Anyone know of any good poly or harem stories that aren't tagged as poly or harem? Preferably romantic in theme, and more women than men involved.
Anyone know of any good poly or harem stories that aren't tagged as poly or harem? Preferably romantic in theme, and more women than men involved.
Joe J's do-over Twice Lucky stories aren't labeled poly or harem. Romance included. I've never read a poly or harem story that didn't have more women than men (most often "man"). The Living Next Door to Heaven series might have as many men, but I don't know as i quit reading early on in the first book. I'm almost certainly in the minority on that.
G Younger's Stupid Boy stories aren't labeled Poly, though to my thinking they are. They meet the site's definition of the code.
Joe J's do-over Twice Lucky stories aren't labeled poly or harem. Romance included.
Also his Prisoner of the Widows. Note the plural.
Oops. Strike that. Just noticed it carries the "Harem" tag.
bb
@jimh67
I didn't know of any either that had more men that women, i just put that as my person preference (though I would imagine it is most men's). I did the same on Next Door to Heaven. It just became a monster to keep track of characters, plus a few that I liked weren't as featured. Twice Lucky is a good series. But I never bothered to finish it since it was left incomplete, and I hate to get attached to characters and not finish their story.
I didn't know of any either that had more men that women, i just put that as my person preference (though I would imagine it is most men's).
Well, my _Gayle's Ceremony_ has 6 women and 3 men. As Gayle says someplace, "Three women can keep 6 men happy, and 6 men can keep 3 women even happier."
Real harems had a tendency for the women to satisfy each other while they waited for the pasha to call them into his bed.
Have a look at some of those written by cmsix. I know nearly all are unfinished, but a couple of ones that are complete aren't marked poly when I seem to recall they were.
Also, the Florida Friends series by Dual Writer aren't marked as poly, but I think they all fall under that category as well.
How about The Accidental Master by Lord Skies, and Wagons Ho! (and sequels) by Lazlong?
At the risk of tooting my own horn (isn't that we do on this site reading stroke stories?), it's hardly my main theme, but in my earlier stories (Catalyst and The Great Death), I wanted to explore poly/harem relationships. I was tired of harem story which never quite made sense of the relationships and wanted to explore how they might occur in real-life situations (i.e. why women, in particular, would put up with them). Once I got it out of my system, I basically dropped the premise. As such, they fit within your category, but provide an alternative if you're reading too many of the same types of stories. (Though they're all labeled "harem", so they're hardly mislabeled.)
To be honest Crumbly, I hadn't given them a heck of a lot of thought. Sometimes the subject or description just don't speak to me. I'll give them a shot though, after hearing you talk about them. I'd love some stories exploring the non-mainstream harem side. I love reading about exploring how those types of relationships would work, and why someone would get involved.
exploring the non-mainstream harem side. I love reading about exploring how those types of relationships would work
I was curious as to how the codes differentiated between Harem and Polygamy/Polyamory.
Harem was described as: A traditional old fashion harem, is where an old sultan has a collection of women housed in a palace for his own pleasure.
To me this implies one man and multiple women with the man owning the women. Since he is maintaining them for his pleasure, there may or may not be a personal relationship between the man and the women other than that typical of two people who are sexually intimate with each other. It is my understanding that in some harems, the sultan kept so many women that he never met some of them and he rarely engaged in a personal relationship with many.
Polygamy/Polyamory is just defined as multiple spouses or partners which could be multiple men and/or multiple women. It is implied that membership in the group is voluntary, and they remain together due to their personal relationships.
Based on the stories I have read I can't recall any of the groups fitting the definition of Harem, although harem was a frequently used word. It comes across better than: This is my polygamy/polyamory.
Based on the stories I have read I can't recall any of the groups fitting the definition of Harem, although harem was a frequently used word. It comes across better than: This is my polygamy/polyamory.
Harem is typically used as a synonym for polyamy, though it more widely recognized and isn't as awkward to quote in a story (how often do any of us drop it in everyday speech?). The main idea is that there's one person affecting and largely controlling the lives (often sexually) of many partners.
