The other day at work I was sent this festering pile of wrong. It’s an article in the Washington Post about how people should not be polyamorous by W. Bradford Wilcox. The article was saturated with shitty arguments and bad sourcing. Did you know that polyamory leads to child abuse?
Open marriages put children at risk. Children are markedly more likely to be physically, emotionally, and especially sexually abused when they are exposed to a revolving carousel of romantic partners in the home, according to a recent federal report on child abuse. And we know nothing of the emotional impact on children of being exposed to open infidelity on the part of their parents.
Anyway, I posted the link to my facebook wall with the caption “boy, am I ever gonna poop on this when I get home.” However, a friend of mine, Christina Stephens (she also has a PhD – repping the skillz), got to it first and said everything I was going to say, only better. Frankly, this both infuriates me and arouses me at the same time. I’m so confused. Why do my friends do this to me?
Whenever I see an error mushroom cloud this big combined with notions like ‘defending traditional marriage’, my ‘somebody is trying to defend religious beliefs acquired before they could reason and are stretching the truth to get there…again’ flags all go up. Somebody should start writing my gospel, because damn, if I’m not a prophet. I was cruising Wilcox’s CV and his first book was Soft Patriarchs, New Men: How Christianity Shapes Fathers and Husbands. For my next, more daring prediction, I predict it will be sunny sometime this week.
So anyway, pop over to Christina’s blog, read her beat down. Say hello while you’re at it.
Shame on you, Washington Post for giving a stage to this hack. I hope the sociology professors at Princeton, the university from which Wilcox got his PhD, are facepalming something fierce right now.