Polygamy, and the Nature of Man and Woman: Part 2

Taliban_beating_woman_in_public_RAWAOne of the most frequent lies from muslim polygamy apologists is that polygyny is natural based on the differences between the sexes. The topic has been discussed on this blog several times, proving the absurd falsehood of this argument.

A muslim scholar wrote:

Lastly, there is the component of rebellion. It is human nature on part of man that he simply cannot tolerate someone else having conjugal relationships with his wife. In the case of polygyny, the jealousy of a woman is curbed by the leadership of her husband. In polyandry however, both men are on equal footing. As has been noted above, besides gender any other impartial variable available is absent which gives rise to a vacuum ready to be filled with adversity. When women fight, they pull each other’s hair. When men fight, they go to war.

A woman can not tolerate someone else having conjugal relationships with her husband either. It is inherently evil to us, disgusting and nauseating. Women “tolerate” it on the same basis people tolerate being beaten, raped, enslaved. Women tolerate it to survive. Women tolerate it in order to keep from going insane. Women tolerate it out of fear. Women tolerate it to be allowed paradise after death since they are doomed by polygyny to live in hell here on earth.

If a man is chained to a wall, physically or psychologically, he “tolerates” somebody making love to his wife too, even while he is obliged to watch.

That’s the basic truth.

“The jealousy of a woman is curbed by the leadership of her husband”. How, may I ask? How did the mere presence of my husband’s leadership curb my jealousy? Did you, dear scholar, ask any women about this? Any single woman? Because this is such major BS I can’t believe you managed to get it out of your head and down on paper. It isn’t “the leadership of her husband” that makes a woman try to survive polygyny. Nor is it her love for her husband. Do you want to know what it is?

“When women fight, they pull each other’s hair. When men fight, they go to war.”. This is actually an argument in favour of polyandry and against polygyny. Yes, men go to war. Men kill each other. Men beat and kill women. So, any loving and wise god would make MEN submit to polyandry and sharing and working on their lower instincts, since they are obviously the ones who need it!

The falsehoods, misogyny, heresy and sanctimoniousness of muslim scholars never ceases to amaze me.

But even more, it amazes me that women buy into this nauseous toxic goo.

The True State of Polygamy

imagesAs you probably know, my second husband Graham had a stroke a while back.

It has been scary, hurtful and it has opened our eyes to the value of life, just as it would have had our marriage been monogamous. But some of the issues we’ve had have been specific to polygamy.

I’ve been thinking a lot about the fact that one of my husbands could die, while I’m with the other husband. How would I feel if Graham had died from the stroke, while I had been off having a romantic night out with Mark, or making love to Mark? What would have happened if Graham had been all alone and unable to get help? What if he had been brain damaged, and the doctors had told me that if he had received help in time he would have been ok, but since he didn’t he’ll be living his life unable to communicate, eat or move…How would I live with that on my conscience?

I have realized that I can never be a half time wife to two husbands, I must be a full time wife to two husbands. There is no emergency I can decline attending to, there is no request I can turn down, there is no moment of sadness, loneliness or fear in my spouse that is not my responsibility to alleviate.

I have realized that had both my husbands had young children, I would have had to give up on polygamy. It would have been a 48 hours a day job, just to be a full time mother. No way could I have been a full time wife also. Any man who opts for polygamy with children in both his families does this knowing that he is forfeiting fatherhood and husbandhood in order to be polygamous. He chooses polygamy over his wives and children. Any spouse of such a man must be aware that this is his choice. Polygamy is more important to him than you are, than your children are.

It’s also been agonizing to see that my love for the other husband is still so painful to both my husbands. I think they’ve both lulled themselves into a calm life of make belief, where they both disregard my life with the other husband and my love for him. Like, each husband believes I have a love marriage with him, and a marriage of duty with the other. Ok, I can see how they build that scenario in their minds and hearts. But it keeps all the pain and hurt alive and raw, since all make belief  Potemkin villages are torn down and the truth comes out whenever life has me show my love openly.

You know, in one way or another, I believe the only way to survive when your spouse is polygamous is by building some kind of make belief around the whole situation. You make yourself believe you are the favourite. Or you make yourself believe that your spouse is just off to work when she/he is actually with another spouse. Or you make yourself believe this is what god wants. You make yourself believe you’ll be rewarded somehow if you can only make it through the day.

Polygamy is a matrix. It’s the Truman show.


Because Allah has Made Some of Them Excel Others

White people have authority over coloured people, by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous coloured people are devoutly obedient, guarding in the white people’s absence what Allah would have them guard. But those coloureds from whom you fear arrogance – [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], beat them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.