Harem is typically used as a synonym for polyamy,
it may be used that way, but the real meanings are slightly different - kind of the variation you get between a car and a sedan
Harem is typically used as a synonym for polyamy, though it more widely recognized and isn't as awkward to quote in a story (how often do any of us drop it in everyday speech?).
Harem typically involves at least a touch of dominance/submission.
Also, technically:
Polygamy -> one man many wives.
Polyamory -> a generic term encompassing both polygamy and polyandry as well as group marriages with more than one of both genders.
Polyandry -> one woman many husbands.
Polygamy -> one man many wives.
Polyamory -> a generic term encompassing both polygamy and polyandry as well as group marriages with more than one of both genders.
Polyandry -> one woman many husbands.
The SOL tag says:
Polygamy/Polyamory Multiple spouses or partners (multiple men or multiple women)
Should Lazeez amend it to include Polyandry?
I can image 70-year-old teenage men seeking polygamy stories. Are women likely to seek polyandry stories?
AJ
Should Lazeez amend it to include Polyandry?
It's a title. The description says it all.
Should Lazeez amend it to include Polyandry?
I kind of doubt that there are enough polyandry stories out there to make that worth the effort.
I kind of doubt that there are enough polyandry stories out there to make that worth the effort.
From the description, the category includes polyandry already. It's just not mentioned in the title.
AJ
From the description, the category includes polyandry already. It's just not mentioned in the title.
It might be more descriptive (pardon the pun) to change the code to the simpler "poly", as it includes all the variants.
It might be more descriptive (pardon the pun) to change the code to the simpler "poly", as it includes all the variants.
I was thinking that myself! Are we twins?
AJ
I can image 70-year-old teenage men seeking polygamy stories. Are women likely to seek polyandry stories?
I'm not sure about polygamy stories (though they might see themselves as the protagonist more), but a large number like romantic gay stories with multiple partners (especially teenage gay romances with more yearning, building towards the eventual sex scenes), for the same reason we men enjoy lesbian stories.
I think you are a little mixed up here
Polygamy = one person(man or woman)having many spouses
Polyamory = one person having many sexual partners(closer to a harem than polygamy will every be)
Now the difference between Polygamy and Harem is that in Polygamy they are all married to the person and it could be a woman with many spouses
A harem can involve girlfriends, friends with benefits etc.....if they are not all married, its not polygamy, its a harem
Polygamy = one person(man or woman)having many spouses
No, I am not confused. Polygamy is specific to one man with many wives.
A woman with multiple husbands would be polyandry.
No, I am not confused. Polygamy is specific to one man with many wives.
A woman with multiple husbands would be polyandry.
I agree.
But, just to confuse everyone, 'monogamy' is used to mean a single sex partner no matter what the gender of the person under discussion. So a woman in a relationship with a single other would be termed monogamous and not mon(o)androus or monoamorous.
Doncha just lurve English ;)
AJ
Does that relate to the English placed on a curve ball?
No, it refers to bacon, eggs, mushrooms, black pudding, sausage, tomato and fried bread ;)
AJ
Actually, a man with many wives is polygyny.
Polygamy includes both polyandry and polygyny.
Actually, polygamy is a more generic term. This is a common, technical misunderstanding of the term. Polygyny is the actual, precise word describing the phenomenon that you mention there, but due to the Mormon Fundamentalist misuse of the word "polygamy," the general term is often used imprecisely to speak only of polygyny.
Harem is typically used as a synonym for polyamy
I agree.
The problem from my perspective is we have definitions of the terms, commonly obtained from dictionaries, and then we have the way the words are used. This comes full circle because the dictionaries' definitions reflect how the words have been and are currently being used.
I never thought about looking up the actual terms on here. The term harem really has fallen into use as anything poly related, very few actual harem stories that I have found on here. At least as far as that definition. They all seem to be more poly than anything.
They all seem to be more poly than anything.
True. However, other than just noting the differences between the two codes, most of us just use harem without worrying about how it is defined here on SOL. Harem is such an accepted term that many writers seem to use the Harem code without thinking of the differences between the two codes.
