think could be fairly described as a "fringe" Christian group. They are dedicated family members within their structure and generally very supportive of each other in a variety of ways.

 

Apologies MM if I got any of that wrong.

 

Thanks MarkC... i got the jist of that from the "other wives" bit. I was just floored simply b/c i wasn't expecting that. Fun.

[BaileyB]

4 hours ago, Elswyth said:

 

You don't just get to pick and choose elements of modern society and 0 AD society as you like, lol. The whole polygyny model was based on resources - men having as many wives as they could afford to financially support, so the well-to-do men get many wives and the poor men get none. These women signed up based on that agreement. Women working outside the home and contributing to household finances is a very recent phenomenon and is based on a much more egalitarian relationship model, not a man-is-the-head-of-the-household model.

 

Besides, given that Wife #1 and Wife #2 don't seem to have worked outside the house for many years now, their career options will be pretty much zilch. I don't feel sorry for the dude at all, he got himself into this position, so he has to do his duty. Being "head of the household" comes with a bunch of responsibilities, including providing.

 

I suppose mm could go back to work but she has three children under the age of two and a half and another on the way - if I’m remembering correctly. Perhaps, there is benefit in that she can leave the children with the other wives for childcare but having so many children in such a short period of time that that it is difficult to work/you are financially dependent on your husband limits your options...

[RecentChange]

4 hours ago, mark clemson said:

 

2BGA, for clarity from what I understand MM lives in a polyamorous family relationship with one man and three(?) other women. Only one of the women is legally married to her Husband who is someone MM has known since her teen years(?) They are also members of what I think could be fairly described as a "fringe" Christian group. They are dedicated family members within their structure and generally very supportive of each other in a variety of ways.

 

Apologies MM if I got any of that wrong.

 

 

You forgot that MM as has two lesbian girlfriends that live in the house too - but are not involved with the husband.

 

MM - and I recalling incorrectly, or are your two girlfriends also sisters and in a lesbian relationship with each other?

 

Count me as another that is surprised that a man heading this sort of household would be eligible for a publicly elected position. 

[BaileyB]

3 hours ago, RecentChange said:

Count me as another that is surprised that a man heading this sort of household would be eligible for a publicly elected position. 

 

Nothing about mm’s life surprises me anymore...

[preraph]

Pretty sure it's the poly community's way of trying to get "one of them" in that position since they all hate law enforcement and are threatened by it.  I have to believe there's more non-poly voters in this community, but I could be wrong.  If they're out in the middle of Arkansas or something, they may be very sparsley populated.  

[BaileyB]

13 minutes ago, preraph said:

Pretty sure it's the poly community's way of trying to get "one of them" in that position since they all hate law enforcement and are threatened by it.  

 

That does make sense... as usual. 

[RecentChange]

26 minutes ago, preraph said:

Pretty sure it's the poly community's way of trying to get "one of them" in that position since they all hate law enforcement and are threatened by it.  I have to believe there's more non-poly voters in this community, but I could be wrong.  If they're out in the middle of Arkansas or something, they may be very sparsley populated.  

 

Yeah sometimes I forget how sparsely populated some areas are. Calhoun county AR for example has about the same population as the high school I graduated from. 

 

I imagine politics in an area like that work a bit different than what I am accustomed to.

 

I live in a city of over a million - my husband is active in local politics, and some friends and neighbors have encouraged him to run for local office. Low level stuff, district rep etc. I don't support the idea because for even low level positions you open yourself and your home up for major scrutiny.

[preraph]

Yeah, much as I support LE, I wouldn't like to come under close scrutiny by doing anything political.

[greymatter]

22 hours ago, major_merrick said:

Yeah, I get that I shouldn't have done it.  Old habits and all... I have a tendency to be physical when words fail. 

 

You know this about yourself. You have insight into it. So the next time you get angry at your partner,  walk away like he does until you are calm, so that you can get yourself in control. It's time to learn new habits around how to express your anger appropriately.

[major_merrick]

13 hours ago, Shining One said:

Slightly off topic, but I'm curious. Is your husband legally married to Wife 1 or any of the other wives? Or is he legally single?

Legally, my husband is "single."  He rejects government marriage and believes in religious marriage only.  It also makes all four wives equal, which is a good thing. 

