Monthly Archives: April 2023

Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT) secretary general Collins Oyuu has amused netizens with his unusual marital advice to men.

Oyuu encouraged men interested in polygamous marriages to consider marrying three women for his union to be happy.

According to Nairobi News, the unionist who was speaking at a funeral in Homa Bay argued that the traditional polygamous structure of two wives can sometimes cause chaos and instability at home.

PAY ATTENTION: Follow us on Instagram - get the most important news directly in your favourite app!

He cited the possibility of two wives colluding and conspiring against their husband, leaving him exposed.

Oyuu said:

He added:

The unionist based his odd advice on the composition of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court in deciding cases.

Chairman of the Luo Council of Elders Nyandiko Ongadi noted that having three wives ensures peace exists at the homestead.

He said:

On Thursday, January 12, TUKO.co.ke reported that Citizen TV journalist Stephen Letoo encouraged women to embrace polygamy.

He noted that when women embrace their co-wives, it will help reduce jealousy issues that have seen many people kill their spouses and walk out on marriages.

In an interview on Citizen Digital, Letoo said just because he believes in polygamy does not necessarily mean that he is practising it.

He said that he only wants the wife he marries to be aware so that should he decide to bring in a second wife, she should not have issues with him.

Letoo admitted coming from a humble polygamous family and explained that in most of those types of family arrangements, even when the parents were fighting, the kids were always sticking together.

PAY ATTENTION: Click See First under the Following tab to see TUKO News on your News Feed

Source: TUKO.co.ke

Original post:

KNUT Boss Urges Men to Consider 3 Wives in Polygamous ... - Tuko.co.ke

CHRISTINE Brown has given her followers a glimpse of her toned torso in a new video.

The Sister Wives star recorded a chatty clip on her Instagram Stories yesterday.

In the video, Christine sat in her car completely makeup-free, with a floral headband pulling her long wavy hair back from her face.

She wore a light pink ribbed top, with the plunging v-shape showing off her slim neck and toned dcolletage.

The TLC star chatted away happily, saying: "Car confessions! So recently I went to visit my sister Wendy in New Jersey, and they're like obsessed with grapefruits there.

"I told her I really don't like grapefruits, they're just not worth the time it takes to cut them and all of that, basically they're just nasty. And she was like, 'you just haven't had a good grapefruit yet.'"

"So anyway, she mailed me some grapefruits! Check it out," she exclaimed, as she held a box of fruits to the camera.

The50-year-oldhilariously added while giggling: "But I don't even know how to tell if they're ripe, so I'm gonna have to call her, check every single one over the phone. I don't know!"

On April 13, Christine shared the exciting news thatshe was engaged to her boyfriend,David Woolley, after announcing hersplit from ex-husband Kodyin November 2021.

The announcement came just days after The U.S. Sun reported that the reality star was"ready to marry."

However, not everyone is pleased withthe speed of the couple's relationship.

Earlier this month, Christine's sonPaedonshared onTikTok: "Last night [I told Christine]: Hey Mom, youre going fast. Im not telling you to slow down.

"I just want you to be aware that youre rushing this... very, very quickly."

Reportedly, Kody Brown's exesChristineandJanelle Brown, 53,have been secretly working on a new show idea.

The U.S. Sun previously reported that the pair were "gearing towards their own show."

However, the duo'sstrained relationshipdue to Christine's new romance could postpone those plans.

A source also told The U.S. Sun: "Christinehas abandoned the whole Sister Wives covenant. She's working on trying to get her own show."

"It could be either heavily focused on her cooking, or her life after polygamy."

In February 2022, Christine started her owndigital cooking show, Cooking with Just Christine.

But it appears she hasn't uploaded new cooking videos in months after Season 2 premiered in September.

The insider continued: "David, for sure, would be featured on her spinoff, and her children - 100 percent Mykelti."

Christinesharessix children with exKody: Aspyn, 27; Mykelti, 26; Paedon, 24; Gwendlyn, 21; Ysabel, 20; and Truely, 13.

Original post:

Sister Wives Christine Brown shows off slimmed-down figure in sexy V-neck top after engagement to David W... - The US Sun

Two people getting married and staying reserved till death do them apart has been a classic tale.

But not for everyone.

A polyamorous Brazilian man reportedly guy built a 20-foot bed for his six wives for Rs 80 lakh.

The bedroom essential was put together by the man named Arthur O Urso over the course of 15 months with the assistance of 12 people and 950 screws. Arthur once had nine wives, four of whom divorced him, reported News18.

The So Paulo resident and his swinger wife Luana decided to open up their six-marriage setup in 2021.

The six wives are identified as Valquria Santos, Damiana, Amandha Albuquerque, Olinda Maria, Luana Kazaki, and Emelly Souza.