Since the two codes seem to be used interchangeably, perhaps Lazeez should merge the two codes to: Harem/Poly and define the code as a mixed or same sex relationship between three or more spouses/partners.
Since the two codes seem to be used interchangeably, perhaps Lazeez should merge the two codes to: Harem/Poly and define the code as a mixed or same sex relationship between three or more spouses/partners.
I'm inclined to disagree, the two terms are used interchangeably in a lot of cases because the two terms share a fair bit of overlap. However, just because they have commonalities with each other, and can situationaly be synonyms doesn't means they're always synonymous with each other.
"Poly" in my book is an indicator that there is some degree of a two-way(/more) relationship in play between the various parties, and consent is present.
"Harems" due to their nature, can be one way relationships, and consent likewise may not always be present. Going to the "old times" example, the sultan/powerful person can spot a person they find desirable, and have them added to their "harem" whether the other person wants to be part of it or not(a certain Biblical account of King David comes to mind), and just generally, people on at least one side of the equation may not have much consent in things.
A good example within the US in the 19th century would have been a White Slave owner who kept a large assortment of female "house slaves" which he basically used for his own(and maybe other's) pleasure. THAT would qualify as a harem, but it may not qualify as being either polyamorous or even polygamous. It's a defined and sustained sexual relationship between a man and multiple women, and the women are kept as literal slaves, not as spouses, or anything close to that mark.
But we then circle back to: Just because Harems can, and have been known to employ non-consensual and non-reciprocal relationships. That doesn't mean that harems are incapable of being both consensual, and (exclusively) include reciprocal relationships as part of its nature. Which would give you the "polyamorous harem" which many here seems to want to consider as the default.
"Poly" in my book is an indicator that there is some degree of a two-way(/more) relationship in play between the various parties, and consent is present.
"Harems" due to their nature, can be one way relationships, and consent likewise may not always be present.
While I doubt very few readers will follow a strict Bible themed rationale, I think where you idea comes into play is in the qualification, rather than the force. "Harem" is often used when the men REFUSE to consider inviting another man into the fold (thus no free consent to disagree, it's either 'get with the program or hit the road, Jill').
While I doubt very few readers will follow a strict Bible themed rationale, I think where you idea comes into play is in the qualification, rather than the force. "Harem" is often used when the men REFUSE to consider inviting another man into the fold (thus no free consent to disagree, it's either 'get with the program or hit the road, Jill').
I only used the Biblical reference because it is one people are likely to be aware of, or would be able to locate easily enough if so inclined. While citing the 16th Sultan of the Kingdom of Attawanda in the 13th century(I'm making this up, if there really was one, I'm amazed) wouldn't be quite so effective at communicating the idea.
Although I'd still generally hold to the "harem" tag primarily denoting someone involved in a "1 to many" relationship, and very rarely a "many to many" scenario. Where the further qualifier is that no emotional attachments are required on the part of either side. (Sultan and a concubine/slave for example, while the concubine may be required to be "faithful" to the sultan sexually, their emotional interests don't matter and are likely to be of no concern)
While the "Poly" relationship tag is inherently something that is 1 to many at the least, and potentially many to many. With the qualifier that emotional attachments are being made/and are required.
Now if we're talking about swingers, where multiple sexual partners is the thing being referenced(but emotional attachment isn't required), that's another matter.
Although I'd still generally hold to the "harem" tag primarily denoting someone involved in a "1 to many" relationship, and very rarely a "many to many" scenario. Where the further qualifier is that no emotional attachments are required on the part of either side. (Sultan and a concubine/slave for example, while the concubine may be required to be "faithful" to the sultan sexually, their emotional interests don't matter and are likely to be of no concern)
In many "harem" stories, the attachment between those involved is a central component of the story (mine included). Just because several stroke stories don't place much value on human emotions doesn't mean the world isn't concerned with them.
I think it's safe when "harem" is associated with "consensual", you can assume it means a "poly" relationship.
I'm inclined to disagree
I don't disagree with what you say.
