Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Wish I’d had that option. Not gay, but would much rather raise kids with another woman as the primary partner than a man. You can have one two people work and one person be the main stay at home partner, best of all worlds.

Except for the poor confused kid but who the hell cares about them anyway? Whatever is easiest for you pp

Why would the kid be confused? Confused in the same way people insisted children of same sex parents would be confused?

Anonymous wrote:OP, in your place I would worry about your potential for abuse. I wonder if this guy is a narcissist, his wife a victim who has not seen the light but would love to have your company there. The husband must see some potential in you to serve his needs. I wonder if he has detected your weak spots. He is offering that you get to have your own child. Is this what makes this worth it? What will you do, write up a contract? Suppose you get pregnant. How do you protect that child in this situation?

These are valid points. But why do you assume the woman is a victim? How do you know it wasn't the woman pushing for this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What?

What's confusing you, darling?

No one is confused, we’re just disgusted. We don’t think you’re edgy, darling, just damaged and sad.

This. Or an extremely bored troll

Don't ask what if you are not confused. Just post your judgmental commentary instead of being a coward who thinks she's a cool girl.

OP, in your place I would worry about your potential for abuse. I wonder if this guy is a narcissist, his wife a victim who has not seen the light but would love to have your company there. The husband must see some potential in you to serve his needs. I wonder if he has detected your weak spots. He is offering that you get to have your own child. Is this what makes this worth it? What will you do, write up a contract? Suppose you get pregnant. How do you protect that child in this situation?

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Wish I’d had that option. Not gay, but would much rather raise kids with another woman as the primary partner than a man. You can have one two people work and one person be the main stay at home partner, best of all worlds.

Except for the poor confused kid but who the hell cares about them anyway? Whatever is easiest for you pp

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What?

What's confusing you, darling?

No one is confused, we’re just disgusted. We don’t think you’re edgy, darling, just damaged and sad.

+1

And we think you are both judgmental assholes. Bye!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What?

What's confusing you, darling?

No one is confused, we’re just disgusted. We don’t think you’re edgy, darling, just damaged and sad.

This. Or an extremely bored troll

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What?

What's confusing you, darling?

No one is confused, we’re just disgusted. We don’t think you’re edgy, darling, just damaged and sad.

+1

No better way to find out than talk to the fundamentalist Mormons. I think they could talk to you about the lifestyle without dwelling on religion if you can get them to talk to you at all. Sometimes I think I want a sister wife, but really I just want a full time housekeeper and full time nanny. I can’t imagine sharing a husband or living a life that is so abnormal. I think it’d be extremely hard on the kids, especially as they get older, unless you live in a polygamist community.

I am thinking of the book "The Red Tent" a reimagining of the biblical Jacob, Leah, Rachel. The tribal women have community with each other and take care of each other and all the kids, many of the women being married to the same guys.

I have often thought there ought to be two of me (i am DW). This arrangement does not actually appeal to me though. I would not want the sexual jealousy. And what if the sister wife was gross/annoying/ did not agree with me about child raising? I think this communal idea comes up against our individualistic priorities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. Wish I’d had that option. Not gay, but would much rather raise kids with another woman as the primary partner than a man. You can have one two people work and one person be the main stay at home partner, best of all worlds.

This is what I'm saying. It sounds pretty ideal. to me. All solves the problem of not being enough men for each woman that wants marriage and family.

It’s a love triangle these usually end with a suicide or a murder.

I don't see what the original woman gets out of it - another adult to help take care of the children, but presumably there would be more children to take care of if the second woman has a child/children. Plus, gross.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go for it. Sounds super stable and a great way to raise a child who surely will turn out great and have no relationship issues at all. Definitely will last a lifetime.

This model predates what you clearly think is the ideal and has proven to be successful..

I always wonder what happens to the women when the men die. Do they both marry another man? Do they go their separate ways and each one marries a different man? That seems sad that the half siblings would be split up. The whole thing just seems so bizarre.

Anonymous[b wrote:]No high quality man would seek this. No secure woman would allow it. [/b]

It’s true that at points in history humans have formed these kinds of families but that’s not relevant to predicting who is seeking it now.

Those are absolutes you cannot prove, being again your 1 man 1 woman preference does not make it fact.

No high quality man would seek this. No secure woman would allow it.

It’s true that at points in history humans have formed these kinds of families but that’s not relevant to predicting who is seeking it now.