Although it is not enforceable under law because polygamy is prohibited in his nation, Arthur and Liana formally established their connection with additional women at a Catholic church.

The seven members of the group even have an OnlyFans page where they provide sex advice and publish videos and images of their intimate antics. From the platform, they make roughly Rs 50 lakh each month.

The man, who had previously made headlines for having difficulty appeasing each of his women, made a schedule in order to provide equal enjoyment to all of them.

So, what is a polyamorous relationship really? Is it ethical? Lets take a look.

Also read:Biggest Polygamist of Century: In quest for perfect match, Saudi man marries 53 women

Understanding polyamorous relationship

According to WebMD, polyamorous people have multiple loving, intentional, and intimate relationships at the same time.

It is a type of open or non-monogamous relationship that follows certain guidelines.

It excludes all forms of open relationships, including those with more casual sexual partners.

Each partner in many polyamorous relationships is aware of the others.

Relationships or friendships between partners are also possible.

Some people find such relationships more comfortable than monogamous relationships.

Two years ago, Jada Pinkett Smith and Will Smiths daughter Willow Smith opened up about polyamory on Red Table Talk.

She said, With polyamory, I think the main foundation is the freedom to be able to create a relationship style that works for you and not just stepping into monogamy because thats what everyone around you says is the right thing to do. I was like, how can I structure the way that I approach relationships with that in mind?

Also read:Future of love: At the dangerous intersection of longing, loneliness, politics and technology

Its complex

Each polyamorous relationship is unique and complex.

USA Today quoted Washington University Professor of law Adrienne Davis as saying that such relationships in the United States dates back to 19th century when Free Love and transcendentalist movements were at peak.

According to Davis, it only grew popular in 1960s and early 1970s with the counterculture and sexual liberation movements.

In contrast to monogamous partnerships, people in polyamorous relationships create their own rules and preferred boundaries for their interactions.

The commitment to safer sex is among the most significant agreements shared by polyamorous individuals.

This usually refers to a restriction about who they will engage in unprotected sex with as well as methods of birth control for those who are capable of becoming pregnant.

In polyamorous partnerships, this is crucial to preventing the spread of STDs or unintended pregnancy.

Terms to know

Solo polyamory: Individuals who date several people but do not have primary partnerships. In their personal lives, they continue to be largely independent, according to WebMD.

Polyfidelity: A group of three or more persons who are dedicated to one another and do not date outside the group.

Hierarchical polyamory: It refers to people withprimary relationships to which they give the most time and attention, while secondary and tertiary relationships receive less of both. The primary partner could have more influence over crucial choices.

Non-hierarchical polyamory: It describes those who dont have a partner hierarchy. Alternative names for it include relationshipanarchy and egalitarian polyamory. In this kind of relationship, equal time and attention may be given to each partner and they might also have an equal say in crucial decisions.

Compersion: A sensation of joy that results from seeing your lover happy with another person, as opposed to envy, according to Instyle magazine.

Also read:Woman set to marry herself in Vadodara: Understanding sologamy

Common myths

1. Its cheating on a partner

No, people in polyamorous relationships are open and honest with each other about their other partners, since it depends on honesty, integrity, and communication, says WebMD.

2. Afraid of commitment

Though it looks different since traditional relationships such as marriage can be difficult, polyamorous relationships are still committed relations.

3. No true intimacy

Many believe having multiple partners detracts from intimacy.

However, polyamorous people create more intimacy with multiple people due to vulnerability and communication, explains the website.

4. Wild sex life

Yes, they do, but the primary focus is building loving, intimate relationships.

With inputs from agencies

Read all theLatest News,Trending News,Cricket News,Bollywood News,India NewsandEntertainment Newshere. Follow us onFacebook,TwitterandInstagram.

See more here:

Brazilian man spends Rs 80 lakh for bed to share with 6 wives: What is polyamory? - Firstpost

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta today told the Supreme Court that arguments of right to choice and sexual orientation raised by the petitioners seeking legal recognition for marriages between non-binary, non-heterosexual, or transgender persons may tomorrow be raised to defend incestous relationships.

"Visualise a situation, when a person is attracted to those persons who are mentioned in prohibited relationships. Incest not uncommon in the world and world over it is prohibited...Suppose a person is attracted to his sister, can they say we are consenting adults, we're entering into activities privately and we claim our right of autonomy, choice. Based on that very argument can someone not challenge this definition (of prohibited degrees)? Why this restriction? Who are you to decide with whom?" SG submitted.

"That will be far-fetched," Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud promptly remarked.

"We used to treat even thi as far-fetched," the SG responded.