My suggestion of merging the codes was for convenience of the authors and readers.
I suspect that most SOL readers (and many SOL authors) could not define the differences between Polygamy, Polyamory, and Polyandry without the use of a dictionary. I also suspect that they could not explain the difference between the codes Harem and Polygamy/Polyamory without consulting the code definitions.
From that view point, it makes sense to merge the codes even though there is a difference between the relationship associated with a harem and the relationship of the 3 Poly groupings.
From that view point, it makes sense to merge the codes even though there is a difference between the relationship associated with a harem and the relationship of the 3 Poly groupings.
Especially when the existing codes aren't being used as they're designed.
Especially when the existing codes aren't being used as they're designed.
A second good reason for doing so.
Although I would modify my definition slightly to: A relationship between three or more spouses/partners without regard to the spouses/partners sex and sexual orientation.
It is so true, and not just on this site. Don't get me wrong I am not complaining since authors are doing this for free in most cases. But you would think that an author would want to tag their story properly so their intended audience could find it. As a reader, it is frustrating.
that an author would want to tag their story properly so their intended audience could find it
Most readers initially use the New Stories and Update pages to find stories to read. If they like an author then they will check the Author's page. Somewhere along the line they will check the reviews for good stories. The search feature is probably one of the last sources a reader uses. Keep in mind that many readers have free accounts and thus they are limited to 16 stories a day and can only use a limited subset of the search function's features.
A second problem facing the author is to decide what codes apply. When we post a story we select the applicable codes. Go to your Home page and click Code Definitions. Those are our selections. We need to recall the entire story and we are supposed to only check the codes that apply. One of the decisions that needs to be made goes like this: I have this short passage of about 100 words addressing F/F sex in a 9,000 word story. Does that passage warrant the F/F code assignment. Some authors say Yes, others say No. Keep in mind that readers looking for F/F scenes may not read your story without the code, and attaching the code when it isn't warranted irritates readers.
I can most assuredly see your point on the f/f example. But if it is a main theme shouldn't you mark that? And I understand that most readers probably aren't as careful about searching for stories as I can be.
But if it is a main theme shouldn't you mark that?
I would, and I think most authors do.
One of the decisions that needs to be made goes like this: I have this short passage of about 100 words addressing F/F sex in a 9,000 word story. Does that passage warrant the F/F code assignment. Some authors say Yes, others say No. Keep in mind that readers looking for F/F scenes may not read your story without the code, and attaching the code when it isn't warranted irritates readers.
And that reader who was using that code to find things may get annoyed at you for flagging it as such when that story turns out to be 30,000 words, and only has 1,000 words worth of F/F pairing going on.
I know I had that issue when going for the "Nudism" flag on some stories, some of which were insanely long, 100's of thousands of words in some cases. Only to find 1 chapter, out of dozens, that had people getting naked outside of a bedroom/sex scene, and even that was for only a small portion of the chapter.
Of course, I suspect a couple authors decided their story warranted the "nudism" flag because they had a character walk from their bathroom to the bedroom in the nude during one scene. While I guess that technically qualifies, it's one of those "Why?" kind of moments.
And that reader who was using that code to find things may get annoyed at you for flagging it as such when that story turns out to be 30,000 words, and only has 1,000 words worth of F/F pairing going on.
That's true for people searching for tags, but for those avoiding squicks, ANY reference is a reason for inclusion (and story rejection).
That's why, ideally, I'd prefer separate "story code" and "squick code" listings, so we can drop the little used codes from the broader search criteria.
A second problem facing the author is to decide what codes apply. When we post a story we select the applicable codes. Go to your Home page and click Code Definitions.
A related problem to this is Lazeez often adds new codes due to requests from readers and authors (mostly authors) - so we should regularly check if we have a story that a new code applies to and add the code to the story description - which is easy to do.
I suspect that most SOL readers (and many SOL authors) could not define the differences between Polygamy, Polyamory, and Polyandry without the use of a dictionary.
I suspect most SOL readers don't even know what Polyamory and Polyandry is unless they've researched that field, know or knew someone involved in such a relationship, or happen to be under the age of 30.
