I just registered my intent to marry my partner in the UK, coincidently around the time when the state I used to live in, North Carolina, banned same sex marriage in the state via Amendment One. In addition, I’m attending the wedding this weekend of two good friends who are poly. I’m reminded of how lucky I am not only to be able to legally marry in this country, and thus get the opportunity to stay in the UK, but I’m also reminded of why all of the “Congratulations!” given to me because of my marriage makes me hesitant to be pleased.

One might assume looking at me that my fervour for marriage is gone because I’m poly; because if I can’t marry all of my partners than I won’t be happy. But the truth is, I don’t want to marry ANY of my partners. I have zero interest in the institution of marriage.

I want to stay with my partner and stay in the UK. It’s not as though we aren’t committed to each other, don’t want to stay together, or aren’t serious about each other; but neither of us have ever had a particular drive to be officially married. While my partner may have his own reasons, I find, ironically enough, the same people who are defending “the sanctity of marriage” so harshly in my old North Carolina home have completely ruined it as a symbol for me.

My mother is a lesbian. She was forced to marry her babysitter in North Carolina when she was 16 in a good old fashioned, sacrosanct heterosexual marriage. Why was she forced? Well, it was an extenuation of power and control from her sexually, physically, mentally, and emotionally abusive stepfather. Because, as funny as everyone finds referring to incest when it comes to the Southern states of America, he couldn’t ACTUALLY marry my mother to control her – so he chose the next best thing instead.

Because of the great state laws in Virginia, when I was born, her babysitter was put on my birth certificate as my father (whenever a woman’s married in Virginia, the man she’s married to is always listed as the father whenever she has a child). Her babysitter would divorce her later a year after I was born citing one year’s separation so he could marry someone else. After constant bullying and teasing from my half siblings, my parents relented and got married so I could have my father’s name. My mother is a lesbian and my father was abusive. They got married because a name change for me was $300, whereas the holy sacrament of marriage was just $30, and it was the only thing we could afford.

My mother would luckily later break from a pattern of male abusers and find someone who didn’t treat her like crap. Only, she couldn’t marry that person because they were a “same sex couple”. They got married in San Francisco, only to have their marriage license revoked and a refund check for the cost of the marriage sent. Since then her partner, my stepfather, has transitioned and identifies as “male”. And now, because he’s been able to change the gender marker on his birth certificate (something you can’t do in all US states), they are legally married and always will be – so long as no one finds out that he’s trans*, that is, and decides to extend their “protection” of marriage.

Watching people compare my mother marrying someone who finally treated her decently to marrying a dog, or to the incest she actually suffered that is constantly joked about, poked fun, and laughed at by white liberals who think that making fun of poor ignorant Southern racists makes them better – well, that’s been pretty infuriating. And at this point, I feel like asking to be married to all of my partners would only cause conservative jerks to do the “I told you so” dance, claiming that legalising my mother’s marriage has now gone down the slippery slope of letting me marry all of my partners.

I’ve often heard from other queer people that marriage equality shouldn’t be our focus, and I do agree. The job discrimination my mother faced, that meant she was the first to be let go in a staffing cut from a boss who called her a “dyke”, hurt us a lot more as a family than the marriage in San Francisco benefitted us. But for us marriage equality has been a symbol of our wider struggles. And it’s caused me to feel like “marriage”, when it exists as a bastion of a heterosexist society that means that my mother can marry an extension of her rapist stepfather, but not her partner, means absolutely nothing.

Marriage no longer holds any meaning for me as a symbol and sign of love. It’s a government contract; one that I can only be a part of if I choose to identify as female, and that I only have the privilege of getting because my partner identifies as male. Even as Barack Obama says he supports same sex marriage because he’s seen a lot of long term monogamous same sex couples, I’m reminded that straight marriages don’t get scrutinised. Straight people don’t have to love each other, they don’t have to be monogamous, they don’t even have to know each other to be married in most Western societies. But same sex couples are only seen as legitimate if they’ve been together for years. When I registered to marry my partner, no one asked us if we were in love, and it didn’t seem that different than applying for an ID.

It is ironic that the very people so concerned about queers destroying the institution of marriage have destroyed the institution for this queer. While I am grateful for people’s well wishes on my upcoming marriage, and for their general happiness that I have a partner I’m willing to commit to, marriage will never represent anything other than an arbitrary government definition – that in this case means I never have to go back to a place like North Carolina, where my mother’s marriage to my abusive father or her babysitter is “holy”, and her current marriage of 10 years to my stepfather may not be. So, keep up the good work, “defenders” of marriage.

Because of the sensitive nature of this piece, we have agreed with the request of the author and published it anonymously.

Welcome to Ask Polly, the UK’s first poly advice column! We invite readers to send poly-related questions to our resident columnist, Polly, and she’ll do her very best to offer advice. You’re also very much encouraged to join the conversation in the comments. Polly can be contacted by email, on polly at polytical dot org, or via Polytical’s Facebook or twitter. Ask Polly is published twice a month, and you can read more here.

Hi Polly,

Confused in Cambridge

Hi Confused!

From what you’ve said, you sound fairly poly to me! And the word you want is probably compersion. You’ve brought up some really interesting questions about identity, labels, and “poly hard-wiring” that I’d love to explore more.

I feel like poly folks worry quite a lot about labels – conversations abound as to exactly what sorts of labels to use; whether we can call ourselves poly when single or with one partner; when we can start using the term when transitioning from monogamy; whether poly is an orientation (like being queer) and what that means.
I’m inclined towards suggesting taking a bit of a step back from finding exact labels, and just getting on with doing what works. Don’t worry about whether poly is something you are, inherently – let it be something you do, when it makes sense, and call yourself poly (if you like) from that basis. And when things change, remember that sexuality is fluid, that that is okay, and roll with it.