 

13 hours ago, Piddy said:

I know some religions have the husband in the dominant role and the wife in the subservient role.  MM you don't seem to have the temperament to play the subservient role. 

You come across as just the opposite actually.  Strong willed and independent.  I guess religion is a powerful thing to get someone to go against their basic nature.

Yeah I tend to be strong-willed.  My husband calls me his "little snow fox" because I can't be domesticated, and sometimes I bite.  I'm a beautiful wild creature LOL.  He's used to me being stubborn and generally accepts that.  He hasn't taken any of my money, didn't make me quit my job to raise babies, or any of that.  I don't see myself as subservient, although my husband is in kind of a supervisor role.  I chose a different path to see what it was like, fully aware that some issues like this would come up.  I had not anticipated that what seems to be basic financial logic would be an issue.  But I'm operating on logic and he's operating on faith.  Those things don't always mix well.

 

12 hours ago, schlumpy said:

He has a deep and abiding faith in God. If God is calling him to service (which I believe the Major indicated was the case) then God will provide.

That's exactly his perspective.  I take a somewhat less trusting view of God, although I'm learning and I've seen some amazing things.  I was not ready to jump off the deep end with this one.  In all fairness to my husband, he's got savings and a side business that employs Wife #2.  If we put more effort into that it might make up most of the difference.  I grew up in dire poverty and I worry a lot about money.  I owned my own home and a second property debt free before age 30, and I saved the entire amount when I sold it and much more beyond that.  Willingly giving up my good job took me some time.  This news has happened all at once!  I don't do well with surprises.  Not well AT ALL. 

 

12 hours ago, Elswyth said:

Besides, given that Wife #1 and Wife #2 don't seem to have worked outside the house for many years now, their career options will be pretty much zilch. I don't feel sorry for the dude at all, he got himself into this position, so he has to do his duty. Being "head of the household" comes with a bunch of responsibilities, including providing.

My view exactly.  He's set this up, it is up to him to make it run.  I have no problem obeying a leader who makes things succeed.  Wife #1 has never worked, and given her mental issues is not able to hold a job.  Wife #2 works part time at the family business, but would not be able to get a normal job due to her being undocumented.  I gave up my job to stay home, although I could easily go back.  I also own a rental property that gives me some spending money, and I've thought about investing my savings in some more cheap houses to rent out.  Wife #4 works full time where my husband works.  My GF#1 works full time as a designer.  So all together we have a very, very nice standard of living.  My husband has always paid the bills himself, and has said that the money the rest of us make is ours to keep.  We contribute almost nothing financially, so those of us who have worked have substantial savings.  My husband has encouraged us to get into business if we want, or do anything that we find interesting.   

 

3 hours ago, preraph said:

Pretty sure it's the poly community's way of trying to get "one of them" in that position since they all hate law enforcement and are threatened by it.  I have to believe there's more non-poly voters in this community, but I could be wrong.  If they're out in the middle of Arkansas or something, they may be very sparsley populated.  

Yep, our area is rural and sparsely populated.  The county seat (the only real town) is small enough not to need its own municipal police department.  The town closest to us is around 75 - 100 people.  Politics here is all about connections.  Friends and neighbors, and what family you are from.  My husband is from a very prominent local family.  Although he didn't grow up here, he's the descendant who inherited.  His family has been allied with certain other families for 100-150 years, and one of his ancestors was a prominent local Confederate military officer.  You wouldn't think that would matter, but it definitely does.  Enough to even outweigh the oddness of having multiple wives. 

 

Having someone from our community in a law enforcement position could be helpful, but since we haven't faced opposition in our county and my husband has been on good terms with the sheriff, it hasn't exactly been necessary.  Perhaps that's changing.  The chief deputy showed up at worship tonight and brought his children.  I found out that he lost his wife this year, so I can see why he wouldn't want to take on the extra duties of being elected sheriff since he's a single dad.  He's already the acting sheriff from now until next November, and I bet that's stressing him out.  I think my husband and Wife #4 are befriending him since they know what losing a partner is like.  I'm not used to seeing a cop in uniform look vulnerable and human, and this guy looks like he's barely holding things together. 