CJI then said, "Sexual orientation or your autonomy as an individual can never be exercised in all aspects of marriage including the entry into marriage, the prohibited relationships, the grounds on which marriage can be dissolved...these are all subject to regulation by law. So these are very far fetched for anybody to even argue before us that orientation is so absolute that I can therefore commit an act of incest. No court will ever countenance this."

Today is 6th day of hearing before the Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha. Follow live updates here.

SG argued that people can also challenge polygamy on such grounds. "People may say my choice is polygamy...arguments the way they are read for marriage...can be made, whether accepted or not is one thing, for challenging incest and prohibited degrees," he argued.

At this juncture, Justice Bhat emphasized,

"But these are universal rules. As long as these were not codified, they were accepted. That was the law, the norm. If you're building up to this and saying there is a state interest in this relationship, one can understand. There are certain interests of the state which are legitimate."

SG Mehta then submitted that State can regulate certain relationships if the State feels that it is in legitimate interest to do so. "Therefore, marriage was not a regulated relationship. But state in its legislative policy wisdom decided that we will regulate and we can regulate only when we recognise...When your lordships were hearing Navtej, all these arguments were made. The central government said we leave it to the wisdom of the court so far as decriminalisation of Section 377 IPC is concerned but added that this has nothing to do with future right of marriage, inheritance, etc."

SG then moved on to contend that if such marriages were to be permitted, as many as 160 provisions would be affected, leading to irreconcilable differences in the statutory framework of the country.

"See the definition of full blood and half blood (in relation to "degrees of prohibited relationship" in Special Marriage Act)...we can never reconcile this provision - it says that one man has given birth to a child with a biological woman. Marriage between lesbians- that can't be read because it wouldn't be full blood...Merely changing man and woman into person will make many provisions irreconcilable and this full blood will have inevitable impact of succession," SG Mehta argued.

Read all updates from the hearing here.

Case Title: Supriyo v. Union of India | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1011 of 2022

Read the original here:

Same-Sex Marriage Case : Sexual Autonomy Argument May Be Used To Defend Incest, Argues Solicitor General; ... - Live Law - Indian Legal News

Years ago, I asked my mother why she had nine kids, and she responded that her mother and mother-in-law kept telling her that it is the only way to avoid polygamy; some children and all husbands are disobedient. Twenty years later, my Pakistani Canadian friend, Saima, when she consulted me on the idea of freezing her eggs, argued that she could not afford to have a baby and pursue her education and career.

Her income is insufficient to cover the expenses of a baby in Montreal or New York, and support is not made available either by her husband or through affordable babysitting and kindergarten services. Both Saima and my mother, with a two-decade gap between them, were pushed to take their reproductive decision by economic and societal social norm factors far from national or global population growth trends. We live in an almost polarised demographic world; population anxiety is at both poles of increasing and decreasing population. The common feature is that both are focused on the outcome (population size and fertility levels) away from the root causes and the dynamics through which reproductive decisions are made.

In the past, families wanted to have more children because of child mortality and the need for a workforce, and to have more fighters in a world made of a tribal system that linked all good values, such as courage, strength, decisiveness, etc, to men and the risks of failing, such as keeping honour and avoiding stigma and shame, to women. Therefore, we inherited from them the preference for boys over girls. Governments with high population growth rates, including Pakistan, got anxious because of their inability to create enough jobs and provide decent education and health services to all and the security threats they might face with increasingly growing unemployed youth.

Therefore, they direct their thinking around reducing fertility. While governments with declining populations got anxious about the future of the nation. For example, during an informal chat, an ambassador from an Eastern European country hinted at a sort of blame on UNFPA for advocating an increased dose of womens rights to the extent that some women have lost direction and forgotten their reproductive duty to produce more babies for the nations existence.

Historically, governments failed to understand or accept the fact that peoples reproductive decisions do not factor in the opinion of politicians, academics and experts regarding population growth they have their own reasons for having more or fewer children. UNFPA launched the annual report on the State of World Population last week, identifying rising population anxiety and urging a radical rethink of how countries address changing demographics.

The report notices that increasing population anxieties are widespread, and governments are increasingly adopting policies aimed at raising, lowering or maintaining fertility rates. But efforts to influence fertility rates are very often ineffective and can erode womens rights. The landmark report called for a radical rethink of how population numbers are framed, urging politicians and media to abandon overblown narratives about population booms and busts.

Instead of asking how fast people are reproducing, leaders should ask whether individuals, especially women, are able to freely make their own reproductive choices a question whose answer, too often, is no. Womens bodies should not be held captive to population targets, says UNFPA Executive Director Dr Natalia Kanem, adding, To build thriving and inclusive societies, regardless of population size, we must radically rethink how we talk about and plan for population change. Family planning must not be used as a tool for achieving fertility targets; it is a tool for empowering individuals. Women and couples should be able to choose if, when and how many children they would like to have, free from the coercion of pundits and officials.