The converse is also true – don’t feel pressure to date around loads just because you identify as poly. Don’t feel like you need to practice it for your label to be valid. It’s totally normal to be single and poly, or partnered with one person and poly. I’m sure this is all familiar to you from bisexual politics!

It is much easier to think of poly as something that we do, rather than something that we are. That said, it’s really common to worry about not feeling poly ‘enough’, or having more of a monogamous brain than a poly one. Particularly when starting out as poly, transitioning from monogamy towards polyamory, or opening up an existing relationship, it can feel as though you can’t measure up to people who are ‘wired’ for non-monogamy – who feel naturally inclined this way, and who never suffer jealousy, insecurity, or Google Calender bugs as a result.

We’ve got a fair few people in our communities who feel hard-wired for poly – like Franklin, who says, “I know that I did not make this decision; it’s simply part of who I am”.

However, having met a fair few people practising non-monogamy, I’d say that those people who feel hard-wired for poly are in the minority. Most people are just muddling through, most experience difficulties like jealousy despite also feeling wholly committed to practising non-monogamy, and I bet that loads worry about not actually “being” poly because they don’t feel wired that way.

I’m not sure that anyone, except the very few people who seem to have totally poly hard-wiring, can really say for sure that they “are” poly and mean that they’re made that way. There’s too much hard work, self-doubt and second-guessing going on for that to really be an option. That’s why I prefer to think of poly as something we do, rather than something we are – with an acknowledgement of the hard work and active engagement that can take.

So I’d say, don’t worry too much about labels and what they prescribe. Do what seems good and makes sense, keep talking with your partners, and if you do find yourself worrying that you’re the only one around with a monogamous brain, or who isn’t *really* poly, try mentioning that to your local poly network and see how many people feel the same!

With love,

Polly

Liked this piece? Why not check out the previous Ask Polly column?

Take a deep breath, and let’s make the dive into debating territory. What other arguments are there that I hear so often levelled against polyamory…

It will all end in tears

Relationships end, or people die. That’s what happens in life, regardless of the way you structure your relationships. Basic chance would imply that around 50% of relationships that end will end unpleasantly. So this point really does have no relevance to anything at all, does it?

Ok, you mean it will all end in tears simply because it’s a polyamorous relationship, is that it? You mean the relationship style that requires more communication, less reliance upon expected social norms, higher emotional intelligence, and a greater degree of compassion and consideration than your ‘typical’ relationship might have a high chance of ending in pain for most people?

Well, sure, I can see your point there. Poly isn’t for everyone, and it’s definitely something that needs working on, figuring out, and practice to get good at it. Y’know, seeing as we don’t have an entire media institution dedicated to pounding the principles of our relationships into us from a young age. We poly folk are going to go through a lot of tears before we get to a happy relationship – but so are our monogamous counterparts, and I don’t see anyone giving up on the entire concept of relationships just because they’re difficult, and can be painful.

One person should be enough

The question “why?” is an underrated response. It is the perfect retort to most questions that cast doubt upon the validity of polyamory, and it’s particularly appropriate here. Why should I be satisfied with just one lover? I need not be satisfied with one friend – in fact, someone with just one friend is generally seen as an outcast and a loner. That, in and of itself, is absurd; everyone has their own tastes in people, and how many one chooses to befriend is of no real matter. But let’s not go down that road.

You’re happy with one partner – cool. I’m very happy that you are satisfied with your life, and it is a marvellous thing that you and your partner can be so many things to each other. But do you mean to tell me that you don’t have a multitude of friends you hold dear, who fulfil other roles in your life? It’s a fairly standard trope of modern sitcoms that every straight woman has her “girlfriend,” to whom she goes to talk about troubles with her partner. In certain types of drama, a gay best friend is also required for such things.

Now, what if this hypothetical, fictional woman were to also love and sleep with these other people in her life, who are already clearly at least as important to her as her existing partner? Would that really make so much of a difference to their relationship? Is sex really that much of a game-changer, do you think?

But the “why?” really does beg a deeper question – that is, why do people think that you have to be satisfied with one person? It’s all very well and good pointing out that people have different needs, and that poly people have a different way of meeting them from monogamous people – but that does make it all seem rather utilitarian, and what we’re dealing with here is a matter of the heart. We’re arguing on someone else’s terms when we defend ourselves in this; making a comparison to mono-normative behaviour and saying “we’re not so different.”

You know what? We are different. We don’t have this arbitrary limit on the number of people we can love. We don’t need to defend that. Instead we need to ask other people why they think that there should be a limit on how many people one can love. I wonder if anyone can come up with a reasonable response…

You’re being greedy

You refuse to let yourself or your partner get involved with anyone else – essentially cutting two people off from intimacy with anyone else, and you think that by sharing our love (and my lovers) with anyone we wish, we’re being greedy? I’m not sure I follow your reasoning there, my friend.

Of course, there’s nothing wrong with being exclusive in your relationship – be it with one person or more (such as in polyfidelitous relationships); but if there were any validity to the claim that any relationship can be “greedy” it would surely be in a claim levelled against someone who removed individuals from the dating pool. It certainly doesn’t hold any weight against people who share their relationships.

What makes the least sense with this accusation is just how one can be “greedy” with regard to matters of love. Sure, I can want more than I’m apparently supposed to want according to social norms. But how does that translate into greed? Isn’t greed generally agreed (by most dictionaries, at least) to mean wanting to possess something of value to an extreme extent?

So, how can I “possess” love, lovers, or even sex? Unless you’re still operating on the archaic premise that you “own” your partners, then you’re not making any sense. If you are still operating on that premise – get out of my sight and come back when you’ve joined us in the current century.

