Polyamory in the News
. . . by Alan M.



July 19, 2024

Polyamory's maturing position in American life. "Why Gen Z are Ditching Monogamy" while others are hot for celibacy. Advice columns, doctor training, and other poly in the news.



First,


●  Tonight (Friday July 19) through Sunday bring the final events for the Week of Visibility for Non-monogamy. The schedule of events, both virtual and in-person, worldwide. 

Many of the 18 virtual events have already happened. But of the 29 in-person events, 21 happen tonight, Saturday, or Sunday. Check for any near you.

The annual Week of Visibility project is coordinated by the ambitious activists at OPEN, the Organization for Polyamory and Ethical Non-monogamy, now two years old.
______________________________________________________

●  Polyamory's maturing position in American life. Newspaper advice columnists have reflected and shaped mass attitudes for at least 140 years. My current favorite is Carolyn Hax at the Washington Post. She just fielded a mother's anxious question about her daughter getting into a fraught polyfamily mess if she adopts the future baby of her two partners as a legal third parent/guardian.

Hax treats this situation as ordinary, as if everyone knows that polyfamilies are what some people do. Mom worries about daughter’s family plans with polyamorous couple (June 23).



....Your daughter’s domestic arrangements are not for you (or me) to fix for her, and your feelings are not for your daughter to fix for you.

...Your responses so far to her news have blurred these lines. (In a food-processor kind of way.) Unless she asked your opinion, your warnings and concerns were incursions into her business. ... A would-be grandmother is no more entitled to weigh in on an adult’s family planning than anyone else.

Plus, um, the thing you carefully composed as, “Are you sure you’re ready for the big life changes?” always comes out as, “You shouldn’t have a baby!” Always. Ask anyone who has been on the receiving end.

...You were right to make one point, even if she already knew it: lawyer. Laws and families are evolving. Plus, the wise leave neither their hearts nor their children’s custody to chance.

Last thing, for you: If you ever think there’s no place for you amid younger generations because they’ve changed too much, then the mistake is yours. Adapt, or don’t; not one digit of that math has changed.



●  Another advice column dealing with conflict between adult generations, in Slate's "Care and Feeding": My Child Just Told Me They’re in an Open Relationship. I’m Disgusted (June 16). "They’re making a mockery of my marriage."

Michelle Herman explains some realities and closes, 


"Your kid’s life—all of your [adult] kids’ lives—are theirs to make of what they wish; their choices are not a referendum on yours. I think coming to see that is how you get to be “a parent of 2024.”



●  Media don't get more mass-market than People magazine. From its website: Mom Opens Up About Realities of Raising Kids While in Open Marriage with Husband of 14 Years (July 3). Danielle and her husband have experimented with monogamy a couple of times, but only as a passing phase.  For instance,


..."I was dating three people at once, which is way too many, because that's essentially four relationships, plus the relationships that I have with my two kids and family and friends," she recalls. "Dating that many people in that phase of my life took away from my other relationships ... and that was a lesson learned. It is not something I will repeat."

...But no matter the state or phase of her marriage, Danielle maintains that their two children — ages 7 and 10 — always come first: "If my dating life is impacting the time that I spend with my kids when my kids need me, then I don't date," she says.

Danielle of @OpenlyCommitted

























..."I think the main way that non-monogamy impacts me as a parent is other people's perceptions of my relationship, not my actual relationship," she says.

Overall, she feels that non-monogamy makes her a "more energetic, positive parent."

"I feel like dating gives me energy. It gives me a lot of joy. I'm an extrovert. I love meeting people. Dates are really fun," the author tells PEOPLE. "I'm so fortunate that I still have wonderful dates with my husband, and I also get to have fun dates with other people too."

...Non-monogamy also allows Danielle space to explore interests that she doesn't share with her husband, like her more outdoorsy inclinations. "I was recently dating someone who absolutely adores going on a 12-hour hike with me," she says. "That gives me energy. That gives me joy. And I get to bring that energy home into my family."


She posts as OpenlyCommitted on TikTik, where she has 200,000 followers.

 
● The trans/nonbinary romance author TJ Alexander hits the bigtime, if getting interviewed for The Today Show's website qualifies:  ‘Triple Sec’ is one of romance's 1st polyamorous rom-coms. Its author hopes it's not the last. (July 8) (I have no financial interest in this or any other product.)

















T. J. Alexander wanted to write a "fun, flirty and funny" version of polyamory, not "an angsty portrayal of how difficult it is."
 
By Elena Nicolaou

Mel, a tattooed bartender nursing her wounds from a divorce, finds love again with Bebe, an employment lawyer. The catch? Bebe is already married, and has an open relationship with her spouse, Kade, a nonbinary artist.

Alexander, who uses they/them pronouns, is a rising star in the contemporary romance world, writing books that center queer characters.

...While there are are polyamorous configurations in romance and erotica novels, “Triple Sec” is notable in that it’s one of the first, if not the first, in the contemporary romance space. Alexander hopes “Triple Sec” is a joyful, and not vexed, look at polyamory.

Today:  What was your intention with this book?

