I was reading the latest issue of The Economist and ran across an article entitled, Wives Galore about the arrest for polygamy of Winston Blackmore of Bountiful, British Columbia (24 January 2009, p. 44). Blackmore is the former “bishop” of the Fundamentalist Church of Later-Day Saints and is credited with having 26 wives and 108 children. Apparently, his youngest wife was 15 when he married her, though other girls have been married within the local church at younger ages.

I did a quick Google search of Winston Blackmore and found that there were 38,300 references, one of which was a transcript of a CBC news program with interviews of several people related to the church.

One interview was with Jane Blackmore, Winston Blackmore’s first wife. She was born into a prominent polygamous family. Her father, Dalmon Oler helped found Bountiful and had six wives and 47 children. He expected his girls to be demure, unobtrusive and obedient.

Jane Blackmore: Men are the head of the household and are very very gifted in knowing what women should do. If a man is very good, and has found favour in the eyes of the prophet, then he’s given a position, and more wives. And women should do what men tell them to do.

Dalmon Oler had so many children it was difficult to remember all of their names. So children born in a certain year were all given names beginning with the same letter.

Jane was married to Winston for nearly three decades. She had the privileged position of being the first wife of the most important family in Bountiful.

Reporter: HOW ARE POLYGAMOUS FAMILIES ORGANIZED? HOW DOES SOMEBODY WITH MORE THAN TEN WIVES AND A WHOLE BUNCH OF CHILDREN ORGANIZE THEIR LIVES?

Jane Blackmore: Usually the women do the organizing, about how things are going to be run. Who’s going to cook the meals, who’s going to tend the children. And .. those sorts of things.

Reporter: WHAT AND THE MAN JUST SHOWS UP FROM TIME TO TIME?

Jane Blackmore: Basically.

Reporter: DO YOU ALL FEEL LIKE ONE BIG HAPPY FAMILY?

Jane Blackmore: Well if you get 20 children or 25 children under five all trying to eat at the same table, that can be a little bit chaotic. And consequently a little less than happy.

Reporter: HAVE YOU EVER BEEN IN LOVE?

Jane Blackmore: Mm. (laugh) We won’t talk about that.

Another of the interviews was with Debbie Palmer, another of Dalmon Oler’s daughters. She was married off at age 15 to become wife number 6 to a 57 year old man who already had 32 children, most of them older than she was when she married him. One of her step-children is Winston Blackmore.

Debbie Palmer: I was his stepmother, several of his sisters were married to my father so he was an uncle to me. I was actually ended up being a step grandmother to him as well.

She left Bountiful when she was 34 because she couldn't keep quiet about the lifestyle any longer.

Reporter: IS LIFE IN BOUTIFUL ABOUT SEX OR SALVATION?

Debbie Palmer: It’s all about sex, it really is. There is great pretence that it’s a very moral sort of back to basics family fundamentalist type of community but there’s sex everywhere.

Reporter: WHAT ARE THE LOGISTICS OF INTERCOURSE? HOW DOES IT WORK? DOES SOMEBODY KEEP A BIG CHART AND SAY – OH, BETTY YOUR OVULATING – THURSDAY IS YOUR NIGHT.

Debbie Palmer: I know in the larger families, they do, do that, they have to.

Reporter: REALLY?

Debbie Palmer: Well like I mean in a good size dairy, you have to know when a cows going to come around so she can be serviced properly by the bull, or you don’t have calves and you don’t have your cows freshened properly and if you’ve got very many wives in your family then somebody needs to keep track of that...one of the really horrific things about some of the inbreeding that has happened in the polygamist communities is that most of the men that have been in positions of control that have instigated these marriages are men that have studied breeding stock in animals.”

Reporter: THIS IS ALL BASED ON ANIMAL HUSBANDRY?

Debbie Palmer: Yes it is.

CBC News (http://www.childbrides.org/Canada_CBS_i ... kmore.html)

Originally broadcast January 15, 2003

Several of the items in the Google search were references to a documentary titled Polygamy’s Lost Boys about the fate of the surplus boys in such a polygamous community.

All I want is one wife

All I want is one wife

"Wife": Rhymes with "Fife", a small shrill instrument.

"Fife": Rhymes with "Wife", also a shrill instrument.

Now all we need is a drummer boy.

Yoli

Voted "Class Clown" and "Most Likely To Amass A Testicle Collection".

Texas School For Wayward But Interesting Young Ladies.