 

For right now, I'm getting along better with my husband.  We spent some time on the road together today and it felt like old times.  I was able to relax a bit, and I kind of feel stupid for getting as worked up as I did.  I don't like being left alone during the day, though.  He can sometimes take me to work with him, but obviously not every day.  And I have my own work to do at home, too.  The separation during the day bothers me, though.  I shouldn't feel insecure like that, but I do.  I don't usually have nightmares, but I've had a lot this week and my sleep has been terrible. 

[pepperbird]

just my opinion, but he has no business being in any sort of law enforcement.

(a) he;s actively breaking the law every day

 

(b) it sounds like he has little to no use for the laws of the land of law enforcement in general.

 

EHy wold someone ( unless he's Ron Swanson from " Parks and Rec" )want to be a cog in a machine he doesn't trust and seems to dislike very strongly?

 

[pepperbird]

On 12/15/2019 at 10:57 AM, CautiouslyOptimistic said:

 

I would guess he doesn't get it.  Have you been diagnosed with PTSD?

 

I think you could be underestimating the negative feelings folks would have about electing someone with such an alternative lifestyle to this position.  Surely not everyone in the whole county already knows you guys and how you life your life.  Once word gets out, stereotypes will exist, and he may not win the election as easily as you think.  

It's not even anything to do with polygamy.

[major_merrick]

4 hours ago, pepperbird said:

(a) he;s actively breaking the law every day

(b) it sounds like he has little to no use for the laws of the land of law enforcement in general.

 

The way you put it actually sounds like a great argument FOR him to take the job.  Play the system, secure our area.  Avoid enforcing things that are odious.  But since that could be accomplished in other ways, I'd rather he not do it. 

[mark clemson]

I'm confused as to how MM's husband is breaking the law. None of them are legally married so the arrangement they have is legal.

 

Is it that one of the women is undocumented? I'm not sure if "harboring" an undoc is actually illegal.

 

Is it something else that I've missed?

[major_merrick]

Mark, I think that "harboring" is part of what Pepperbird is getting at.  IDK why Wife #2 has chosen not to pursue becoming legal.  She's got 3 kids who are US citizens, so getting her papers in order would be pretty easy.  She's just never felt the need.  With not needing "normal" employment and living in an area with tons of Hispanic people (including many who are undocumented), she's never worried about it.  She was brought here as a child, so it wasn't her choice anyways. 

[pepperbird]

I just keep thinking that his taking the job would be incredibly hypocritical. He has no use for thbe law/police, but will gladly take a job in the field? He is going to be asked to enforce laws he may not agree with or want to uphold.

 

Quite frankly, I wouldn't trust him in any sort of governmental or civic position. Not because he's a bad guy- he may be a great guy. It's more than, in my experience, people of faith have an extremely difficult time putting that to the side. What will happen if he is asked to enforce laws he feels conflict with his religious beliefs? Which would he follow? Man's law or god's law? It really wouldn't be up to him.
This could be one of those times when he has to put his faith first. I would think that part of being a true believer in his faith is recognizing when it's time to step back and not assume a leadership position he isn't suited for. 

[Els]

On 12/19/2019 at 2:37 PM, major_merrick said:

My view exactly.  He's set this up, it is up to him to make it run.  I have no problem obeying a leader who makes things succeed.  Wife #1 has never worked, and given her mental issues is not able to hold a job.  Wife #2 works part time at the family business, but would not be able to get a normal job due to her being undocumented.  I gave up my job to stay home, although I could easily go back.  I also own a rental property that gives me some spending money, and I've thought about investing my savings in some more cheap houses to rent out.  Wife #4 works full time where my husband works.  My GF#1 works full time as a designer.  So all together we have a very, very nice standard of living.  My husband has always paid the bills himself, and has said that the money the rest of us make is ours to keep.  We contribute almost nothing financially, so those of us who have worked have substantial savings.  My husband has encouraged us to get into business if we want, or do anything that we find interesting.  

 

I mean, this is why I always chuckle when men who aren't in "traditional" relationships talk about them being the bees' knees, lol. Obviously people should feel free to pick whatever relationship style suits them, but IMO following traditional gender roles can be pretty darn rough on the man! Being the main provider (which is the very definition of the traditional "male" role) is a huge responsibility. They can't pick their job based on job satisfaction or fulfillment or desirability, that is a luxury reserved for those who are not providers. Their main role is to bring in enough money to support their family, and that comes with a bunch of personal sacrifices.