TJ:  I was aware that this was going to be, in a lot of ways, the first kind of romance of its kind traditionally published here. I was like, ‘We have a responsibility. We do not have the narrative plentitude to fall back on.’ I had to make sure that it’s not this lurid, scandalous kind of portrayal (of polyamory), or an angsty portrayal of how difficult it is. I wanted it to be a fun, flirty and funny, more of a gentle take. Most of the real life poly people I know are just normal people eating chips, not angsting over their relationship 24/7.

It’s like a love triangle but the opposite. 

When I pitched this book, I was like, “Here’s what this book isn’t going to be. It’s not going to be a bunch of love triangles. It’s not going to be about cheating. It’s not going to be a big bummer.”

...There’s a narrative device in the book that we were all very proud of. Communication is such a big component of polyamory. How are we going to show them communicating in a way that’s not, like, a total slog? I landed on the contract that these characters had that gets updated every time the relationship changes or evolves. I don’t think most people need a contract in real life, but for the purposes of this book, we needed it just to, like, keep things moving along.

A lot of times, it seems like when polyamory is mentioned, it’s in the context of relationships being destroyed.

I was very naively unaware. I think because I’m queer, I don’t know what straight people are doing. And so, I remember when I was first drafting out the outline, both my agent and my editor were like, “There have to be points, especially at the start of the book, to show that Bebe and Kate like each other and that polyamory isn’t something that like they’re they’re doing to try and get away from each other.”

And I was like, “What are you talking about? Why would someone do that?” They explained it to me. The guy opens up the relationship, and then the woman actually gets more attention,  and he gets all upset. This was fascinating to me. I, again, very naively, didn’t understand that. Oh, that’s what a lot of straight people experience with polyamory. Hilarious. I was like, “Oh, they’re doing it wrong.” I will make it very, very clear that these people actually like each other. I was so blown away by that.

...It’s not my job to hold everybody’s hand and explain the facts of life to them. But I do think I have a responsibility to readers who are coming to something for the first time. The best way to do that, and the funniest way as well, is to do it through the point of view of a main character who isn’t as experienced. I wanted her to be kind of our tour guide through this. ...


BTW, although Alexander says "Triple Sec is one of the first, if not the first [poly novel] in the contemporary romance space," and Today repeats this, Goodreads lists 205 "polyamorous romance books" on its site alone, and Alibris offers 525 "romance polyamory fiction books". So I suspect the romance industry's use of "polyamory" is untrustworthy SEO bait. The word isn't supposed to include  stupid old love triangles!


●  Medical Xpress covers research and health news for doctors, other health-care professionals, med students, and patients. It has republished (from The Conversation'It made me feel judged': Why it's harder to get sexual health care if you practice consensual non-monogamy (June 18)


By Ryan Scoats and Christine Campbell

Consensual non-monogamy is a surprisingly popular relationship style. ... But many continue to face barriers when accessing sexual health services, our research has shown.

In line with other research, we found stereotypes, myths and a general lack of understanding about consensual non-monogamy all act as potential barriers to health care.

For instance, when they go to their GP or clinic for testing, it's not unusual for them to be met by doctors and nurses who either don't understand their relationships or who actively stigmatize them. Approximately a third of our participants either never, or only sometimes, revealed their relationship style to medical professionals.

...Or they might be treated with outright hostility, with another participant sharing, "One [doctor] considered it a form of cheating and intimate partner violence."

...To our knowledge, no medical students are being trained on how to work with consensually non-monogamous patients.

This has serious implications, as a lack of understanding around consensual non-monogamy can create barriers to patients receiving appropriate health care and building trust with their providers.

Many patients told us about the frustrating interactions they'd had as a result of this lack of knowledge and understanding. ... It's not surprising that participants had significantly lower trust in health care providers than the general population. Nor is it surprising that consensually non-monogamous people are often quite picky about where they seek out sexual health care, as we found in our most recent study.

...To remove these barriers, it's vital doctors and nurses develop a better understanding of consensual non-monogamy and the unique health care needs this group has. But this change needs to come from within institutions. Many who are consensually non-monogamous do not wish to take on the role of relationship educators—especially given the potential risks for stigma. ...





...Dina Mohammad-Laity [VP of Data at Feeld] revealed that in-house research found that Gen Z tend to be more non-monogamous and single compared to Millennials and Gen X. With 48% of Gen Z identifying as LGBT and non-cisgender [!?!? Ed.] they are also the most fluid generation on Feeld.

She added: “They are much more open to relationship structures outside monogamy, which has come as a lot more socially embedded for previous generations.”

[Dr Natasha] McKeever and [Dr Luke] Brunning [who direct the the Centre for Love, Sex and Relationships] ...highlighted that with more fluid patterns of working and living in general, it makes sense that younger people are more open to changing norms... they’re more used to trying and doing new things.

They added: “Also, they may have watched their boomer parents’ relationships fail or run into difficulty, and learned that existing relationship norms and practices are not adequate.”

Mohammad-Laity: “The notion that Gen Z is ‘puritanical’ is challenged by the significant interest in non-monogamous relationships within this cohort.... Our introduction of the Celibacy Desire tag, which sparked a 175% increase in social media engagement, further illustrates the wide range of desires and the fluidity that appeals to Gen Z members.”

