Kink & Current Events: The FLDS

Anyone not watching the events that have been unfolding in Texas at the FLDS compound with interest is missing out on something a bit chilling. The news is full of it, so I’ll spare the more obvious summary, except to say the sight of armored transports surrounding a religious community and a whole town’s worth of children being moved away from their parents is disturbing for a few reasons.

Oddly enough, the kink blogosphere has been extraordinarily quiet about all of this, or at least the 50 or so blogs I read about BDSM have been (which may not be the same thing.) Much more was made of Elliot Spitzer’s dalliances with a high-priced hooker, for example, which probably says more about BDSM’s obsession with pro-dommery rather than folks living a lifestyle, or even practicing privately in their off-hours.

Now, obviously the FLDS, which is the Mormon splinter-church at the center of this controversy, is probably anathema from the point of view of most kinksters, and most people into BDSM. The church is conservative, religiously fundamentalist, patriarchal, and the brand of polygamy they practice is pretty much — by its very nature — socially deleterious, both on the young girls that provide the fuel for its group marriages and the faith’s persistence, and for its effect on non-privileged men within the compounds, who tend to get driven out at the first opportunity. (I have no idea if the Texas compound was practicing the kind of shunning practiced in other FLDS strongholds, but simple math tells you that if the balance between women and men is 50/50, and you have a handful of elites marrying multiple women, the young men at the bottom of the totem pole will have to be dealt with, one way or another.)

This post is in no way a screed defending the FLDS. I’m not a fan of polygamy in general, given how it tends to play out in the real world, and the story behind the FLDS creates a particularly unlikeable fact pattern. But as a professor of mine said on several occasions, “Bad facts make for bad law,” and Texas has already demonstrated that it’s not friendly to people practicing kink. Amongst other things, it managed to create — whole cloth — a tort based on Infliction of Emotional Distress to allow a wife to collect damages in a divorce for consensual S&M she practiced with her husband on three or four occasions during their marriage. SS&C is not going to pass muster as a defense in those courts if the judges aren’t fans of S&M.

So when I say that the scenes on TV are chilling, they’re not frightening because I feel any real kinship with the FLDS, or approve of their particular brand of sexist patriarchy and the side-effects it creates. I say it because kink and poly folks in America should always have their eyes open for the state — or State, if you will — using its coercive power against those who are sexual minorities. We’re living in a country where a large voting bloc gives lip service to the more ridiculous portions of the Old Testament, where for the last 8 years that voting bloc has promoted a strong and frightening version of Unitary Executive legal theory under the guidance of the head of state, and where the supreme legal authority of the land has veered into more and more conservative territory. (Scalia’s dissent and its talk of a gay agenda co-opting America in Lawrence, for example, is sheer paranoid madness, but few people blinked at it being in a Supreme Court opinion. And they should have — it was like reading about Zionist Conspiracies in an Executive Order.)

Combined with the power of the administrative state — the Texas FLDS issue is being handled by state agencies — and I think anyone who practices something out of the mainstream should be a little worried. Especially those of us who practice BDSM, because no matter how comfortable I am in my own skin with what I do, the vast majority of people in America think the more extreme flavors of it are off-putting at best and offensive to human dignity at worst, and there are still psychiatrists who believe an interest in S&M comes about due to childhood trauma. (ABC news had an article to that effect not a month and a half ago.)

But they’re not us, right? The FLDS are bad guys. Well, bad facts make for bad laws, and ballgags and leather hoods and golden showers and bloody backs don’t play well in Middle America. I have to wonder if a state was pulling a couple of children from the house of a poly family, or the house of a couple into S&M (especially 24/7 or domestic discipline scenes) if we’d look any better on TV, no matter how much more into consent and negotiation we are.

But Lawrence protects us, right? I can think of a dozen reasons why Lawrence can be distinguished from S&M activities, not the least of which is simply the stigma associated with BDSM, and the psychiatric fields’ unease with it, provide plenty of fuel for a smart judge to distinguish it with. You simply don’t have to be a good lawyer to pick apart a Lawrence argument in a case about S&M.

Now, am I being a doomsayer? Not really. I don’t see this as a “First they came for the Mormon fundamentalists, and I didn’t speak up…” situation. The FLDS really does have major social costs and questions of consent hanging around its neck — as concerns its particular brand of polygamy — that it will have to deal with, and which I believe it might not ever be able to. They’re bad guys, or at least immensely misguided and harmful. But I think any kinky folks out there with an interest in the law need to watch how this is handled, and how the power of the state is exerted against undesirable sexual minorities.

You know, like us.

Posted in S&M. Tags: .

10 Responses to “Kink & Current Events: The FLDS”

  1. undertheboot Says:

    As a footnote to this, I was discussing this matter with my wife and our conversation turned to polygamy versus polyamory. And I pointed out — rightly, I think — that poly folks need to pay attention to things like this, not because their flavor of poly is anywhere near similar to the FLDS’, but because there’s a synergy at work. Fundamental questions of polyamorous marriage are going to be decided in cases where it’s folks like the FLDS involved. And if poly folks want to get statutory recognition of their relationships — and they will, give it time — they’re going to have to face folks like the FLDS trying to ride on their coattails.

