Reddit mentions of The Persistence of Polygamy: Joseph Smith and the Origins of Mormon Polygamy

Have him read The Persistence of Polygamy by all faithful scholars that you can google and confirm as such so that it scans as "safe". The way it sets up the popular defensive myths and then obliterates them is instructive. As a last ditch effort, your husband will either lose all affection and respect for Joseph Smith or he is a hardcore TBM. Since you say that he is drinking my bet is he will go the latter route. You want help? That's help. It's $9.70 so it's cheap, relatively brief so it's not a daunting read, and has bloody fabulous footnotes. If trying is important to you then you can at least try this.

Either way, you both should go see neutral marriage counsellor specialising in your particular issue.

Here is the desktop version of your link

>That was my only or primary point with that example: that the rule, "he who asserts must prove" is only a very general rule of thumb, and that we are allowed to make presumptions as long as we have some independent grounds for those. If I've established that much - and you seem to have acceded on that - then that point is made. That only leaves one other question.

I've never pretended the claim about Joseph having sex with HMK was anything other than a presumption, or that you weren't allowed to make such a presumption. But even if you consider it a justified or logical presumption, it's still a presumption, and to present it as anything other than that is disingenuous. That's the only thing I've ever raised a question about; the surety with which people present their opinion on the subject.

If people simply said "we presume Joseph had sex with HMK", that would be great. But that's still far different than saying "Joseph had sex with HKM".

I don't mean to be condescending, but it really seems like you haven't done your homework on polygamy. At the very least, if you haven't read "In Sacred Loneliness" and "The Persistence of Polygamy", I highly recommend taking the time to do so, especially if you're going to be making claims based on historical context and what should be considered "unusual" or not for Joseph Smith's polygamy. If you don't have time for "In Sacred Loneliness", the Compton's article here is a decent summary:

A Trajectory of Plurality: An Overview of Joseph Smith's Thirty-three Plural Wives

But if we both agree that the actual evidence is ambiguous, and that claiming Joseph had sex with HMK is a presumption and inference, that's all I've ever been saying, so we don't need to belabor a point we agree on.