...The experts highlighted that it is possible to be non-monogamous but still have less sex overall, especially if nonmonogamy facilitates other kinds of intimacy that people value.


And for HuffPost's more conventional readers,


Mohammad-Laity: ...“Monogamous couples can learn from non-monogamous relationships by fostering open and honest communication and vulnerability. By asking questions and staying curious about what moves and affects each other, couples can maintain a deep, adaptive, and resilient bond.”

McKeever and Brunning said [mono couples can learn from ENMers]

– Honest and open communication, and that there are various ways to show love and commitment
– Being open about life complexity and relationship goals
– The need to question received social norms and understand their impact on our states of mind and emotional skills.
– That a decision to be monogamous should be a decision made consciously and reflectively, not just as the default option
– Being flexible with domestic and practical arrangements, being more creative around care labour and childrearing
– Not taking sexual and emotional health for granted
– Distinguishing between disappointment and feeling wronged in a relationship.



●  A bit of blunt dating advice, from a Los Angeles MFM triad, that we need to hear more often: 'We're in a polyamorous relationship - here's the one bit of advice we'd give people' (in the UK's tabloid Mirror, July 15).


Felix, Shannon and Brett (Soft White Underbelly/YouTube)
















[When meeting a supposedly open couple,] "make sure they both want it, because I had many, many relationships [say] ‘oh we both want it’. [But] she didn’t want it; she was lying on her husband’s behalf."


As in Polyamory Under Pressure, that sick PUPpy fouling the scene.

Other blunt advice they offer: If you're an MF couple opening up, accept the likelihood that the man gets no online dates while the woman gets lots. The article cites data:


Statistics from Tinder show 75% of its users are men, reports Statista. It says women match with 10% of the people they like, while men match with just 0.6%.


...That's 17 times worse.


● A different bad-poly warning in the UK papers: There’s a new kind of ‘softboi’ in town (The Independent, July 15). A "softboi" is described as a certain very casual hipster dater of any gender, characterized by super-low commitment and an interest in natural wines.


By Lauren Bulla

...This “new look” softboi often has a primary partner that they use as a safety net – yet they still trawl the apps... with little (if any) proper accountability. And in my opinion, this is where we’re going wrong with modern dating. Poly connections should operate in a similar manner to monogamous connections, with the same requirements: communication, directness and honesty.

...I was once on a date with someone who confessed that until they meet a “match” in real life, they don’t see them as an “actual person”. I type this sighing over my keyboard….

...Once, I was on a date and it wasn’t until the end of a bottle of orange wine (of course) that I discovered the person already had a “primary partner”. Oh, but not to worry! She explained they had a loophole: “We could go to a sex party together” and “that would be OK”.

...Our individual choices are our own. The thing I take issue with is those who omit the truth, or who cherry-pick parts of a connection in order to solely benefit them. Here, we see the “trendy” version of polyamory, which doesn’t do this type of relationship justice.

...There’s a difference between really loving and embracing a lifestyle, and co-opting certain parts of it for your own gain. Whatever your life (and love) choices, be upfront. 



----------------------------------------------

Meanwhile... and not unrelated...







    
Here is why I've been ending posts to this polyamory news site with Ukraine: I've seen too many progressive movements die out, or get wiped out, because they failed to scan the wider world accurately and understand their position in it strategically.

We polyamorous people are a small, weird minority of social-rule breakers. Increasingly powerful people call us a threat to society — because by living successfully outside of their worldview, we expose its incompleteness.

Our freedom to choose our relationship structures, and to speak up for ourselves about the truth of ourselves, is just one way we depend on a free and pluralistic society that respects people's dignity to create their own lives, to access facts, and to speak of what they know.

Such a society is possible only where people have reasonably good power to govern themselves, combined with legal structures that are at least supposed to guarantee the rights of all.

Vote for Ukraine Aid protest signs outside the US Capitol
Innovative people, communities, and societies who create their own lives, and who insist on the democratic structures and legal rights that enable them to do so safely, infuriate and terrify the authoritarians who are growing in power around the world and in our own United States. Now with direct mutual support that is increasingly stated out loud.

Such rulers and would-be rulers seek to stamp out other people's freedom to choose their lives — by intimidation, repressive laws, inflammatory disinformation and public incitement, weaponizing police abuse, stacking courts, and sometimes, eventually, artillery.

For what it's worth, Polyamory in the News received more pagereads from pre-invasion Ukraine over the years (56,400) than from any other country in eastern Europe.

For those of us born since World War II, this is the most consequential war of our lifetime. Because we have entered another time when calculating fascism, linking up at home and abroad, is rising and sees freedom and liberalism and social tolerance as weak, degenerate, delusional  inviting easy pushovers. As Russia thought it saw in Ukraine. The whole world is watching what we will do about it. Starting with China, with its eyes on Taiwan.


The coming times may require hard things of us. We don't get to choose the time and place in history we find ourselves born into. We do get to choose how we respond to it. 

Need a little help bucking up? Play thisAnother version. More? Some people on the eastern front trying to hold onto an open society. (TW: war is awful.) Maybe your own granddad did this from a trench facing Hitler's tanks — for you, and us, because a world fascist movement was successfully defeated that time, opening the way for the rest of the 20th century.