You’ve just not met The One yet

Quite possibly true. And yet also entirely irrelevant to what I’m doing now.

If there is indeed just one person on the entire planet who I’m meant to be with then sure, I might one day find them, decide that I want to be monogamous with them, and change my way of loving. Then again, when I meet them, I might integrate them into my existing poly family and have a wonderful time sharing all the other people I care about in all kinds of different ways.

The point is, even were the myth of The One something I believed in (it is, after all, pretty implausible, as Tim Minchin points out so well) then it wouldn’t render polyamory invalid. Just because there might be something different, possibly even better, waiting in the future doesn’t make what I’m doing now wrong.

And even according to the myth, not everyone finds The One in their lifetime. So why shouldn’t I have a good time while I’m waiting for my ethereal white knight to appear? It’s not like monogamous folks don’t date other people before they apparently meet The One either – poly people are just doing more of it.

But that’s all defensive arguing again. I’m not going to sit here and try to defend myself against people who believe in an evidently untrue assertion, and who often make one hell of a mess of their life as they go through it with this belief in their heads. I’ve dated people who have declared all their previous loves to be invalid because they found someone new that they loved – I’ve had that done to me, too, and it hurts like little else can. You really believe that all those feelings you had for someone are made invalid because you have them for someone else now? When you make a new friend, does that mean all your old friendships are invalid now? Oh no, I forgot that love is mystical, unique emotion that stands entirely outside of rational thought.

You carry on going through your life believing that every new person you love is The One, until you meet another One who makes you think differently. I’m going to keep valuing all the relationships I have, and have had, and believing that love is more than a fairy tale that needs constant chasing.

God said it’s wrong

That depends on how you interpret your scripture. Personally, I like to think that most religious figures were pretty relaxed about declaring things “wrong.” Jesus and Buddha were both so anti-establishment as to be easily compared to anarchists, for example – so I don’t think they were all that big on declaring new things out of bounds.

If you’re going for the old testament God of Abraham, then you might find something in there – after all, he was a very rule-happy fellow: no eating shellfish, no wearing cloth of mixed fibres, and all that nonsense. In short, if you want to argue over scripture, dogma and religious teachings, we can do it all day. It’s not going to change your mind though.

You know what, though? Most religions are based on love and compassion. Buddha emphasised compassion as one of the key virtues of life. Jesus said that love shall be the whole of the law. If that’s the case, I think we poly folks are following those teachings closer than you are. But it’s ok – I forgive you.

-

I think I need a cup of tea. And I don’t even drink tea.

Don’t worry, I’ve got more of these waiting for me to tackle when my brain has cooled down a bit. I’m not yet done with debunking myths and shouting at people with no reasoning skills!

Liked this article? Why not check out Challenging Challenges part 1?

If you’ve read any of my previous articles for Polytical, you’ll possibly be somewhat confused by this title. “But Isobel!” I hear you say, “Aren’t you part of a triad of one man and two women?” Yes! Yes I am. And I think they are awesome! The kind of awesome that makes me want to tell the whole world how happy I am and how great things are for our family.

Despite my assertion of awesomeness, the internet – and some poly people I have met, seem to have mixed views on the subject. Several times I have seen the mere idea of an MFF (that’s stands for Male-Female-Female, for those not in the know) triad vilified for being a patriarchy, or sexist, or politically incorrect. Those who seek one are labelled “unicorn hunters” and are often subject to sneers from the community.

On the flip-side, I have learnt to become more careful of referring to our arrangement as an “accidental” triad, after having been mildly scolded at a local poly meet-up for being too flippant about something that “people search their whole lives for and never find”.

The accusation of patriarchy is something that still confuses me a bit – especially when it’s made in reference to my particular triad, by people who know me. Why does one man and two women immediately equate to the idea that the man gains fair more from the arrangement than either of the women do, or that somehow the women have been coerced into such a relationship? Yes, there are certainly some triads with those problems, but that’s not a problem with the MFF relationship form as much a problem with those individual relationships.

The view most people have of a patriarchal MFF triad seems to be one where the man potentially controls who “his” women sleep with, possibly connected with the one-penis policy. The man is the focal point of both relationships, with the women are at best being good friends, and at worse putting up with each other so they can get some of the man they both love. He gets to enjoy having two women.

These relationships do exist; but these things do not apply to the majority of MFF triads, in my experience. We are in an almost-equal, polyfidelitous triad with the possibility to open up at a later date, should any of us choose. My girlfriend and I are together because we want to be, not because our relationship enables us to also be with Dan. Each couple gets time alone together; and Dan is most definitely not the focus of the whole triad. We are polyfidelitous by mutual agreement, not because Dan has told us we can’t have another man.

So – unicorn hunters. Hooray. I will agree that sometimes people seeking a unicorn are insensitive, selfish, and entirely unrealistic; but why is every couple who feels they want to add to their relationship given this label? I do not think there is anything wrong with desiring a particular kind of relationship. Triads work for some people, so if you feel that you are one of those people, why not actively seek out people who share your desire? It’s no different from only seeking out women if you are a lesbian, bisexual or straight male. You know what works for you, so you’re going to look for it. If I was a straight, mono woman, would I be pilloried for seeking out single men? I don’t think so.

Controversially, I am also going to say that I see nothing wrong with the idea of a unicorn. The idea, the dream, is the thing that spurs us towards seeking something. The danger lies in expecting a very specific dream-person to be real. When you go from seeking someone who lives in your general area and shares some vague interests, to demanding an attractive, bi woman who loves children, cooks, bakes on the weekends, and is willing to be you & your partner’s sex-slave; then there is a problem. When people stop being aware that the third party they are seeking will have dreams, preferences and a place of his/her own, then there are problems.