    There are ways around this, of course — age limits on marriage would divide up the FLDS types who want to marry young girls from the SS&C poly folks — but as my wife and I decided today, the distinctions we make here in Kinkworld don’t matter to the rest of the world. To them, a lot of us fit under the same tent, even if we wouldn’t be caught dead with each other.

  2. pinkroses521 Says:

    A very thought provoking post.

  3. BBW Switch Says:

    I live in the mecca of the Latter Day Saint Church and there are many polygamist communities here.
    Historically polygamy was necessary and actually made sense to practice. The purpose was to protect women. When a woman’s husband, who was then the SOLE provider for her and her children, died it was customary for a male relative, even if already married, to marry her to give and her children the protection of the family name as well as to become her and her children’s provider. It was necessary because women had no other means to survive.
    Obviously, the status of women has changed, thus the practice has changed to young girls, ages 12-16, being married into forced servitude to a man of someone else’s chosing, usally for a profit or social gain to someone else.
    The women are kept uneducated, not allowed to work in a paying profession and because they are not legally married then use state programs to bring money into their community to support the “unmarried wives” and their children.
    In my opinion polygamy should be legalized thus making the men legally/ financially responsible for the women he marries as well as for any children he sires.
    He could have 20 children but Federal Law would allow a maximum of 10 for tax deductions.
    Also, it would require marriage certificates to be issued, thus girls not of legal age could not be “married” and possibly deter the exploitation of these children.
    Not to mention, it would allow women and the children rights of divorce, such as alimony and child support.
    Personally, I think if the financial gain is removed the polygamist communities, they would vanish.
    *steps off soapbox*

  4. undertheboot Says:

    First up: Great post. I hadn’t thought about most of that at all when I was writing.

    I wish I could agree with you about the results of fixing the financial incentives, but I suspect the patriarchal reward of having a bunch of younger women under your control is an attraction to itself. Personally, I’m okay with polygamy as a concept, but in practice it seems to be mostly attractive to very conservative groups that result in gender-inequality and a lot of weird externalities (like having to get rid of young men, in the case of the FLDS, and other side-effects in other forms.)

    If we could create some kind of system where group marriages avoided the worst excesses of the worst forms of polygamy out there, I’d be all for it, though.

  5. undertheboot Says:

    Pinkroses521: Thank you for the compliment!

  6. MrsKeeper Says:

    lsb and I discussed this just last night. His opinion was that while he agreed that there was abuse going on, he hoped the way the state has handled it is challenged well; giving Texas (or any State) carte blanche to carry off any kid they think is in a ‘bad family situation’ is not good. A good precedent needs to be set now, in this case.

  7. undertheboot Says:

    I agree, Mrs. Keeper. On the one hand, the images coming across the TV are disturbing and represent a pretty coercive state power — but to play devil’s advocate, I imagine Texas’ law enforcement remembers Waco and wanted to demonstrate control as quickly as possible. (Not that that’s right…but it’s the only justification I can think of.)

  8. BBW Switch Says:

    I am not certain there is a way to create a system that advoids the worst of polygamy, considering we don’t even have a system that does that for “traditional” marriages considering in my state, until just a few years ago, a girl could get parental consent to marry at 14 years old. That is the age limit is some other states. In my view, that is just legalized enslavement because honestly what 14 year old can make a reasonable decision regarding marrying?
    My criteria for supporting polygamist marriages is an age limit of AT LEAST 18 years old is imposed for both men and women. However, the flip side of that is that women FROM polygamist families generally are the ones entering polygamist marriages, so does an age limit really protect them if they have been RAISED to be a polygamist wife?
    The other criteria is education of these wives. It is absurb that a girl can be taken out of the education system to become a “wife” because the “husband” has gained legal guardianship (which they do from the parents of the girl) and can remove her. That goes for the children born into these families as well. Home-schooling is the choice a lot of families make, polygamist and otherwise, but they have to take state mandated tests to ensure their education is at least par with the public school system.
    Finally, our society expects families to be self-supporting (with exceptions of the disabled etc) and provides limited financial resources in unemployment, welfare, food stamps etc. Polygamists should be held to the same standard, not each “wife” and child being a separate “family” from the polygamist group. This would limit the financial resources the state provides and make them more accountable.
    Ooops, stood on that soap box longer than I planned. :)

  9. undertheboot Says:

    No, I’m glad you’re on the soap box. And for the most part I agree with you, especially about how problematic polygamy can potentially be.

  10. BBW Switch Says:

    I appreciate you allowing me to spout off my views - I tend to try to stay anti-political but occassionally I forget to do that and find my feet planted firmly on a soap box. lol

Leave a Reply