But the outcome didn't look good for a couple of years then, either. Popular history remembers the 1945 victory over the Nazis and the joyous homecoming. Less remembered are the defeats and grim prospects from 1941 through early 1943.

Remember, these people say they are doing it for us too. They are correct. The global struggle between a free, open future and a fearful revival of the dark past that's shaping up, including in our own country, is still in its early stages. It's likely to get worse before it gets better. The outcome is again uncertain, and it will determine the 21st century and the handling of all its other problems.

----------------------------------

PS: Ukraine should not be idealized as the paragon of an open democratic society. For instance, ‘A Big Step Back’: In Ukraine, Concerns Mount Over Narrowing Press Freedoms (New York Times, June 18, 2024). And it has quite the history of being run by corrupt oligarchs — leading to the Maidan Uprising of 2013, the Revolution of Dignity in 2014, and Zelensky's overwhelming election in 2019 as the anti-corruption candidate. So they're working on that. And they're stamping hard on the old culture of everyday, petty corruption.  More on that.  More; "Ukraine shows that real development happens when people believe they have an ownership stake in their own societies."

Writes US war correspondent George Packer in The Atlantic, 


Here was a country with a tragic history that had at last begun to build, with great effort, a better society. What made Ukraine different from any other country I had ever seen—certainly from my own—was its spirit of constant self-improvement, which included frank self-criticism. For example, there’s no cult of Volodymyr Zelensky in Ukraine—a number of Ukrainians told me that he had made mistakes, that they’d vote against him after the war was won. Maxim Prykupenko, a hospital director in Lviv, called Ukraine “a free country aspiring to be better all the time.” The Russians, he added, “are destroying a beautiful country for no logical reason to do it. Maybe they are destroying us just because we have a better life.”


They have a word there, with a deep history, for the horizontal, self-organized, mutual get-it-done that grows from community social trusthromada. It's been keeping them going  to the extent they've been able. We polyfolks often dream of creating something like that community spirit in miniature, in our polycules and networks. Occasionally we succeed.

----------------------------------

Social attitudes in Ukraine are mostly traditional, rooted in a thousand years of the Orthodox Church. But in the last generation the ideal of modern European civil society has become widely treasured. The status of women has fast advanced, especially post-invasion. More than 43,000 women volunteer in the armed forces, flooding traditionally male bastions — including as combat officers, artillery gunners, tankers, battlefield medics, snipers, and infantry. Some LGBT folx in the armed forces display symbols of LGBT pride on their uniforms, with official approval, whereas in Russia it's a prison-worthy crime for even a civilian to show a rainbow pin or "say gay." A report on Ukraine's LGBT+ and feminist acceptance revolutionsAnotherAnotherAnother. War changes things.

Polyfolks are like one ten-thousandth of what's at stake globally. Ukraine must have our full material backing for as long as it takes them to win their security, freedom, and future. Continue to speak up for it.
                                     
A Russian writer grieves: "My country has fallen out of time."


Ukrainian women soldiers in dense undergrowth
Women defenders on the world's eastern front

PPS:  U.S. authori-tarians, such as Sen. Ted Cruz, say that allowing women in front-line roles is a woke plot to weaken America's armed forces. Ukraine puts that shit to bed. Do you have a relative who talks like that? Send them this video link to Vidma, who commands a mortar platoon, recounting the story of one of their battles near Bakhmut.

Update June 17, 2024: Almost two years later Vidma is still alive, still with her mortar unit, and posting TikToks. They are now at the front in, it looks like, the battle to hold Chasiv Yar, an afternoon's hike east of Bakhmut. A young girl who looks high-school age showed up to join themAnother vid. Their lives, and their promising society, depend on us. 

And maybe our own? Says Maine's independent Senator Angus King (Jan. 31, 2024),


Whenever people write to my office [asking why we are supporting Ukraine,] I answer, 'Google Sudetenland, 1938.' We could have stopped a murderous dictator who was bent on geographic expansion…at a relatively low cost. The result of not doing so was 55 million deaths.


Labels: , , , , , , ,



July 3, 2024

Green flags to watch for in poly dating. The great poly/queer overlap. Co-living. And, a total heartwarmer.

Pride Month has just passed. But not pride.



Getty
By Charles Trepany

...According to a survey on relationships published online in 2018, 2% of heterosexual participants reported being in open relationships, as opposed to 32% of gay participants, 5% of lesbian participants and 22% of bisexual participants.

...Experts cite a few reasons why LGBTQ+ people might be more drawn to non-monogamy.

[For generations] many gay people likely became accustomed to defining and organizing relationships on their own terms, rather than by societal norms. This led more gay people to challenge monogamy, as well as other standards traditionally associated with long-term relationships.

"There is a stereotype that queer couples are, at very least, open to being open," says Leanne Yau, a polyamory educator who has been non-monogamous for eight years. "I think that, if you are queer, that means that you are already rejecting the societal norm of being heterosexual. And, if that is the case, then people who are queer are much more likely to think about in what other ways they might live their lives that are unconventional, or which might suit them better."

...Philip Lewis, a therapist specializing in gay men's mental health, says stereotypes around the ways gay people date and fall in love do LGBTQ+ people no favors. One stereotype gay men in particular face, he says, is that their sex and romantic lives must involve either promiscuity or non-monogamy.