As long as all three people are aware that they need to work together to create an entirely new relationship dynamic, and that one person can’t just slot into the place that has been pre-created for them – then I see nothing wrong with seeking a particular kind of third partner. There is a difference between searching for that one woman to “complete” your relationship, and preferring a triadic-form relationship.

I do not think that any kind of triad, quad, V, or whatever other poly configuration you live with and enjoy is any better or worse than any other configuration. My MFF triad is no better or worse than your relationship(s); it works fantastically for us, and we are all very happy. We may not be happy living your configuration, you may not be happy living ours. It’s all cool! I’m not asking you to change.

What I will ask for is a little more tolerance. If you’re reading this, the chances are that you are poly, or at least poly friendly – so you are probably pretty tolerant already. But if you are also someone who reads about/sees an MFF triad and sees it as somehow a lesser arrangement, I’d like you to stop. Please?

Welcome to Ask Polly, the UK’s first poly advice column! We invite readers to send poly-related questions to our resident columnist, Polly, and she’ll do her very best to offer advice. You’re also very much encouraged to join the conversation in the comments. Polly can be contacted by email, on polly at polytical dot org, or via Polytical’s Facebook or twitter. Ask Polly is published twice a month, and you can read more here.

Dear Polly,

Sugar Pumps

Hi Sugar,

What a great question! I think it depends on what you’re doing with them: people can mean different things by ‘getting off.’

This can be a pretty tricky thing to navigate. You want to make yourself available to be hit on by cute girls, and you also don’t want to hide anything, or lead anyone on. Short of wearing a badge that says, ‘I’m non-monogamous, bi and available, I have a boyfriend and he is fine with this, I’d love to be hit on by cute girls’ (and actually, many events, like BiCon, run a sticker-code system to do exactly this) – what’s a girl to do?

Well, usefully, you’re at a queer event: I recommend talking loudly, at every opportunity, about being bi and poly. You could throw in a few more things about your in-bed preferences where relevant too: sex chat makes fun conversation and you could scope out the other hot switches/femmes/furries (whoever you happen to be interested in) while you do so. Hopefully, that’ll mean that not only will cute girls know you’re poly by the time you get to playing, they’ll also know exactly what to do to get you off.

Being open like this? It can be scary. You’re a bi woman, with a boyfriend, looking to play with cute girls, at a queer event – biphobia can rear its head and make your life suck. It might be tempting to play all this down a bit in the hope of upping your queer credentials, and certainly you might increase your chances of play if you do; but, y’know, this whole ethical non-monogamy thing? It means you have to be the grown-up and be as open and honest as you can be, even when that means you don’t get to play, or that cute girl storms off in a huff. Being the grown-up can really suck, but I’m afraid there isn’t really another option.

Let’s talk specifics! There are lots of things one can do with cute girls – here’s a selection:

Casual kisses – at parties, while dancing

You’re dancing, you dance with someone, you kiss, you move on and dance elsewhere – that’s a fabulous way to spend an evening, and I’d say anything goes here. A dance floor kiss isn’t a promise of sex that night, or commitment later – enjoy it for what it is, and don’t feel you need to have a shouted, awkward chat beforehand. If things get heavier – kissing every night, kissing no-one else, long nuzzling, extra-long hugs goodbye – then it’s probably time to talk.

A casual shag or one-night-stand

Now, sexual consent is a bunny you’ve got to be really careful with. You can’t just roll with this as you might a kiss and expect that the other person will also see it as casual without negotiating things. One rule I use is, if you’re withholding a piece of information that, if the person knew that thing, they may withdraw their consent to sex, then there’s a violation going on right there. Obviously, you can’t be expected to know they might have a hard limit over your love of antique teacups or karaoke; I’m not asking you to be psychic here, just careful. If you feel like you should mention something, you probably should – and you should definitely mention other relationships. The one exception to this rule is trans status.

The idea of violating someone’s consent is big scary stuff. Luckily, some simple, careful negotiation on both your parts can help a lot. Chances are you’ll be having a conversation before you shag anyway: about safer sex, what you both like and any limits or triggers. If she doesn’t know, that’s a good time to mention your partner – it being a queer event, chances are that she will already be familiar with the concept of poly. Make some space to chat about it – she may well want some reassurance that he’s also aware and consenting.

This bit really doesn’t need to be complicated – don’t feel the need to rattle off all your relationship rules or your poly history. You could simply say, “so you know, I’m non-monogamous and there are other people in my life right now.” She might well shrug and answer, “Cool. Is this lube vegan?” And then you can both have a fabulous, consensual, fully-informed time.

Starting something bigger

If you’re staying up all night talking – if that includes snuggling or kisses or sex as well, generally the implication there is that it could be the precursor of A Big Thing, or at least that it is its own event-contained Big Thing. If you’re not mentioning your boyfriend or your non-monogamous philosophy here (and, er, what else would you be talking about all night?), there’s something wrong there.

Try your best not to cause people to feel as though they’re being led on – this is even a thing that’s separate to your other partner, as it’s more a case of what you’d like in your life. Emotional energy levels are related to more than just other partners; you might not be looking to date right now because of career commitments, or focusing on yourself. Now, if you’re happy snuggling lots at this event but not looking for bigger stuff in the rest of your life, say so. If she seems to think that your casual one-night-stand is the consummation of a big and beautiful relationship, you’ve got to talk about it. Even if you’re not getting those vibes, probably best to talk about it anyway.

Imbalances in what people want spring up all the time, and often they’re painful to deal with. If one person has another partner, and also wants less involvement than the other person, it’s often somehow more painful for the person who wants more than if the object of their affection were simply busy with school. This isn’t fair, it’s kind of mono-centric, and it sucks too. But again, doing non-monogamy ethically can be really hard. With a bit of disclosure and conversation, things can be loads easier.