 

Edited December 20, 2019 by Elswyth

[major_merrick]

6 hours ago, pepperbird said:

I just keep thinking that his taking the job would be incredibly hypocritical. He has no use for the law/police, but will gladly take a job in the field? He is going to be asked to enforce laws he may not agree with or want to uphold.

 

Which would he follow? Man's law or god's law? It really wouldn't be up to him.

The interesting thing about the role of a sheriff is that he CAN choose to not enforce a bad law.  Similar to the idea of "jury nullification."  A jury can refuse to convict someone who has broken the law on the basis of that law being unacceptable.  A sheriff can refuse to enforce, or can give a warning rather than arrest.  Since you're from Canada IIRC, that may be a weird concept to you.  It is controversial in some parts of the US, but is accepted here and a number of sheriffs have done so.  Before it was legalized, open carry was one issue where the sheriffs got together and said that even though it wasn't legally permitted, they would not arrest someone with a visible handgun who was just going about their business.  Their refusal to enforce was actually one big reason why open carry became legal. 

 

If my husband took the job, I know he would use it in a positive way to create some change...refusing to enforce bad laws and tightening up on corruption.  There's a movement in our county and in some nearby counties toward "Godly Government."  The guy who is running against our incumbent county judge is running on a faith platform.  The public schools in our county have the Lord's Prayer right along with the Pledge of Allegiance.  The high school has a painted mural of Jesus.  The sheriff in the next county where my husband works ran on the slogan "Man of faith and character" and was elected in a landslide.  I don't think there's as much separation of church and state here as there is in the rest of the US. 

[schlumpy]

1 hour ago, major_merrick said:

 I don't think there's as much separation of church and state here as there is in the rest of the US. 

The constitution does not call for separation of church and state. The statement does not exist within the body of the constitution. What does exist is: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

 

The intent of the founders was to avoid a state religion. This has been torn and twisted by the left over the years through activist judges and conditioning of the population to believe in "separation of church and state." While I have no problem with a secular government and judicial system I think it's taken to far when it's applied to any organization receiving federal funds. 

[major_merrick]

Schlumpy, you are correct.  Separation of church and state is a concept proposed by some our founders, but not an absolute requirement.  Some states have clauses in their constitutions that mention "no religious test" for public office.  That's about as far as it goes. 

[Haydn]

Husband must be knackered.

 

Does he sometimes have headaches?

 

Sounds like he`s wants a less stressful job.

[major_merrick]

Yeah he gets headaches and nightmares and has issues sleeping.  But I suspect a sheriff job would have increased that rather than having a positive effect.  He tries to make his workplace happy.  If there is such a thing, I'd say he's a damn good boss.  His crew really loves him. 

 

THANKFULLY we've found a resolution to the sheriff issue!!!  My husband is not going to run.  The chief deputy/acting sheriff has been coaxed into running.  He's nervous that if he loses the election, he'll lose his job and his means of supporting his kids.  My husband is working on that issue, and he is going to help him with his campaign.  My husband helped the previous sheriff during election time, so he knows what he's doing.  Campaign funding, dinners for local folks, debates and meetings.... he's going to be very busy in 2020.  At least our lives aren't going to change, and I guess my husband listened to me after all. 

 

For some reason, my husband has invited this guy and his family to spend Christmas Day at our house.  I've never been comfortable with the idea of having a cop in my house, but I can't complain now after receiving good news like this.  I guess the two guys are becoming good friends, so I'm going to have to get used to it.  Since it is my husband's house, I can't really say no anyways.  Last year it was my ex and my younger sister.  Nothing like hospitality...

[BettyDraper]

I'm happy for you, MM. It seems like your husband helping with another election campaign is an excellent compromise. 

 

I wonder why your husband wouldn't care about having a person in the home who made you very uncomfortable.

 

I don't think that submission in a marriage is about absolute power given to one partner with no consideration for the other. 

[schlumpy]

Merry Christmas Major. May the blessings of this time of year reside within your heart. You got what you wanted. 

[major_merrick]

My husband is very social.  He invites without thinking someone else might have an issue with it.  I'm not going to say anything or I'll start to seem like I'm irritated all the time.  I know that's a turnoff for most men and for my husband especially.  So many other things are going right for Christmas I don't want to make trouble.