From that view point, it makes sense to merge the codes even though there is a difference between the relationship associated with a harem and the relationship of the 3 Poly groupings.
Yes and no, the three terms denote different things, but the difference they denote is largely based on gender, something which is already addressed through the story codes for FF/MF/MM and so forth.
Of course, the argument could be made for "harem" and the consent flag, albeit with wildly different results.
A Poly story with a non-con flag may not be a "Harem" story, after all.
I suspect most SOL readers don't even know what Polyamory and Polyandry is unless they've researched that field, know or knew someone involved in such a relationship, or happen to be under the age of 30.
That certainly fits me. To me "harem" implies complete control outside marriage. The boss could be female though is usually male. For me this starts (at least) as non-consensual. I specify "outside marriage" because Islam gives the man total control over his wife/wives.
As for voluntary groupings, whether one man with multiple females, one female with multiple males or a grouping of multiple males and females why not call it a "group" which, hopefully, the less well informed will understand better than polywhatever?
Then we have the problem when something happens mid-story. I am thinking about a particular story where a group of females start by effectively raping an injured solitary male, they want to put him to work as a slave but eventually they voluntarily become his harem (but is it a "harem" or a "group"?
Polywhatever seems like a good way to organize all the polys except maybe Polly wants a cracker. The various Greek roots to indicate the kind of multiple or just plain Amory for love, I guess, seem unnecessarily pedagogical. That means you need a college degree to figure out what you are talking about. I suppose just poly is out because it might be polydactyl which involves more than a normal number of fingers or toes. Or maybe an ancient flying reptile before there were birds.
but is it a "harem" or a "group
I have a big problem remembering titles and names until I've used them a few times.
If it is the story I read, I would call it a group. The soldier bonded with the women and they stayed together voluntarily. If I recall the soldier remained with the women after he recovered from his wounds.
I have a big problem remembering titles and names until I've used them a few times.
If it is the story I read, I would call it a group. The soldier bonded with the women and they stayed together voluntarily. If I recall the soldier remained with the women after he recovered from his wounds.
Nearly right; he was a pilot shot down in Iraq. The story is Prisoner of the Widows or close to that.
The options are "group sex" which sounds more like an orgy and "Polygamy/Polyamory" which, if you know those words would not suit (see below)
I'm not sure if these words are current over here. My pretty complete Oxford dictionary does not have polyamory and polygamy is clearly married people only.
Polygyny is having two or more wives and/or concubines which is not a SOL option but is the correct choice
polygamy is clearly married people only.
I don't know that much about other countries' law, but suspect they are the same as the US. In the US the generally accepted legal definition is one person (usually a man) married to two or more people at the same time.
Here at SOL the term is sometimes used to reflect a relationship with or without a legally recognized marriage between a male who is in a relationship with two or more females. Polyandry is a woman in such a relationship with two or more men. Which leaves us with Polyamory which is two or more males in a relationship with two or more females. The only thing left is to figure out how to get into such a relationship without getting killed or permanently mutilated by our significant other. :)
I don't know that much about other countries' law, but suspect they are the same as the US. In the US the generally accepted legal definition is one person (usually a man) married to two or more people at the same time.
Actually, I believe the legal term for that is Bigamy. Technically, I think it also applies to one woman married to two or more men, but that is not the connotation the word usually carries.
Actually, I believe the legal term for that is Bigamy. Technically, I think it also applies to one woman married to two or more men, but that is not the connotation the word usually carries.
Actually, it depends on the laws in the area and how the marriages were conducted. In Australia you can only be married to one person at any one time under the Commonwealth Marriage Act. However, in most states there is no limitation on the number of de facto spouses you can. From what I've read the same is true of many US states; while some also limit the number of de facto spouses to one spouse; and some allow for one by the marriage laws plus one de facto spouse, giving a total of two legal spouses.