Good luck, and I hope the event is wonderful for you!

With love,

Polly

Liked this piece? Why not check out the previous Ask Polly column?

My my, polyamory is really starting to get people’s attention, isn’t it? We’ve received two very different, and very interesting requests for poly people to be involved in art & media projects.

The first request is from talented photographer, Emli Bendixen; who is looking for Poly people in the UK to photograph as part of her Modern Families project. She has already taken some beautiful pictures of unusual families, and is looking for more variety. Interested? You will get a print, the photographs may be published (so be aware of this when volunteering), and you’ll get to work with Emli to produce images of your life. This appears to be an interesting project that I might well get involved in myself, as Emli has a genuine desire to portray families of all kinds in a sensitive and positive light.

Here’s what Emli has to say about the project herself:

I’m a London based female photographer interested in working with you on a photographic project.

I’m interested in documenting the modern family unit and its many shapes.

Family no longer has to mean mum, dad and 2.5 children; family can be single parents and their child(ren); you and your pet, a carer and their relatives, poly-families, adoptive, estranged or long-distance families; flat mates and best friends… the definition is looser and yet more meaningful than ever before – especially in a big city like London.

My aim is to catalogue a few of the many constructs that today qualify as a family unit.

As part of this, I’m interested in meeting and talking to people may be interested in participating in the project. A photography led project of portraits and still life, I hope to offer an opportunity for participants to tell their side of the story – happy or sad or both – about why this is what they call family.

As an editorial photographer, I’m experienced in working with people including 0-5 year olds and the elderly. I hold a current CRB check.

Please visit http://emli.co.uk/2012/04/saci-and-anna/ for a recent family story.

You can get in touch with Emli by email, phone, skype or twitter – all the details are on the contact page of her website.

Thanks to Charlotte Cooper for sending this our way!

-

The second request we have is from a TV documentary maker. Specifically – North One Television’s producer/director, Ida Bruusgaard has gotten in touch and is looking for a poly ‘family’ (however you define the term yourself) to play a part in a programme looking at a variety of families that don’t fit the nuclear family archetype. I’ll let her explain herself:

I’m a documentary director making a programme for Channel 4 about marriage. I’m researching polyamorous relationships as an example of an alternative to the classic ‘marriage’ ideal which pervades society from children’s books to David Cameron’s political manifesto.

I’m interested in debunking the myth around the ‘traditional’ nuclear family. It seems to me that the idea that two people should be able to find indefinite happiness within their own four walls without much support / input / pressure taken off them by other adults, is in fact a very new phenomenon. Our homes used to be more open, with family members, neighbours and friends more intimately involved in our business. It makes me wonder whether ‘privacy’ and ‘space’ for married couples can cause isolation and trouble as much as being of benefit to a marriage.

I would love to find polyamorous people who are either married or in long term-ish relationships to feature in the documentary. I realise that a polyamorous lifestyle can be a sensitive subject, but I’d like to think it’s a chance to get a very positive message out there which will resonate with our viewers in ways they may not have expected. I was very encouraged to come across Sierra Black, her husband and their lovers, who took part in a TV piece in the States this week-end (ABC20/20), which was very well received.

If this project sounds like it could be of interest to you, or you are willing to tell me your story simply to help me with my background research (in confidence), it would be great if you would contact me via the details below:

Ida Bruusgaard – Producer / Director

Tel: +44 (0) 207 502 5669
Mobile: +44 (0)77 183183 88
Email: ida.bruusgaard@northonetv.com

North One Television
46 – 52 Pentonville Road
N1 9HF

I spoke to Ida at some length, and she seems genuinely interested in portraying something different from the norm, in an accessible and empathetic fashion. It seems that this kind of exposure for polyamory is really important to our gradual acceptance – that is, being put alongside other relationships as just another way of doing it, rather than as some kind of unique and weird way of loving people.

-

If you have any further questions about either of these projects, or would like a more detailed reference, don’t hesitate to get in touch with us here at Polytical. Always happy to help!

Just as a final thought – is all this media attention a good thing? Are we being given a fair hearing in general? Do you think it’s beneficial for us to be as open with the media as possible? Let us know what you think in the comments.

This is an addendum to my old article entitled “I’m Better ‘Cos I’m Poly”. I don’t entirely want to retract my previous statements because I do feel that being in an non-mainstream culture still creates defensiveness when trying to explain it to outsiders. But, I would like to announce that I have found the smugness, and forthwith apologise to people who I doubted in the past who had a lot of criticisms of the poly community. I often found myself wondering (as I continued going to poly events and getting involved in the community) why it seemed to be dominated by certain types of people, and while I explored the difficulties of jealousy and the shame around it in our community, I’ve begun to see the smug.

I feel it’s important to address this. Not because I enjoy being a naysayer, but I can see why the community alienates people. The smugness comes in two forms – a lack of acknowledgement of intersectional issues, and unchecked blatant privilege.

I have experienced a lack of acknowledgement of intersectional issues, both online in polyamorous groups and at polyamorous events. I have been repeatedly chastised for bringing gender or sexism into any discussion; and I’ve been accused on more than one occasion of “playing the gender card” when expressing frustration with the constant hetero-normative assumptions about the way people may or may not experience jealousy or possessiveness based on gendered stereotypes. People who say they’re polyamorous and critical of the assumption that we’re biologically suited to monogamy do not seem to bat an eyelash at gender stereotypes, and are more than willing to glue themselves to biological imperatives of the way “males” and “females” behave.