Governments must first realise that deciding to have children is an individual and couples decision, not a community or a public affair. Governments must realise that any attempt to intervene in this matter will face push-back from society for religious, cultural, liberal, political and many other reasons, and the outcome will be a distortion of the demography of society that leaves negative socioeconomic multiplier effects. The proper approach is the human rights that promote the fact that getting babies is an individual decision.

Branding such decisions as good or bad is a bad idea; people should freely decide if they want to get babies and choose how many. Nevertheless, it is important to understand the dynamics in which families take decisions, and governments should do their best to ensure the right people make their own reproductive choices; women should not be pushed to get pregnant and not be forced to become infertile; they should take their decisions in the context of an approach of bodily integrity and autonomy.

Governments also need to ensure that whatever the decision is, families are provided with all proper services, information and understanding to implement their own reproductive decision. Women are not accountable for the nations problems; they are victims of social norms. Nobody should hold women accountable for population decline or increase. This matter is an outcome of the societal values shaped over years by the men-led States organs, including media, supporting programmes, and the enabling environment to decide. In countries facing population decline like Singapore, Japan, Poland, Germany, etc, we observe the difficulties that women face to have babies without compromising their human capital gains as professionals and human beings whose lives are in accumulated development and progress.

In those societies, babies can come once women feel that they do not have to choose to get pregnant or continue their progress in life; when they realise that having another baby will not distort their future and spoil their economic aspirations due to costly childcare, babysitting, education, recreation and getting a healthy child whose mother can continue her own progress. Making the best services, advocacy and information in which women and couples can make informed decisions is the most appropriate approach to address population anxiety. All other alternative attempts proved not to work very well. In a nutshell, enjoying reproductive rights is the key.

Read the original post:

Population anxiety in Pakistan - The Express Tribune

Indore (Madhya Pradesh): Amid the ongoing hearing by the Supreme Court over the legality of same-sex marriage, that has sparked a nationwide debate,youths of Indore have supported the rights of gay/lesbian and said that non-heterosexual marriages should get legal acceptance.

A relationship can never be forced, nor can someone force themselves to like a certain gender. If a person wants to spend hisher life with a certain individual then they should be allowed to do so. In the end, what matters is that people should be happy,

Saumya Jatav, university student.

In the past people have fought for basic rights and freedom. Non-heterosexual marriage is a part of gender fluidity and hence it is the right of an individual to be able to choose their partner for life. However, society needs time to accept the changes and become comfortable with it.

Sonam Jatav, tutor

Gender equality is a part of diversity. Instead of looking at it as a problem, people should consider it as a solution. While there have been many protests in the country regarding the support of LGBTQ, one must understand that equality is beyond caste, creed, gender, or money. Same-sex marriages are and should be considered as legal practice.

- Kashish Saxena, university student

People are opposing same-sex marriages on the ground that it is a new concept. However, if someone goes through history one will find that our culture has been very supportive of accepting marriages. Earlier, polygamy was normal, but now it is not

- Chitra Gandhe, university student

There should be no problem in accepting same-sex marriages, but it is the society that is unwilling to accept it. The concept of degrading and discriminating against individuals has been brought up by the British. It is surprising that at a time when gender fluidity is being demanded, people are shying away from supporting this openly.

- Manasvi Jain, university student

The Indian culture has always been supportive of gender equality, and this demand is also about equality. Indian culture is so strong that it cannot be affected by this development. Our culture has been evolving for ages and has encountered ample changes. Hence, the claim that this type of marriage will harm our traditions seems to be unjustified.

- Harish Gidwani, university professor.

Same-sex marriage is neither socially nor medically acceptable. It should not be promoted as it can also lead to various diseases. It is also considered a perverse disorder. It should not get the legal acceptance.

- Dr Ashok Dagaria, senior psychiatrist

As a democratic country every citizen here must have the freedom to be treated equally. After the Supreme Court verdict of September 6, the community got hope. Policy change is needed to give them social acceptability and ensure equality for such people in all spheres of life. Procreation is not the sole objective that binds people in the bond of marriage and therefore should not be seen as deterrence for allowing homosexual couples their rights.

Medha Shukla, resident

I dont want same sexmarriage at my home

Senior advocate and Rajya Sabha MP VivekTankha said that he did not consider people who are into same-sex marriages as criminal. I dont see them as criminals but frankly I dont want them at my home, he said while addressing a press meet on April 23.

(To receive our E-paper on WhatsApp daily, please click here.To receive it on Telegram, please click here. We permit sharing of the paper's PDF on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)

Read the rest here:

Indore: City youths give thumbs up to same-sex marriage - Free Press Journal