That isn't the case, Lewis says − but a young gay person who grows up thinking it is may believe those are the only ways to have relationships as a gay person.

"I don't think that just because you're queer, you necessarily need to abandon everything else," Yau says. "Question and explore your identity and your choices and things like that, but the point is having freedom of choice. The point is not to do all the radical things all the time.... What's radical is the choice."



●  Another reason is because many people don't recognize (or admit) their sexual orientation until they're already adults and hitched to the opposite sex. For serious sexual incompatibility in couples, an agreed open relationship is a common work-around.

Or sometimes a work-apart, as Jason Bilbrey describes in the Modern Love column of the New York Times's Style section. I Was Content With Monogamy. I Shouldn’t Have Been (June 21).

The story takes a surprise backflip toward the end. Spoiler: The answer to the subtitle, "Can exploring polyamory both break you and make you?", is yes.


Brian Rea / NYT
















...One night, seven years into our marriage, she said, “Do you ever wish we had slept around a bunch in college before getting married?” Corrie was a fiery social worker whose face could never hide what she felt — annoyance, attraction, embarrassment. Behind this question was an expression of excitement.

I stared at her in disbelief. By “college” she meant the Bible college where we met, both of us in student leadership. It was the kind of Christian university that prohibited dancing.

...It was after an episode of “Orange is the New Black,” the Netflix show featuring incarcerated women — many of them lesbians — that Corrie said, “I wish we hadn’t gotten married so young. I don’t regret marrying you, but I regret that I never got the chance to explore first. What if we had that chance now? Both of us.”

It hurt. It was the first time we talked about divorce. Neither of us wanted to end our marriage. But the idea of opening it also felt wrong — or it did to me. ...

...My reintroduction to dating was a disaster. I spent the moments before my first date dry heaving in an alley behind the restaurant. ...



●  BTW, that New York Times tale was served to me with the same ad repeated in all of its ad slots: Cartier, the high-end jeweler, advertising multi-partner wedding rings.

Here it is (45 seconds). It suggests multi-relationships that look more like RA than triads stereotypically do:
 

Times ads are super-expensive. Cartier is super-establishment. Capitalism adapts.


●  My last post led with Peacock's new documentary Queer Planet laying waste to the Catholic legal doctrine of "natural law," originating from Thomas Aquinas. Remember, 13th-century biology is to modern biology as 13th-century astronomy is to modern astronomy.

Now a new meta-analysis widens the picture by 38%.



INTO / MSN


By Jude Cramer

From humpback whales to manatees, there’s been no shortage of queer representation in the animal kingdom lately. But according to a new survey, there’s still more queerness to the natural world than meets the eye — because scientists haven’t been accurately reporting their findings.

The study, published in PLOS One, surveyed 65 animal researchers on their experience seeing same-sex behavior among animals in the wild. Those researchers were studying 52 different species across various orders, from primates to rodents to elephants. Of the survey respondents, more than three quarters (76.7%) reported observing same-sex activity in their species, but less than half actually collected that data (48.2%) and even fewer included same-sex behavior in their publications (18.5%). ...


















By Bob Yirka

A team of anthropologists and biologists from Canada, Poland, and the U.S., working with researchers at the American Museum of Natural History, in New York, has found via meta-analysis of data from prior research efforts that homosexual behavior is far more common in other animals than previously thought. 

For many years, the biology community has accepted the notion that homosexuality is less common in animals than in humans, despite a lack of research on the topic. In this new effort, the researchers sought to find out if such assumptions are true.

The work involved study of 65 studies into the behavior of multiple species of animals, mostly mammals, such as elephants, squirrels, monkeys, rats and raccoons.

The researchers found that 76% of the studies mentioned observations of homosexual behavior, though they also noted that only 46% had collected data surrounding such behavior.... They noted that homosexual behavior observed in other species included mounting, intromission and oral contact—and that researchers who identified as LGBTQ+ were no more or less likely to study the topic than other researchers. ...




...Of the unique species identified as engaging in SSSB [same-sex sexual behavior] in the survey, 38.6% (N = 17) have no existing reports of SSSB to the knowledge of the authors. In both the survey questions and freeform responses, most respondents indicated that their lack of data collection or publication on SSSB was because the behaviours were rare, or because it was not a research priority of their lab. ... No respondents reported discomfort or sociopolitical concerns at their university or field site as a reason for why they did not collect data or publish on SSSB. ... These results provide preliminary evidence that SSSB occurs more frequently than what is available in the published record and suggest that this may be due to a publishing bias against anecdotal evidence.




●  In Gay Times, Non-ethical non-monogamy? What cinema can – and can’t – teach us about polyamory (June 18).  "Non-monogamy is notoriously based on open communication and healthy dialogue, but where’s the fun in that?"

All kinds of movie fun could be in that. But the industry mostly can't see past its old standly the love triangle.
 
A movie exception, writes Megan Wallace, is Passages (Ira Sachs, 2003). 


Most of the films which depict forms of non-monogamy circumvent the culture around it (no-one in these films has read Polysecure, that’s for sure) and certainly don’t affirm the idea that non-monogamy can be an identity or orientation in and of itself. 