I find myself (and I’m not exaggerating) constantly having to remind fellow poly people that not only do intersex and gender variant people exist, but sometimes even that bisexual individuals exist. And when I bring up how sexism probably impacts the way people interact with others; the way people find partners; how comfortable, for example, those who identify as female may feel in situations where being poly means they are sexually available, I’m told that I’m pissing in everyone’s Cheerios or being too negative.

At one poly event, when a friend of mine brought up the struggles of women & gender variant individuals, and how – as poly activists, we need to mention and address these issues, she was condescended to by a fellow “poly activist” who told her that those people need to fight their own battles while we need to focus on poly struggles and poly issues.

Yet, almost ironically you find individuals within poly who are not queer identified, or who have no little to no personal lived experience of heterosexism or cissexism, who feel as though poly should be included within the LGBTQ (or QUILTBAG) acronym. In all of the arguments where people have volunteered to add a “P” to the alphabet soup, absolutely none of them have been in any way queer. Most of them have been white heterosexual cis men steeped in economic and educational privilege. And when I voice my concerns as a queer person, that adding “P” to an acronym built on backs and blood of beaten, raped, tortured, and slain individuals is insulting when, while polyamory is misunderstood, it has yet to be a death sentence – I’m told by individuals who have no concept of being queer that I’m being divisive and discriminatory. What sort of welcoming do queer people find in a community that tells them to keep their issues to themselves, unless of course heterosexuals want to co-opt their struggle?

This unchecked lack of intersectionality extends to class and race. To put it bluntly, being polyamorous may cause one to endure all manner of ignorant comments and may even threaten the custody or family lives of a few, but practicing polyamory is overwhelmingly a privilege. Loving more than one person is a capability I believe all human beings have. But having the time, energy, and resources for more than one relationship is, without doubt, a privilege. I see a lot of poly people online and offline wax poetic about polyamory being the next stage of human evolution, degrade and devalue monogamous people for their silly triflings; all the while ignoring that a working single mother barely has enough time for herself, let alone dating.

These discussions about how advanced polyamory is and how much better we are at relationships and life come off to me as incredibly ignorant of the realities many face. There’s a difference between being happy in and of ourselves for what we have, and being arrogant and ignorant. I have the economic privilege and free time to date more than one person, but I haven’t always had that. And people who have to spend most of their time working to keep their head economically above the water may have little time for conventions and long discussions about compersion. Love is infinite. Time is not.

I cannot specifically comment on race relations within the UK and, as a white person, my commentary on race relations in general is very limited. I do not pretend to speak for poly people of colour. Instead, I ask why I have seen so few poly people of colour at events or in online communities? I’m hazarding a guess that economic privilege has a play in it in certain instances. But I also feel like the exoticising and simplifying of cultures which have some sort of polyamorous practice also has something to do with it.

There’s a lot of oohing and aahing, and assimilation of the practices of “others”. I think it’s great to try to find examples of poly outside of the West. But there’s a line between appreciation and exoticification. And just as poly practices in the West aren’t as simple as they seem, one should not assume poly practices anywhere else are equally as simple. I’m not one to tell anyone what their spiritual path is, but I urge people to consider, before adopting something from another country or a completely different mind-set, ask yourself what you’re doing and why.

I’ve previously written about jealousy, the ways in which mental illness causes difficulty in my relationships, and how I’ve found very few people within poly circles who are willing to acknowledge jealousy as a constant issue. Discussions that centre around shaming jealousy, or the assumption that security is a realistic goal for all, or that you need it in order to be “good at poly,” create an environment that encourages people with mental illness (and people without) to not only misjudge red flags and pangs they experience as jealousy but also encourage them to ignore those feelings for fear of being the “green eyed monster”. There’s little to no discussion around these assumptions unless it’s pointed out that insecurity could stem from mental illness, and no advice or acknowledgement on how exactly folks with mental illnesses are supposed to navigate poly situations.

My physical disabilities don’t usually interrupt my daily life, but I wonder about individuals whose physical abilities do create obstacles when navigating through a world that rarely accommodates. Is the poly community inclusive of those people, and I mean in more ways than just making our events wheelchair accessible? Do people take for granted the ease at which they can physically visit or see partners, go on dates, do certain activities? Or, when giving advice for how to deal with poly situations, do we take into consideration certain physical and mental disabilities that directly affect communication?

If you’re incapable, for example (and for whatever reason), of certain types of physical intimacy, and you feel insecure next to partners who have that capability, would that impact how you navigate poly situations? How exactly, given the typical advice poly people are given about insecurity, are you supposed to feel “more secure”? Again, I can’t entirely speak on these issues, but I want to ask if we even think about this when we’re talking about polyamory.

Is this lack of intersectional acknowledgement a result of unchecked blatant privilege? I see people who refuse to acknowledge that practicing polyamory is a privilege; who refuse to allow other people to voice their concerns unless they want to co-opt queer identities and struggles to do the hard work for them; I see a community lacking in individuals of colour; and I see individuals who bring up problems being judged and told they’re hurting the cause of poly, being martyrs, or playing whatever “card” they have. Would there be more diversity in our community if this wasn’t the case?

Also, when we co-opt phrases to describe things within our community that are problematic, we further deny our own privilege. I’m speaking specifically here on the use of “couples privilege” to describe a lack of consideration a poly couple may have for a secondary partner. Privilege within a social justice context and within the world is understood as an unearned advantage, often within systems of oppression, which grants power of all types. Using that word within the context of a couple of individuals wherein there is not an unearned privilege but either a lack of consideration or a preference is incredibly off-putting and insulting. Couples existing as couples do not have an unearned privilege akin to whiteness, heterosexuality, and any other social identity or concept with which the application of the term “privilege” is far more appropriate.