Actually, it depends on the laws in the area and how the marriages were conducted. In Australia you can only be married to one person at any one time under the Commonwealth Marriage Act. However, in most states there is no limitation on the number of de facto spouses you can. From what I've read the same is true of many US states; while some also limit the number of de facto spouses to one spouse; and some allow for one by the marriage laws plus one de facto spouse, giving a total of two legal spouses.
Except, in those instances, 'de facto' spouse doesn't grant the same privileges as a marriage, but is instead designed to protect mothers impregnated by cheating husbands (thus only the man is stuck with support payments for any children resulting from their affairs).
I believe the legal term for that is Bigamy
I agree with what you say. However, you took the comment out of context. My response to Sejintenej's comment was addressing the term polygamy.
Bigamy is a restrictive term that only applies to a person, male or female, who has married two or more people without legally ending their prior marital relationship(s).
Polygamy laws include bigamy and relationships between three or more people who form relationships without being married.
Edited to add: I should have said, Polygamy is defined as one man and multiple women. Polyandry is one woman and multiple men. Polymorphous is multiple men and multiple women.
I think you mean polyamory ;)
And then there is polywantacracker, when a resident of Georgia or north Florida lives with a parrot. The parrot is poly, the guy is a Cracker.
Someone who is polymorphous is a shape-shifter. Is there a shape-shifter tag on SOL? ;)
AJ
Is there a shape-shifter tag on SOL?
Not exactly. There is 'were animal' under 'Paranormal' and 'Transformation' under 'Other'
I should have said, Polygamy is defined as one man and multiple women. Polyandry is one woman and multiple men. Polymorphous is multiple men and multiple women.
Then what do you call one person in a relationship with multiple species of various genders, such as tentacle monsters (great for sci-fi stories)?
By the way, a google search for the proper spelling of "tentacle" turns up "tentacle kitty" as the #1 reference. Go figure. Must be a new Japanese comic.
Then what do you call one person in a relationship with multiple species of various genders, such as tentacle monsters (great for sci-fi stories)?
A Stranger. Even if I do know them. :)
Then what do you call one person in a relationship with multiple species of various genders, such as tentacle monsters
Do tentacle monsters even have genders?
If tentacle monsters indulge in sex then they have genders. However they might not be genders that we recognise ;)
AJ
If tentacle monsters indulge in sex then they have genders.
What would a female tentacle monster look like? A spheroid with a bunch of tentacle receptacles?
I wonder whether they might be like slugs and snails, where at any one time either partner can be the male with the other partner being the female.
AJ
As for voluntary groupings, whether one man with multiple females, one female with multiple males or a grouping of multiple males and females why not call it a "group" which, hopefully, the less well informed will understand better than polywhatever?
"Group" mostly refers to "group sex", which is distinct from both "poly" and "harem".
A Poly story with a non-con flag may not be a "Harem" story, after all.
The non-con flag usually stipulates a single relationship or interactions (i.e. a single rape scene) in a larger story, so I wouldn't base much on it's inclusion.
Since the two codes seem to be used interchangeably, perhaps Lazeez should merge the two codes to: Harem/Poly and define the code as a mixed or same sex relationship between three or more spouses/partners.
I think what's happened in most readers minds, is that "poly" denotes "multiple partners", whereas "harem" denotes a particular type of story (single guy has dozens of devoted followers/lovers).
I think you'll find more use of "poly" in couple-sharing circles, where each partner has multiple lovers, rather than where one person partakes but shares little with others.
I suspect that's where the common perception of the names breaks down.
FantasyLover's 'Escape from Lexington' is polygamy, but isn't labeled as such. At least, I consider several wives and a few other females as polygamy, but since he is married to most of them I don't think it can be called a harem.
https://storiesonline.net/s/14823/escape-from-lexington
A lot of Charm Brights stories involve harems.
https://storiesonline.net/a/Charm_Brights
Anyone know of any good poly or harem stories that aren't tagged as poly or harem? Preferably romantic in theme, and more women than men involved.
Most of the stories by Verywellaged involve one American male and a large number (well, larger than two) of women, almost all natives of the Philippines.