If one could take the goddamned religion and theological BS out of the equation, a polyamorous arrangement might be nice... each night with a different bed partner. Well, maybe to set up such a sweet arrangement, one WOULD have to build in some religious appurtenances for the gullible and religious-minded weaklings. I recall reading Robert Heinlein's book "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress" and extended breeding families was one of the themes of that book. In fact, I think I've read that Heinlein himself, a visionary and brilliant writer, might have dabbled in polyamorous relationships himself.

If anyone wants to read a fascinating book about the Fundamentalist Mormon church, read "Under The Banner of Heaven" by Jon Krackauer (hope I spelled that right)...it's a true page-turner, and reveals more about the fundamental Mormons than they'd really like you to know.

amahl_shukup (imported) wrote: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:39 am I recall reading Robert Heinlein's book "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress" and extended breeding families was one of the themes of that book. In fact, I think I've read that Heinlein himself, a visionary and brilliant writer, might have dabbled in polyamorous relationships himself.

And it wasn't the only Heinlein's book, with that theme. I can at least remember "Stranger in a strange land" and "The cat who walks through walls", which had it as one of the themes.

fhunter wrote: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:36 am And it wasn't the only Heinlein's book, with that theme. I can at least remember "Stranger in a strange land" and "The cat who walks through walls", which had it as one of the themes.

Yes, you're quite right about "Stranger.." but I haven't read "The Cat..." Maybe I should dig that one up and add it to my reading pile.

As to the original topic, I've heard it said many times, in the press and elsewhere, that exposing young girls (14 or so) to sexual experiences somehow messes up the rest of their lives. I've never seen any scientific or psychological studies to back that up, but since it is practiced in the Fundamental Mormon culture and in other cultures around the world, it seems there would be an excellent chance to prove or disprove the notion empirically. Does early youthful sexual experiences create older adults with psychological problems? I recall reading the stories of German women who as young girls were raped by Soviet soldiers as they overran German lines in WWII...and many of them seemed to be well adjusted but seemed to hold only regrets and some anger at the Soviet captors. Is there any scientific data on this? The Kinsey Report seemed to say it was OK, but then Kinsey himself seems to have been something of a nutcase, and his data have been soundly criticized, as well as his techniques and the studies themselves. Any experts here care to comment?

amahl_shukup (imported) wrote: Mon Jan 26, 2009 8:13 pm As to the original topic, I've heard it said many times, in the press and elsewhere, that exposing young girls (14 or so) to sexual experiences somehow messes up the rest of their lives. I've never seen any scientific or psychological studies to back that up, but since...

...Any experts here care to comment?

Well, I am not an expert, just a common man who endevours always to deal only in the truth. So I always try my best to make sound observations on anything I comment on. I offer my (non-expert) observations on this matter:

On the subject of sexual experiences and the psychological effects on young girls, I seriously doubt that there will be any empirical data available on that subject, at least it will not be available in the next fifty to one hundred years.

Firstly because of the current atmosphere of hate and fear of any sexual subject (thankyou Reverend Fallwell, et al).

Secondly, too many people who are interested in that subject are clearly NOT interested in it for any scientific reasons. Either they themselves are sexually aroused by the subject, OR, they themselves are puritanical zealots wishing to "PROOVE" beyond any doubt that their own views are always right regardless of what any facts indicate. So any factual observations that exist today are clearly skewed one way or the other by people who have their own agenda to push, and their own "truths" to "proove."

Finally, the little data we do have available on the subject comes to us mostly from cases that are clearly rape and sexual assault victims. Clearly the information that comes to us from the FLDS cases is what we read/see/hear from social workers and police investigators working on the FLDS criminal cases. Can you imagine ANY of them saying "sexual activity occured, but it was not coercive and was completely consentual on the part of all persons..." FAT CHANCE that would happen! In the cases of German girls raped by Soviet soldiers, again, that was clearly rape. Returning to the simply observations of a common man, I say that rape of any sort is very likely to cause psychological problems, regardless of the victiim's age. We do have some scientific data on that subject, and while much of it is most certainly skewed, enough sound data exists that we can reasonably deduce that rape, regardless of victim's age, is damaging to the victim's mental health.

Now, as an aside note, not really on the subject you bring up, but tied into it. Sexual activity clearly does occur for many males and females long before the "age of conscent," and it is not commonly studied by any scientific methods. We generally concede that the vast majority of both males and females start masturbating sometime around 12 to 14 years of age, and there are no doubt many consentual sexual acts that occur between youths and even acts that are consentual but not LEGALLY consentual acts that occur between adults and youths. But I sincerely doubt that anyone has actually done any scintific study to establish a cause and effect relationship between "age of first sexual activity" to "increased probability of mental disorders." Again, I point out that in our current atmosphere of hatred and fear of any real and scientific sexual explortation, any researcher who even suggests such studies is quite likely to be ostricized, villified, and probably the focus of "concern" from the law enforcement authorities.