Since coloured people are to obey their spouses, coloured people are only allowed to marry white people. White people are the leaders and guardians of coloured people, since they are weak in reason and religion. This is in the best interest of coloured people and a heavy burden on white people.


Coloured people are only allowed to work if their white spouses give permission. The white spouse must provide for and protect the coloured partner, and hence has a right to prevent the coloured spose from having a job, or even leaving the house, or receiving friends at home. The white spouse also has a right to forbid the coloured partner from speaking to people on the phone or using the internet. This is in order to protect coloured people from harm.

A white person has a right to marry up to four people, coloured or white. Coloured people are only allowed to marry one spouse, and this spouse must be white since coloured people must be lead and protected by white people. A baby born to a mixed couple is coloured. White people can marry up to four coloured people, and they don’t need permission from former spouses, nor need they inform them of subsequent marriages.

White people can divorce by simply uttering words to that effect. Coloured people are not allowed divorce, since they are run by their emotions and can not be trusted to make rational decisions about their lives. If a coloured person needs to divorce an abusive spouse, they must go to court and prove the abuse, and pay to be released. This is to protect coloured people and keep them from being deserted and unprovided for. Coloured people must be grateful for this, and remember that if any person were to be commanded to prostrate himself before another, it would be coloured people before their white spouses.

A child belongs to its white parent, unless it’s in its infancy. If the coloured person remarries, it loses the right to any prior children. A coloured person can not be a judge or a political leader or a religious leader, due to their lack of reason and religion.

Coloured people are by nature emotional, irrational, vulnerable, loving and caring. This means that they easily get used. So no coloured person is allowed to be without a white legal guardian. This is to protect the rights of coloured people and make sure they aren’t taken advantage of.

White people can find coloured people attractive. To protect coloured people from the stares and advances from white people, coloured people should stay in their homes. But if they have to go out they must wear black baggy jumpsuits, full length ponchos, balaclavas and diving masks. This way they will be protected, hidden gems, and their modesty will make them proud of themselves.

Coloured people must have sex with their white spouse on command, or else the white spouse has a right to lock them up in their homes and beat them or divorce them on the spot. A coloured spouse has a right to sex once every four months. If that right is not fulfilled, the coloured spouse can go to court and ask for a divorce. If granted, the coloured person must wait three months before he or she can remarry, they must pay for their release and give up their rights to any child above the age of 7.

Do you find any of this offensive?

I do.

It is all offensive beyond measure.

So why isn’t the world screaming with outrage, when the above is applied to women? 

The Warped Wickedness of Mr Khalid Baig

The right to beat your wife, to have plural wives, to keep slaves and fuck them...

The right to beat your wife, to have plural wives, to keep slaves and fuck them…

I wrote earlier about gender apartheid in islam, and I mentioned an article by Khalid Baig. In another article by the same author you can see that he claims that the family in the West has been ruined by female emancipation. He says that families are divided by emancipation, women suffer from demands they are not equal to meet, men suffer because they haven’t got women at their disposal in the home and children suffer because they are abandoned by their mothers.

First of all I would like to state a few obvious truths that Mr Baig has overlooked. One: If women work it means that the family has a double income and can provide better homes, better food and better education to their children thus giving them a better start in life. If a mother works while her children attend their better school, the children are winners not losers. Two: if men started to own up to their half of the work in the home, the women would be sufferers no more. And by doing so men would come to know their homes, their children and their wives better and respect their wives more and women and men both would be winners. So: if men put their big boy’s trousers on and start acting like men, doing their half of all work in the home – everybody would be winners.

One thing that strikes me while reading Mr Baig’s article is that he calls the home “the home of the husband”. Like: “the wife should stay in the home of the husband”. Did you hear that? Not her home. Her husband’s home. And this of course is at the basis of Mr Baig’s warped and misogynist ideology. The wife must obey the husband because he spends on her. Because his work has a value and is paid, her work has no value and is not paid. If a woman in the West divorces her husband, she gets to keep half of the family assets. Because of course the husband can only earn because the wife takes care of home and family. The value of her work is equal to the value of his – in the West. In the warped and disgusting views of Mr Baig her work is worth only empty words like “being a mother is an honour and gives her high status” while in reality it gives her nothing, not even a part in owning her home. She lives in her husband’s home. His only. Because his work has a value, hers has none. He spends on her, no matter how much she works and slaves away she does not spend on him. That is Mr Baig for you.