What a topic I started. I agree about the term harem being used as a synonym for all the other poly* terms. And you really don't see true harem stories all that often. Most of the time it is really more of a poly story. Even the ones that call themselves harems are actually more poly stories than anything.
Practically all of my Troy & Julie stories fit this description. We don't see their wedding, but "The Day Before The Day" takes place during Troy's bachelor party and they get married in-between that story and "As Day Follows Night."
https://storiesonline.net/universe/903/troy-julie
There's sort of a code to the titles.
"Amongst Equals" means that the story primarily focuses on Troy & Julie themselves. Other women may take part, but the two of them and their relationship will be most of the story.
"Day" indicates that their friends will play major roles and some poly stuff will definitely happen.
"Night" means that the story will revolve around Contessa Helena de San Finzione. Thus far, polyness (To possibly just now invent a word.) happens in "As Day Follows Night," but not in "Night Brings the Hunter."
Susan gets title billing. (She's got a great agent.) She's the permanent third in Troy & Julie's relationship, so multiple partners are always involved in her stories.
Not my field but British law brings up an interesting question. If a man and woman live together AS IF they were married then after a certain length of time the law treats them as having been married even as regards the distribution of joint assets etc. and I think inheritance tax exemptions
OK so if you have say one man living with three women AS IF they were married for such period of time ......
I don't think it has been tested in the courts yet!
after a certain length of time the law treats them as having been married even as regards the distribution of joint assets etc. and I think inheritance tax exemptions
I believe what you are describing, common law marriage, currently has no legal basis. There was a case in the news recently when a man's partner was left in dire straits after his death because they hadn't married.
There are moves afoot to afford some legal weight to long-term relationships, but I have no idea if and when that might become law. With parliament having to worry about Brexit and the latest attempt for Scottish independence, it's not a priority.
AJ
currently has no legal basis
I don't know about UK law, but here in the US there is a legal basis for it. Off hand, I can think of only one highly publicized case. Lee Marvin was sued for support by his common law wife, and she won.
In Colorado, there was a law on the books a few years back, may still be on the books, which states if a man introduces a woman as his wife, they are legally married. I think that was true if the woman did not object or correct the identification of her being his wife.
Question: If a man lives with multiple women long enough for them to be declared his common law wives, could he be charged with bigamy?
Question: If a man lives with multiple women long enough for them to be declared his common law wives, could he be charged with bigamy?
Usually not, because bigamy requires the person to marry both as per the relevant Marriage Act with an approved celebrate.
Some people have to have two marriages because they get married in their church by a person authorised by the church and not the state, then they have to see a civil celebrant for the state marriage. Bigamy usually requires both marriages to have been by recognised state celebrants.
I don't know about UK law, but here in the US there is a legal basis for it.
There are only one or two US states that still recognize common law marriages. Most US states eliminated common law marriage in the wake of the civil war when laws banning interracial marriages were passed.
Common Law Marriage by State
http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/common-law-marriage.aspx#1
Common Law Marriage by State
www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/
North Carolina Soccer League rules?
Question: If a man lives with multiple women long enough for them to be declared his common law wives, could he be charged with bigamy?
No. Technically, bigamy is a crime against the state, essentially fraud used in obtaining a valid state marriage license, and has nothing to do with their living status.
I believe what you are describing, common law marriage, currently has no legal basis.
Depend on the local laws. Most countries and states have rules on common law or de fact marriages. The rules usually require they live as man and wife for a minimum period (various with jurisdictions) before they're recognised by the law. However, there are other laws that can come into effect. Most laws on superannuation will not recognize a person as their spouse unless they were married as per the local marriage act, same with some insurance and mortgage laws. Some states and countries have laws where they recognize all those things, but not all.
There have been some law cases in some countries where the legality of common law spouses have been recognised. In Australia back in the days of Kevin Rudd as Prime Sinister he passed a change to Family Law act where a person you shacked up with on a regular basis had the same rights as a legal spouse. Thus giving legislative support for common law marriages.
Thus giving legislative support for common law marriages.
Or a legal defense for mariticide! (The killing of mattresses?)