This is what makes Passages so refreshing. ...Things don’t exactly end well and there is plenty of emotional suffering to go around. However, Passages takes genuine steps forward in depicting the relationship between Agathe and Martin as metamours – the partners of a shared partner. While Tomas flagrantly flouts boundaries and has a passion for withholding key information, Agathe and Martin’s scenes together are filled with transparent conversation and respect. These two might not be romantically involved, but they offer one another far more consideration than the man who supposedly loves them both. 

In this way, Passages breaks new ground by authentically depicting the overlaps and new formations which can spring from polyamory – and it does so with a quiet understanding, rather than the sensationalism which still abounds.... As non-monogamy becomes increasingly visible in popular culture, we can only hope that other filmmakers follow suit.



------------------------------------------------

●  You've heard lots about red flags when dating. But what about the opposite?

Here's Green Flags in Polyamory (Medium, June 24, registration walled). "Society doesn’t teach us how to build healthy relationships, so look for people who seek to learn by themselves." It's adapted from the author's Discovering Polyamory website. 


How to tell if someone is ready for polyamory, and has your best interests in mind













By Thomas H. Brand

...Green Flag: Learning on their own accord.
[Which means] When someone is actively working on learning how polyamory works and how to be the best polyamorous partner. 

The truth is, it's simply not possible to take the skills we learn for monogamous relationships and transfer them to polyamory. ...

Green Flag: Spending time alone.

... And why is this a Green Flag? Because it shows that they are not using their partners to avoid themselves. Alone time is important for all of us. ...

Green Flag: Doing their best to communicate.
When someone is actively trying to be open and honest in their communication.

The importance of communication is obviously universal across all types of relationships. But I consider it to be a specific Green Flag when it comes to polyamory. ... We can no longer rely on the assumptions that we have all too often fallen back on in monogamous relationships. And this means breaking out of our communication comfort zones.

...The Green Flag is when someone recognises they need to try harder with their communication, strive to be better, and listen when they are told where they can improve. 

Green Flag: Openly listening to criticism.
Someone who doesn't get upset them they are told they can improve, but instead actively takes it onboard.

Green Flag: Knowing and communicating what they want.
Someone who knows what they are looking for in their relationships and isn't afraid or uncomfortable being honest about it. 

One of the things about polyamory that can be hard to grasp is that everything is on the table. ...The only problem is when we're dishonest with what we're looking for. ... 
 
Green Flag: You feel good telling people about them.
Someone you are comfortable talking about without having to hide, or avoid talking about certain parts of their personality or life.

...If you're not prepared to tell people about something, there's always a reason. It could be because [it's] not your business to tell. But if it's because you know it's a Red Flag and you don't want people to point this out to you, that's another matter entirely. ...



●  Monogamy? In this economy?  Actually, housing and childcare costs, plus pervasive loneliness, are prompting more monogamous and single people to explore group living as long-term close friends. The mommune phenomenon, for instance. The search for good chosen family is growing in many spheres, as financial precarity looks to become permanent in American life.

The results can be very happy. Valuable group-living assets to cultivate, and look for in others, include communication skills, honesty, forthrightness, flexibility, high emotional intelligence, readiness to stand up for one's own needs, and a generous heart. Sound familiar?

Time magazine takes note: Meet the Friends Buying Houses Together (June 10).


TIME / Getty Images















By Simmone Shahjune

...Eve Ettinger realized something needed to change. Stuck working remotely in a rented farmhouse in rural Virginia, they felt isolated and yearned for community and support.

...A friend of Ettinger’s had recently divorced and was looking to start over, and the two began to toy with the idea of purchasing a house together. “We wanted to divest from the compulsive heteronormative idea that you make your family and your stability out of romantic relationships,” says Ettinger. “We wanted to make an intentional community living situation where we could be there for each other in a bigger-picture way.”

They purchased a home in northern Virginia in 2021 that they now share with a few friends. The move has allowed Ettinger, a writer who also works at a nonprofit, to build financial stability that had long felt out of reach.  

...Many millennials and members of Gen Z no longer view the traditional markers of stability—marriage, children, and a white picket fence— as an inevitable or even desirable goal. ... Many increasingly believe that the benefits of homeownership—the number one driver of wealth in the United States—should not be limited to those in romantic relationships. That’s why more people are choosing to purchase a home with close friends instead.

...It’s hardly a new concept in the queer community. “It’s something that people have been doing for a long time because they had to,” says AnnieRose Shapiro, a real estate agent in Portland, Oregon. ... Now the practice is catching on with others out of financial necessity. ...


Poly people too have been ahead of this curve.


...Unique challenges come with buying a house with a friend instead of with a spouse. Heath Schechinger saw that for himself when he chose to co-buy a home with friends in Northern California in 2021. “We all had our own reservations about the nuclear family model of moving to the suburbs and feeling isolated and trying to raise a family by ourselves,” says Schechinger, 40, adding that regular rent hikes made them eager to purchase instead. “We all wanted to be able to eventually be a homeowner, so that we had the autonomy of making choices for our own, but living in the Bay Area that just seems so financially out of reach for all of us.” 