He says that when women were given freedom, actually they became enslaved. Society broke down. Divorce-rates and social problems reached an all time high. Mr Baig: with the same kind of warped logics you can take a look at what happened to coloureds when slavery was abolished. Look at crime-rates among the coloured community in the US, look at adultery and domestic violence among the coloureds. Obviously slavery was better. Freedom has not given the coloured community a perfect life. So, we should reinstate slavery. Do you see Mr Baig, how sick and horrible your argument is??? I suppose you can’t because if you could you would not have written these sickening articles.

Mr Baig. Your ideology is the toxic medicine that keeps women in slavery and your part of the world in misery. Your ideology is what gives air to ISIS and Boko Haram.

Mr Baig. You are the stuff nightmares are made of.

Polygamy, the Law, the Army and the US

NiqabpureBigamy is illegal in most civilized nations.

Polygamy per se can be viewed differently. If only one marriage is registered and the subsequent marriages are only religious or common law marriages, some nations do not regard polygamy as bigamy, since only one marriage is accepted as legal.

In the US, the law regards religious/common law marriages differently in different states. In some states, like say New Jersey, polygamy is not always illegal since a nikah or a common law marriage is not accepted by law. A second wife hence is not regarded as a wife, she’s just a sideshow.

If however a polygamist in states like New Jersey were a member of the Armed Forces, the situation would be completely different. Such a person, say e.g. an officer in the Armed Services, would be subject to military law. According to the law of the US Armed Forces, not only is bigamy illegal but also the attempt to commit bigamy. Hence, a polygamist who is only religiously married to a second wife, not legally, can still be convicted of attempt. I refer you to the law, you can find it here. As you can see, the law also considers whether the crime committed means that the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Matters to consider here could be e.g. if the crime was committed in public, e.g. described on a blog. If testimony shows that the crime was committed in a disgraceful way, e.g. causing extended pain and suffering or e.g. was directed at the rights of women while the subordinates of an officer committing the crime were dying in Afghanistan while defending the rights of women, such matters would be considered.

Furthermore, according to martial law, adultery is also a crime. The law says adultery is a crime and must be punished if it can be proven:

  • 1) That the accused wrongfully had sexual intercourse with a certain person;
  • (2) That, at the time, the accused or the other person was married to someone else; and
  • (3) That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

This means that the punishment would be severe if e.g. facts show that the crime was committed in a disgraceful way, e.g. causing extended pain and suffering or e.g. was directed at the rights of women, while the subordinates of an officer committing the crime were dying in Afghanistan while defending the rights of women. Proof, such as a deleted blog, can easily be obtained by the authorities.

Since polygyny is a crime against humanity and a vile offense against human rights, we who believe in human rights and the law should certainly report all such crimes.

If anybody should know of such a crime, it should be reported to the Armed Forces, primarily, not the police.

If the suspect was in e.g. the National Guard, the correct place to make such a report would be directly to the National Guard, in the case of New Jersey e.g. here.

Since the governor is the head of the National Guard, one should also report the crime to his office, in the case of New Jersey e.g. here.

A convicted polygamist would lose all pensions and benefits.

Women Have a Very High Status in Islam

9151-beautiful-submissive-woman-prostrate-on-floor-chris-maherWe hear it often.

Women have a very high status in Islam

Western women are oppressed. We have to look good, work, take part in society. But in Islam, women are elevated, respected.

This claim always makes me wonder. “Women have a very high status in Islam.” High in relation to whom? Hermaphrodites?

How is this high status women hold in islam expressed?

* “Were I to command anyone to prostrate to someone I would have commanded the woman to prostrate to her husband.” – in Islam the role of the wife is one of submission to her husband who holds the authority over his family, and this hadith accentuates that. So women are of such high status, they should really be prostrating before their husbands, if it weren’t for the fact that we should only throw ourselves on the ground before god.

And due to the wives is similar to what is expected of them, according to what is reasonable. But the men have a degree over them [in responsibility and authority]. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise. Men are superior. Women are inferior.

Men are the protectors and heads of women, because Allaah has made one of them to excel the other, and because they spend to support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient to their husbands, and guard in the husband’s absence what Allaah orders them to guard. As to those women on whose part you see ill-conduct, admonish them, refuse to share their beds, and  beat them, but if they return to obedience, seek not against them. Surely, Allaah is Ever Most High, Most Great. Women in islam hence are so high in status they must obey their husbands in everything, be governed by their husbands and be beaten by their husbands if they are disobedient.

Once Allah’s Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o ‘Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, “O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle ?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” They replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” The women replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.” So women in islam are told they are deficient in intelligence and religion and less than any man. Women in islam are told they are more likely to end up in Hell – because they are inferior. That’s how high in status they are.

“Beware of this world and beware of women, for the first fitnah among the Children of Israel had to do with women. I have not left behind me any fitnah more harmful to men than women.” Women are awrah – shameful. Women are fitnah. That’s how high their status is.