The point is that common law does not require a license(paid for to the government). In some ways it bypasses those licenses. I have never read of any cases where those type relationships were really tried in a court. Sure polygamy has been in court a few times but its really almost a rarity and seems to be more of a publicity stunt than actual enforcement.
edited to add: Nice part is common law does not limit the number of people in a relationship.
A solution to poly relationships is to set them up as a partnership or corporation whose business is to hold property jointly, provide food, raiment and other aspects usually considered as a benefit of marriage.
Cheers
A solution to poly relationships is to
Establish a trust company to hold all the assets and have the adults as the board of directors and all the adults and children as the beneficiaries.
A solution to poly relationships is to set them up as a partnership or corporation whose business is to hold property jointly, provide food, raiment and other aspects usually considered as a benefit of marriage.
You also need multiple redundant powers of attorney, particularly medical powers of attorney in case one of the adults is injured and unable to make decisions for themselves.
You also need
Sounds to me like rustyken's solution is more trouble than it's worth.
After all, in today's society most people wouldn't care. Most of those who do care wouldn't take any action. The few who might take action could cause a problem, but the question is would the court even be willing to hear such a case.
After all, in today's society most people wouldn't care.
In general, you're right. However, it was only recently that common law spouses had access to the pension plans and leave entitlements of deceased common law spouses - prior to that the law only recognised the rights of those married under the c'wealth marriage act to have access. Same is true for things like medical authorities etc.
Sounds to me like rustyken's solution is more trouble than it's worth.
If you ever want to visit a lover in a hospital during critical care, and your marriage isn't recognized by the state, for whatever reason, it's still a valid reason (though again, adoption tends to grand more rights, although forming a business partnership is more 'socially acceptable' as it doesn't sound as suspicious.
If you ever want to visit a lover in a hospital
Mutual Power of Attorney for Healthcare would solve that problem.
You also need multiple redundant powers of attorney, particularly medical powers of attorney in case one of the adults is injured and unable to make decisions for themselves.
Another reason for adopting another adult male, as Liberace famously did back in the 50s or 60s.
A solution to poly relationships is to set them up as a partnership or corporation whose business is to hold property jointly, provide food, raiment and other aspects usually considered as a benefit of marriage.
For a long time, gay men would either create a business corporation in lieu of marriage, though they'd often perform 'adoption of independent adults' to achieve the same thing (i.e. the granting of marriage rights via non-marital means).
All these terms are confusing, so I made a list and went to Merriam-Webster dictionary to get the meaning. In two cases, the terms weren't listed so I went to Wikipedia to get the meanings.
Applies to Relationships with and without Marriage:
Polyamory - the state or practice of having more than one open romantic relationship at a time
Polyandry - the state or practice of having more than one husband or male mate at one time.
Polygyny - the state or practice of having more than one wife or female mate at a time.
Applies to Married Relationships:
Polyandry - the state or practice of having more than one husband or male mate at one time.
Polygamy - marriage in which a spouse of either sex may have more than one mate at the same time.
Applies to Relationships without Marriage:
Harem - a group of females associated with one male.
Monogamy - state of having only one mate at any one time.
Monoandrous - when females have one mate at a time.
Monoamorous – search brings up Monogamy and states Monoamorous refers to monogamy in animals.
You know guys, and gals, this thread started out being reasonably interesting. It has since degenerated into an I don't know what of arguing back and forth about word definitions. As such, I'm outta here.
You know guys, and gals, this thread started out being reasonably interesting. It has since degenerated into an I don't know what of arguing back and forth about word definitions. As such, I'm outta here.
Don't go. Nobody's worked pizza into the discussion yet. :P
Don't go. Nobody's worked pizza into the discussion yet. :P
sorry, but it already became too much for most of us to chew on, let alone swallow.
Nobody's worked pizza into the discussion yet.
I didn't know that pizzas had genders, let alone that they formed relationships.
AJ
I didn't know that pizzas had genders, let alone that they formed relationships.
Yeah they do with a little help. Take two different pizzas and flip one on top or the other so the topping sides are mated, and your get a new pizza offspring. :)