....

DeaconBlues (imported) wrote: Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:11 am Now, as an aside note, not really on the subject you bring up, but tied into it. Sexual activity clearly does occur for many males and females long before the "age of conscent," and it is not commonly studied by any scientific methods. We generally concede that the vast majority of both males and females start masturbating sometime around 12 to 14 years of age, and there are no doubt many consentual sexual acts that occur between youths and even acts that are consentual but not LEGALLY consentual acts that occur between adults and youths. But I sincerely doubt that anyone has actually done any scintific study to establish a cause and effect relationship between "age of first sexual activity" to "increased probability of mental disorders." Again, I point out that in our current atmosphere of hatred and fear of any real and scientific sexual explortation, any researcher who even suggests such studies is quite likely to be ostricized, villified, and probably the focus of "concern" from the law enforcement authorities.

There have been epidemiological studies done on the physical effects of "age of first sexual activity" on women. They seem to suggest that women who experience first intercourse before the age of 15 have more "female problems" when they get into their 30s and 40s. The usual reason suggested is that women who start earlier have more partners, and therefore more exposure to pathogens.

In my unqualified opinion this is the epidemiologist's equivalent of a hammer. The fact that the age of consent, in jurisdictions where such a concept exists, is usually 16 years of age, for girls, would seem to me, to indicate an unconscious societal recognition of a physical fact. A woman's sexual organs are usually not mature until she is somewhere in her 15th year.

The literature on the mental effects of early sexual activity are mostly the result of case studies of child molestation or young people who have been subjected to the legal system involving criminal investigation or prosecution of their sexual partner. As such, the findings of these studies are almost universally negative.

Personally, I was so fearful of the thought of the accusation of "statutory rape" when I was in my teens, and since, that I have never had sex with anyone under the age of 18, even though I started earlier. When I started dating, my mother told me that she didn't want to hear of me having any sexual troubles with the daughters of her girlfriends. By the time she told me this I had already devoured a "marriage manual" that I had checked out of the library, learned that a tongue was not just for talking, and discovered that it was much easier to get her girlfriend's pants than their daughters.

Well, as I alluded to above, but did not follow up on, the "sexologist" Alfred Kinsey wrote extensively about sexual response in children as young as 2 or 3 but no one questioned how such data were collected until recently. He obviously had access to young children and conducted "experiments" to report on their arousal and response, etc. He even went so far as to suggest that it was "good" for children to have such exposure. Today such experiments would not be permitted, but back in the 1950s the concept of "informed consent" was not present in psychological experiments, and no one would have thought of a scientist experimenting on young children so it wasn't overtly "banned" as such. Kinsey himself might have been quite a pervert, even by today's standards according to some articles I have read about him...he certainly practiced group sex, shared his wife with several of his colleagues, masturbated with various items stuck down his penis, etc., so he might not have been the most objective person to write a report on sexual response. Plus he skewed the populations of his surveys and did not have a true random selection. But anyway, other than the physical limitations mentioned above (and they are not inconsiderable), I was wondering about the oft-mention psychological damage that such exposure does to youngsters, male OR female.

I see a lot of news stories these days about female teachers "raping" young boys in their classes. We had an infamous, nationally reported incident here in my own state...and the teacher was quite a good looking gal. I remember when it hit the news I was thinking, "Man, where was a teacher like that when I was in high school?" At age 14 I would have dropped my drawers for several teachers I had, and don't think I would have regretted it for one moment. In particular, my 7th grade teacher, Ms. St***er was a hottie, and she could have sat on my face (and crotch) anytime, but living in a small rural town as I did, it would have soon become public knowledge, I'm sure. Still... alas, I wish I had had a "teacher" like that.

So, I just wonder about the "common knowledge" that early sexual exposure damages one's little psyche. Disregard the Kinsey Report, much of it has been discredited. Other than that, are there any scientific studies on the subject?

FianceeUvBigGuy (imported) wrote: Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:14 am "Wife": Rhymes with "Fife", a small shrill instrument.

"Fife": Rhymes with "Wife", also a shrill instrument.

Now all we need is a drummer boy.

Yoli

Voted "Class Clown" and "Most Likely To Amass A Testicle Collection".

Texas School For Wayward But Interesting Young Ladies.

Yoli,

...would that be the drummer boy who wanted your eyes to roll up.., parump, parump pum?

...or was it just another one of your Freudian slips...