I’m open to explanations or interpretations of the concept of couple privilege, but being in a couple is not the same as me being white, especially when I consider practicing polyamory in and of itself to be a privilege. It makes me wonder if using this term to describe this – while it articulates something perfectly valid, isn’t a sign that individuals either don’t understand the concept of privilege within systems of power, or believe it can be applied to any situation wherein one individual has power over others — which is not the case.

So, I have found the smug poly people. But it’s more than smugness. To me, smugness implies at the very least that there is something to be proud of, and you’re going the extra mile beyond being proud to being boastfully arrogant. This isn’t boastful arrogance, this is unchecked ignorance – and that is nothing, as a community, to be proud of. I see this problem in many communities, and I’m hoping that this is something that will change.

I do understand and empathise with defensiveness: It’s just as tiring for me to explain to people that yes, my partner knows I date other people, as it is to explain to people that I didn’t actually get my tattoos because I wanted to be touched without my consent. But like I have the economic privilege, time, and energy to afford to get tattoos, I also have the privilege of time to engage in multiple relationships. I sincerely hope more people acknowledge these issues within poly groups and poly events, and stop forcing out discussions of intersectionality.

Welcome to Ask Polly, the UK’s first poly advice column! We invite readers to send poly-related questions to our resident columnist, Polly, and she’ll do her very best to offer advice. You’re also very much encouraged to join the conversation in the comments. Polly can be contacted by email, on polly at polytical dot org, or via Polytical’s Facebook or twitter. Ask Polly is published twice a month, and you can read more here.

Hi Polly,

Ancelin

Hi Ancelin!

Congratulations! You’ve just come across an opportunity to show just how brilliant you are at the greatest poly skill of all – communication! I’d recommend two main things to bear in mind here:

• Be open, honest and generally excellent right from the start
• Don’t (don’t, don’t) try and start two relationships at the same time.

So. Pick one of them. Pick the one who you think would be more likely to say yes if you ask her out. (Because, if you ask her out, and she says no, and you ask the friend out soon afterwards, it’ll look like she’s a second choice. Awkward!) Ask her out. Hopefully she’ll say yes, and you can go off and date and have a lovely time – yay!

Now. As early as possible, perhaps while you’re exchanging information about other partners, STI status and the like, say that, in the interests of full disclosure, you want to mention that you’ve also been crushing on her friend for a while. Say that you might like to do something about that at some point, but not just yet because it’s simpler to focus on one new person at a time, and you’d really like to focus on her at the moment. Ask if that’s cool, chat about it, answer questions she might have, reassure her if needed (though hopefully, she won’t need much reassurance: this is all tentative stuff, early on in your dating!)

I don’t think it’s necessary to tell the friend. Saying something like ‘I fancy you, so you know, but don’t want to act on it just yet’ isn’t really needed – just wait it out for a bit and ask her out in a couple of months. Chances are that the friend you’re now dating may let her know you fancy her before that – that’s okay too, and if that happens maybe you could have a quick chat with the friend and check in that all’s okay (another chance to demonstrate your super-awesome relationship communication skills! This is a lot like safer sex talks – awkward, but the other person will think you’re totally excellent and really mature and skilled for initiating them.) Either way, it may well be that she already knows you fancy her, if you’ve been flirting with each other.

As an aside – I think that one superpower that poly people develop, and one reason we’re totally rad (of course some mono people do this as well) is the ability to openly fancy other people and not necessarily do something about that immediately. Fancying a person, and wanting to date them right now (or even ever) is (more) seperate, because generally we talk about moving towards dating actively, and choose to do so based on more than simply fancying a person (as there are also factors like amount of energy to consider, and timetables, and so forth.)

And if the person you ask out first says no? Give it a couple of weeks. She’ll have probably told her friend about this – acknowledge that when you ask her friend out. (If she hasn’t, be the first to let her know, again in the interests of full disclosure. It’s going to come out either way: don’t let it look like you were withholding that.) Say that it’s obviously a bit of an awkward situation, that it might look as though she’s second choice, and that that’s not the case. As ever, be open and honest, offer to answer questions, allow space and time for talking loads about it, and you should be fine. And if she doesn’t believe you? That’s her problem, and she won’t get to date someone as lovely as you.

The general poly guidelines apply here: be open and honest and as awesome as you can be. Act in good faith, acknowledge situations can be difficult and do the best you can. I wish you all the very best!

With love,

Polly

Liked this piece? Why not check out the previous Ask Polly column?

So, I co-ran the first every Poly Speed Dating in the UK. It was quite an evening, but for myself and Ludi the whole thing kicked off around late October last year, when Ludi was in San Francisco making friends and first hearing about Poly Speed Dating. I was sent quite a large PDF file full of things I didn’t really get but the overall jist was “it looks a lot more complicated than it is”.

I got chatting with Luke, the main organiser over in SF (apparently, it’s either SF or San Francisco, no-one there calls it San Fran) and thankfully I got to dodge the very technical “Set up a server in DJango and Python” since the system supported multiple events and groups in one database. Yes, it introduced the risk of someone breaking everything, but that was pretty minimal. Certainly not a big enough worry to fork out for lots of paid hosting and then learning two programming languages I’d never used before.

Ludi was going to be in charge of finding us a venue and all the “Front of House” activities, and I’d be in charge of anything that interacted with the database; so registrations and payments mostly, as well as signing folks in on the night and getting the dating sheets made up. The first priority was to set up a website where folks could actually register. As lovely as the base site is, it was all a bit dark for our likings. Inspired (read:” Ooh shiny steal steal”) by the look and feel of Polytical, I set about putting together a basic site which contained all the important details as well as looked bright and lovely. As someone who doesn’t really “get” design I was quite pleased with the final result.