 Women have a very high status in Islam – beneath everybody else.


Slavery and Polygyny – Islamic Hypocrisy

Aboard an Arab slave boat, in 1869

Aboard an Arab slave boat, in 1869

Muhammad had many slaves. He was a slave owner.

He also had sex with his slaves. He owned the women, and had sex with them.

Muhammad was also a polygynist.

Today, many islamic scholars claim that slavery is not allowed any more. They claim that slavery was only allowed in the historical context, but not any more. They “prove” this by referring to the quran and hadiths saying e.g. that a way to atone for a sin is to free a slave. And since freeing a slave is said to be a good thing, slavery has been abolished, and that is islamically correct. They also say that since slavery was heavily restricted, that goes to show that it was disliked, and hence it is correct to abolish slavery. There are some muslim scholars who claim that slavery is still allowed, as is having sex with your slaves, since Muhammad did this and everything that he did is perfect. These scholars seem to be exceptions though, not the rule.

Then how about polygyny?

Polygyny is only explicitly allowed in one single verse in the quran, and in An Nisa there are clearly stated restrictions, the man must be custodian of orphans and fearing not to be able to live up to that responsibility, he must not only be absolutely fair to his wives – he must harbour no fear whatsoever that he’d ever risk being unfair to them!

So Muhammad was a slave-owner and a polygynist. He didn’t free all his slaves. Today however, islamic laws have abandoned slavery while maintaining polygyny. Why?

The quran restricts slavery as well as polygyny. Today however, islamic laws have abandoned slavery while maintaining polygyny. Why?

The quran allows a man to fuck his slaves, to keep him from zina. Islam allows polygyny to keep men from zina. Today however, islamic laws have abandoned slavery while maintaining polygyny. Why?

Islamic scholars today say that slavery in the quran and hadiths must be interpreted within the limitations of historical context. What about polygyny? Today islamic laws have abandoned slavery while maintaining polygyny. Why?

Muslims in favour of polygyny often argue that we can not make haram what Allah has made halal. Slavery is not haram in the quran, nor in the hadiths. Today however, islamic laws have abandoned slavery while maintaining polygyny. Why?

I’d like to quote a text about slavery in Georgia:

The parallel between the mechanisms of slavery in christian Georgia, and women in islam is all too obvious.
Most muslim nations however have banned slavery, although it is allowed in the quran. Polygyny often remains legal.
It’s a worldwide truth, that misogyny is an even stronger force than racism.

Polygamy, Family and Summer

Backlit_Pink_Rose_Interior_With_Drops_(209284324)Back in London.

The rose garden is beautiful. I hide there with Tamsin while the city is swamped with tourists. I’ve discovered there’s a guided “Downton Abbey tour” passing outside our house – obviously they have shot some of the London scenes in the neighbourhood. It’s rather interesting to listen to the tour guides through a window, but it’s a bit annoying to have tourists all over the place, taking pictures. Still, I’m happy to be living in Downton Abbey-land, and not in Harry Potter-land 🙂

As I told you earlier, Mark has been planning things concerning his #2. He told me while we were in Scotland that he’s going to Oman to spend the rest of his vacation there.

Ok. I can’t stop him. I don’t know what he envisions, what kind of future he is planning. I’m just going to let the ball roll, see what happens. I’m going to use his absence to spend long lazy days in the Chilterns with my second husband, my daughter and my friends who love to visit. My son and daughter will come and stay too.

I’m building and uniting a family here.

God knows what Mark is doing.

I really do think women are much more suited to be polygamists than men are.

A Free Polygamy Blog – For Everybody

gg4603327This blog is for everybody and anybody who wants to discuss polygamy. And if you happen to go off topic – well so be it 🙂 That’s ok too.

You’re welcome here.

And if you come here to contradict me, or even condemn me, fine – you’re welcome.

The only things I won’t allow are threats or other illegal activities.

Another blog stated that this blog will accept anybody, and it’s true. That’s what this blog is about.

And another thing – if you want to contact somebody who’s a contributor here, you can just contact me on norfolkfiona@mail.com, and I’ll pass your e-mail address along. So if you want to contact somebody here without anybody else knowing about it, just send me an e-mail.

Thank you all for being here.

My Baby

Heart-beatWe have a daughter.

A healthy, beautiful daughter.

Her name is Tamsin, after her paternal grandmother.

I can’t tell you how much I love her, how much I love her father.

You should see them. The tenderness of a man with his newborn daughter in his arms.

And I’ll let you in on a secret: It’s true. All babies come with a hat.