But Schechinger and his friends, who used CoBuy to help navigate the home-buying process, quickly learned that the process was not designed for multiple, unrelated buyers.... Many cities in the U.S. prohibit three or more unrelated adults from living together. ...

Andy Sirkin, a lawyer who specializes in real estate co-ownership, says that he encourages co-buyers to draft up an operating agreement that breaks down what the agreement will look like from start to finish—including an exit strategy, property management, and default. 

Sometimes the obstacles remain too great to overcome. Schechinger and his friends recently decided to sell their home, in part because their mortgage agreement prohibited them from transferring the mortgage to a non-family member when someone was hoping to transition out of the arrangement. 

Still, Schechinger is determined to try again. He describes his ideal home: a house with separate wings to allow for privacy, with shared spaces that foster connection. He views it as an antidote to the loneliness epidemic, a world in which friends might share the responsibilities of raising children or household responsibilities. “In the past, there were clear structures where people could rely on each other for support, whether it was caring for aging parents or helping with child rearing, or even finding a partner,” says Schechinger, a psychologist and co-founder of the Modern Family Institute, a research-based organization focused on expanding legal and social definitions of family. ...

He believes living situations that prioritize friendship and community will only continue to grow in popularity—especially as people look to build their own safety net in the absence of larger societal protections. “The social and economic pressures,” he says, “are too high for people to not consider it.”


 
●  I've saved the best for last. This just came in from the Valley Advocate of western Massachusetts, the half-century-old alternative newspaper where I once worked 16-hour days and slept on a couch. Summer of loves: Polyamory in the Valley isn’t what you think (June 27 print issue).

What poly there is, the writer seems surprised to find, is networks of support, community, and loving chosen family. I'm warmed to see that the Pioneer Valley, at least parts of it, continues to foster our early vision.


Partners LC, Ryan and Erin embrace in Northampton’s Look Park.
(Photos by Christopher Evans / Valley Advocate)
























By Melissa Karen Sances

“You know what goes on behind closed doors in a polyamorous household?” Fox asks, and I lean in closer. We’re on the phone and he is 800 miles away, so I am leaning toward — nothing. I am on the precipice of something, I know I am, but all I can see is my broken phone screen over a black background, his name, white like sunlight, filtered through the cracks.

“What?” I ask, as the seconds tick by. “What goes on?”

Josie and Tasha Metley at last year’s Hampshire
Pride Fest. Metley, who is married to Josie, also
has a relationship with Jimmy, who
is married to Liv.


“Board games,” the 45-year-old says with a laugh. “Like Dungeons & Dragons. A polycule makes for a readymade D&D group. I’ve never run across the bacchanalias that conservative folks are worried about, because our life revolves around board games and Google Calendar. It’s soccer mom times 50.”

It sounds so … wholesome.

It also sounds familiar. In 15 interviews across 5 polycules, almost everyone will share that, for them, polyamory has very little to do with sex. And, a few days after my call with Fox, when representatives of each polycule gather for a photo shoot and join hands, I will be touched by their gentle circle, and I will see exactly what everyone has described: shared joy in shared love.

Terri and Gus. “It was helpful to have my first poly
relationship with someone who had so much
experience in the community,” he says.
“It was like going to a foreign country
with a native language speaker.”


Let’s be real

But even in our liberal, queer-friendly Pioneer Valley, polyamory isn’t easy. Everyone who shared their story with me acknowledged a level of risk, from being “outed” to their family, workplace or community, to facing social or legal danger. Some chose to use pseudonyms or first names only to protect their privacy. I spoke with people from Springfield, Greenfield, Westfield, Chesterfield, Easthampton and Northampton, ranging in age from 29 to 55. I consulted with a therapist whose clientele is 80% non-monogamous and an expert witness whose own fear of polyamory drove her to research its benefits. Here are their stories. ...

Polyamorous partners Jennifer Rahner, center, and Sean Rahner, right,
with Jennifer’s boyfriend, left.

















Read on. It's long and, like life, not always happy. It ends,


I stare at my black iPhone 7 and disconnect the call. When I turn it over and examine the multicolored case, it assures me, somehow, that nothing is black-and-white, that in between lies promise and danger, and that there is something beautiful about a smudged but sturdy rainbow.



----------------------------------------------

Meanwhile...







    
Here is why I've been ending posts to this polyamory news site with Ukraine: I've seen too many progressive movements die out, or get wiped out, because they failed to scan the wider world accurately and understand their position in it strategically.

We polyamorous people are a small, weird minority of social-rule breakers. Increasingly powerful people call us a threat to society — because by living successfully outside of their worldview, we expose its incompleteness.

Our freedom to choose our relationship structures, and to speak up for ourselves about the truth of ourselves, is just one way we depend on a free and pluralistic society that respects people's dignity to create their own lives, to access facts, and to speak of what they know.

Such a society is possible only where people have reasonably good power to govern themselves, combined with legal structures that are at least supposed to guarantee the rights of all.

Vote for Ukraine Aid protest signs outside the US Capitol
Innovative people, communities, and societies who create their own lives, and who insist on the democratic structures and legal rights that enable them to do so safely, infuriate and terrify the authoritarians who are growing in power around the world and in our own United States. Now with direct mutual support, which is increasingly proclaimed out loud.

