to be a bit unhappy about Harems being supported by the taxpayer?

[pankhurst]

I am ardently against polygamy. Sorry. I think it's discourteous and (because usually male advantageous) sexist nonsense masquerading as religious right.

I found out that men with multiple wives under islam will have benefits for all of them.

AIBU to be concerned about this? If I were a muslim man on benefits and I wanted to, there would be NOTHING now to stop me bringing four wives in.

I don't want my children to grow up in a country where harems are even 1% of the population. I really don't. I would prefer more obstacles rather than making it easier.

Or did I miss the point somewhere? Help?

the question wasn't about whether gender, religion, race etc should be more important, but about what it is you see as being unequal, pankhurst.

Umm, on the subject of polygamy practiced with free-will on either side, I don't have much of a beef. It's not for me, but hey ho.

There are many Muslim women (and Indian women, and Nigerian women) who deplore the practice, and would dearly like to see it abolished globally. Others are more sanguine, I guess, depending on circumstance.

Senora, I agree. UK law is tolerant of 'crimes' committed overseas where the 'crime' is not recognised as such.

With regard to a British citizen who married twice abroad, my understanding is that he would only be able to bring one wife into the country, and that during the naturalization process, her marriage status would be altered to monogamous. What happens to the other woman, I've no idea.

In the UK, a resident polygamist can legally only bring one wife into the country ... but he can claim full housing benefit for 52 weeks for each of his wives who live abroad.

Now if that isn't a flagrant abuse of tax-payers money, then I'd be interested to know what is. I don't blame the claimant. I blame the government. They're the eejits.

thanks, i see what you mean, but it is as senorapancake has said, what do you see as being unequal?

anyhoo, pan is a bloke, for future reference

i think if you asked holocaust survivors about equality, i thikn they would have like to be considered human , before white or jewish or whatever.

erm, madamez , I don't think adult children get automatically benefits, because they most likely can work....however, if people are brought into the country (legally) but they might not be able to work due to language probs, that is a whole different story, and one must consider the factor that people, if living in their own language communiaty (in any country) are much less likely to learn the local language...

I think the unequal part is, that polygami in any religion/culture tends to be that men can take whatever amount of women, but women do not have the same right....but I might be missing somehting here...

"but he can claim full housing benefit for 52 weeks for each of his wives who live abroad."

I really don't think that's true. no-one can claim housing benefit if they live abroad.

errrr. i think i was asking for clarification in the first post.

i can't find a country where i can actually marry lots of men, yet..?

i started by saying i don't like polygamy.

i don't think it's a good thing and i don't want my government to facilitate it or legitimise it.

i really didn't think it relevant what colour or race the people were - just that the system is a male-centric one. and i don;t want my dds learning that.

there's been some to ing and fro ing about whether it also means polyandry, and then colditz proposed...

then we went off into all the kind caring males supporting all these widows into the bedroom and it became a bit too much to follow.

pan is a bloke???????

Well, I'm no expert Senora, but I just googled a few things, and it was in a Times article I've just read.

Are there any counties in the world where women are allowed to have multiple husbands? Polygamy always seems to work in favour of the men.

I referred to fraternal polyandry in my earlier post. It's still practiced in areas of Tibet and Nepal (but, as I also said in that post, tends not to operate to the benefit of the woman).

madamez-an adult living with their parents would be treated the same as a single person,ie they would be entitled to jobseekers or IS depending on circumstances.

That was what I was thinking of - polyandry. I don't think there are any because the few cultures where you're allowed legally two official wives or more are all Muslim as far as I am aware.

We were in Central America a year ago one summer just after security alerts in the UK. At the home there was a man with two wives, all fully robed. We were wondering what the bed room situation was like. Later we were in the pool with them - the girls wore long long costumes for modesty and my daughter who were about their age 18 - 20 asked to borrow their ball and discovered the man (he looked at 19, the lucky husband) had a very strong Leeds accent. Apparently he'd come over to marry the second and take her back to join them. I am not sure in which country they were marrying though so whether the second wife would be officially recognised in the UK under the new law as a second wife rather than just a lover.

Ah, OK. The times articles says that a man can claim housing benefit [on a UK property] for a second wife even if she is abroad, as long as she is abroad temporarily and for "pressing reasons". That, as far as I'm aware, is trhe same as the law for everyone else. It only applies to wives ordinarily resident in the UK and in practice probably applies to about 5 families a year.

Also this isn't new: www.jobcentreplus.gov.uk/JCP/Partners/Allowancesandbenefits/Dev_010023.xml.html

obviously there just haven't been enough anti-muslim stories in the papers lately.

Tibet i found used to have it. but it was outlawed. because not very stable. dads and kids driving the mum mad. it's a good birth control policy. (whereas polygamy the other way round makes for more baby potential.)

Desi is correct though, for those with a milking the system mentality:

"A husband may claim housing benefit for each wife even if she is abroad, for up to 52 weeks, as long as the absence is temporary and for pressing reasons. In a draft Commons reply released under the Freedom of Information Act, officials explained another way in which the system made it easy to receive handouts. "A polygamous marriage is the only circumstance in which an adult dependency increase is payable in income-related benefits," it stated. "In any other circumstances an adult ?dependent' would have to make a separate claim"

I thought it was giving her spousal state benefits whatever you get if you live with a wife and have no income - the kind of extra bit you get for your spouse - you could get it for two spouses rather than just one.

why is it anti-muslim?

I read the op as somebody concerned by what i would consider a feminist issue.i honestly cant see what all this has to do with race/religion?

pankhurst - see my post below about the housing benefit thing.

also, yes, in all other circumstances the other adult would have to make a separate claim, but that would mean they would get mnore money in total. so how is the taxpayer funding polygamy?

all of the newspaper articles I've read about it were slightly misleading (like the times and its housing benefit example) and distinctly anti-muslim. I didn't say this thread was anti-muslim.

If the reporting wasn't anti-muslim, why bring it up now, when it's been the law for a while?

I thought job centres had been applying the rules differently and now it was being made clear. Given how many married women and men have lovers I'm not sure this is any worse except it's above board and sexist in that Muslim women may not have many husbands. So if I came home with 4 attractive young male Saudis I wouldn't be able to get the same deal.

errrr, i am anti-polygamy.

(which i learn from this thread is permitted under sharia law though not under mormonism.)

i didn't know that the govt would accept a polygamous benefit claim - or acknowledge any kind of polygamous relationship with anything other than a swift boot into HM hotel.

i am furious that they are letting this go with a blessing. how do you still think this is about racism?

anyone else found a polyandrous society, please? i need a holiday.

yes, it's above board and sexist.

THAT's what I'm cross about.

SenoraPancake, I am trying to have a reasoned discussion about equity in law. I am not interested in whether someone is a Muslim, a Christian, a Buddhist, or a plain, old fashioned fucking fruitcake.

If you are trying to imply that I am anti-Islam, then just come out and say it. Get if off your tits. Take the weight off.

I couldn't give a flying shit what God someone prays to, but the law must be a level playing field and not the Hahnekahm down-hill ski-slope it sometimes appears to be at the moment.

I don't care whether five families are abusing the system or five million. The law must be fair to all its citizens. And it must be seen to be fair.