Such rulers and would-be rulers seek to stamp out other people's freedom to choose their lives — by intimidation, repressive laws, inflammatory disinformation and public incitement, weaponizing police abuse and stacking courts, or eventually, artillery.

For what it's worth, Polyamory in the News received more pagereads from pre-invasion Ukraine over the years (56,400) than from any other country in eastern Europe.

For those of us born since World War II, this is the most consequential war of our lifetime. Because we have entered another time when calculating fascism, linking up at home and abroad, is rising and sees freedom and liberalism and social tolerance as weak, degenerate, delusional  inviting easy pushovers. As Russia thought it saw in Ukraine. The whole world is watching what we will do about it. Starting with China, with its eyes on Taiwan.


The coming times may require hard things of us. We don't get to choose the time and place in history we find ourselves born into. We do get to choose how we respond to it. 

Need a little help bucking up? Play thisAnother version. More? Some people on the eastern front trying to hold onto an open society. (TW: war is awful.) Maybe your own granddad did this from a trench facing Hitler's tanks — for you, and us, because a world fascist movement was successfully defeated that time, opening the way for the rest of the 20th century.

But the outcome didn't look good for a couple of years then, either. Popular history remembers the 1945 victory over the Nazis and the joyous homecoming. Less remembered are the defeats and grim prospects from 1941 through early 1943.

Remember, these people say they are doing it for us too. They are correct. The global struggle between a free, open future and a fearful revival of the dark past that's shaping up, including in our own country, is still in its early stages. It's likely to get worse before it gets better. The outcome is again uncertain, and it will determine the 21st century and the handling of all its other problems.

----------------------------------

PS: Ukraine should not be idealized as the paragon of an open democratic society. For instance, ‘A Big Step Back’: In Ukraine, Concerns Mount Over Narrowing Press Freedoms (New York Times, June 18, 2024). And it has quite the history of being run by corrupt oligarchs — leading to the Maidan Uprising of 2013, the Revolution of Dignity in 2014, and Zelensky's overwhelming election in 2019 as the anti-corruption candidate. So they're working on that. And they're stamping hard on the old culture of everyday, petty corruption.  More on that.  More; "Ukraine shows that real development happens when people believe they have an ownership stake in their own societies."

Now, writes US war correspondent George Packer in The Atlantic, 


Here was a country with a tragic history that had at last begun to build, with great effort, a better society. What made Ukraine different from any other country I had ever seen—certainly from my own—was its spirit of constant self-improvement, which included frank self-criticism. For example, there’s no cult of Volodymyr Zelensky in Ukraine—a number of Ukrainians told me that he had made mistakes, that they’d vote against him after the war was won. Maxim Prykupenko, a hospital director in Lviv, called Ukraine “a free country aspiring to be better all the time.” The Russians, he added, “are destroying a beautiful country for no logical reason to do it. Maybe they are destroying us just because we have a better life.”


They have a word there, with a deep history, for the horizontal, self-organized, mutual get-it-done that grows from community social trusthromada. It's been keeping them going  to the extent they've been able. We polyfolks often dream of creating something like that community spirit in miniature, in our polycules and networks. Occasionally we succeed.

----------------------------------

Social attitudes in Ukraine are mostly traditional, rooted in a thousand years of the Orthodox Church. But in the last generation the ideal of modern European civil society has become widely treasured. The status of women has fast advanced, especially post-invasion. More than 43,000 women volunteer in the armed forces, flooding traditionally male bastions — including as combat officers, artillery gunners, tankers, battlefield medics, snipers, and infantry. Some LGBT folx in the armed forces display symbols of LGBT pride on their uniforms, with official approval, whereas in Russia it's a prison-worthy crime for even a civilian to show a rainbow pin or "say gay." A report on Ukraine's LGBT+ and feminist acceptance revolutionsAnotherAnotherAnother. War changes things.

Polyfolks are like one ten-thousandth of what's at stake globally. Ukraine must have our full material backing for as long as it takes them to win their security, freedom, and future. Continue to speak up for it.
                                     
A Russian writer grieves: "My country has fallen out of time."


Ukrainian women soldiers in dense undergrowth
Women defenders on the world's eastern front

PPS:  U.S. authori-tarians, such as Sen. Ted Cruz, say that allowing women in front-line roles is a woke plot to weaken America's armed forces. Ukraine puts that shit to bed. Do you have a relative who talks like that? Send them this video link to Vidma, who commands a mortar platoon, recounting the story of one of their battles near Bakhmut.

Update June 17, 2024: Almost two years later Vidma is still alive, still with her mortar unit, and posting TikToks. They are now at the front in, it looks like, the battle to hold Chasiv Yar, an afternoon's hike east of Bakhmut. A young girl who looks high-school age showed up to join themAnother vid. Their lives, and their promising society, depend on us. 

And maybe our own? Says Maine's independent Senator Angus King (Jan. 31, 2024),


Whenever people write to my office [asking why we are supporting Ukraine,] I answer, 'Google Sudetenland, 1938.' We could have stopped a murderous dictator who was bent on geographic expansion…at a relatively low cost. The result of not doing so was 55 million deaths.


[Permalink]

Labels: , , , , , ,