Once the main site was up it was time to rig up some social networking. A huge amount of Polytical’s traffic comes from Facebook (although these days Reddit is bringing in many more) as well as Twitter being great for interacting with other people, and since nothing like this had been done before we expected plenty of questions. I set up a Facebook page, then had it set up an event so folks knew it was an event as well as an ongoing thing, Then a Twitter account was made. These accounts are great not just for the event itself but it means that in the future we don’t need to keep a large list of other people’s email addresses. If anyone else decides to run a Poly Speed Dating event (or indeed any kind of fun event) we can just update the social networks rather than worry about passing the aforementioned large list of email addresses.

We now had a website, social network connections and in early December we booked the venue and were ready to go. I left a good chunk of the advertising in Ludi’s very capable hands and within the first hour we’d had our first two registrations.

The next few months were spent watching the number of registrations gently climb, including occasional rushes, presumably when Ludi posted an advert somewhere. Thankfully there were very few problems; even where folks had said they didn’t understand the registration form, it had been filled out correctly. A few folks did ask us about using a payment system other than Paypal which I looked into. Did you know, PayPal are the only member of the Big Three (Amazon, Google Checkout and PayPal) who accept charities/non-profits? I certainly do now, after Amazon rejected the application and Google had an identical policy.

I kept in contact with Ludi, letting her know as we broke certain levels (clearing the loan we got from OpenCon, paying off the venue, banking enough to do it all again on our own funds and finally selling out) but mostly the system was wonderfully simple to use. When we did find bugs, Luke was extremely good at squashing them for us as well as deploying some handy updates as we went.

Finally, on March 9th, the day came and after work I got the express to London to get set up. In hindsight, this was probably my only major mistake as I didn’t get in until after doors had opened. For certainly a good few hours I felt a little swamped in what needed doing, mostly getting folks registered and handling some odd quirks in the system as well as learning to use a Mac. About 9PM though, the wave broke. Everyone was registered, late arrivals had been set up with at least something to do and everything was happening. Seeing the room full of lovely people, all having a really fun time, dating, chatting and mingling – and trying to find their new table every 5 minutes, was just wonderful. It’s that moment, and the rest of the evening, that made me want to do the whole thing all over again.

In about 6 months, when I’ve recovered first!

It takes a while, and maybe a bit of pointing out before you realise it, but I think there’s a huge contradiction within the Poly community. When I was just starting out and going to a lot of events, I was told that “There’s no one right way to do Poly” and “There are no experts on Poly. People may have their own styles”. While I don’t think those people were necessarily lying to me, I’ve found that the reality is quite different. Despite telling ourselves that there is no one right way to be Poly, there are no experts, and we’re all capable of sorting out what combination of partners and situations work best for us, I feel like a lot of us are striving towards this one “best” setup of poly. That there are certain experts whose opinion we laude as fact; that in actuality there is an environment of shame around things like “veto power” and other rules that prove you’re incapable of “handling poly” or being good at this relationship style (that supposedly has no experts and no one right way). It’s all highly contradictory.

I’ve even seen it evidenced in Polytical’s recent “Ask Polly” section, concerning how to deal with jealousy. One of the things I think we strive for – one of the poly ideals, are relationships where jealousy doesn’t ever happen. And if it does, it’s handled easily and dismissed, never to return again. I don’t claim to be an expert on relationships at all, but what I’ve seen time and time again is the assumption that jealousy within poly is all about one person being insecure. The assumption seems to be that one has to be completely secure to be poly. And anyone who’s not completely secure needs to just somehow overcome years of emotional training.

That’s the other highly contradictory thing about what Poly people say and what Poly people do: We complain that society is built around monogamy, that it trains us for monogamy, and that we don’t receive much acceptance or understanding from monogamous people, and yet some of us are surprised and dismayed when we find our monogamous training causes jealousy and makes it difficult for us to adapt to a relationship style that the world is supposedly set against. Why do we shame ourselves so much for experiencing jealousy when we live in a society that encourages it? Why do we expect ourselves and others to adapt immediately to polyamory; should we be very secure people, without any hiccups or growth?

And on that note, I have a confession to make.

I’m not a secure person, and that’s okay. As simple as the logic of security is when I read it, it does not always translate emotionally. I struggle with mental illness, disability, and an upbringing that makes me doubt the validity of my own emotions and reactions. If I can’t trust myself to tell when I am having a panic attack or a legitimate medical emergency, it makes it very difficult for me to tell when my jealousy is just a wobble or a sign of a deeper problem within the context of my relationships. If I can’t assert my identity as genderqueer for fear people will question me, humiliate me, make fun of me, and walk over me, it makes it very difficult for me to assert my boundaries within a relationship where I feel safe and loved. If I don’t feel good enough, thin enough or feminine enough; and it takes a lot of energy for me to find self-esteem in a world where I do not see my experiences and my life reflected in most forms of popular culture or media, it becomes very difficult to see that I am worthy to be loved. If I grew up with abusive individuals who took advantage of any vulnerability I had, it makes it very difficult to be vulnerable with one partner, let alone several.

I envision the journey to personal security for individuals like following a bead maze. Some people get right to the end quickly and easily, whereas others have to do backwards twists and turns, go around in circles to make the same simple journey. If you are a person of colour, if you identify as female, if you are trans*, if you are disabled, if you are gay, if you’re fat, if you are anything that society vilifies, doesn’t understand, or doesn’t represent, becoming secure in a world that discourages you means navigating through the main narrative of society. It means having to find confidence in a world that is continuously disempowering, it means having to be able to trust yourself in ways that you’re not capable of mentally, emotionally, or physically. Even understanding one’s own mental illness enough to seek treatment for it is not just a personal journey that is a hallmark of a strong individual – in reality it takes time and often money for therapy that countless people cannot afford.

For myself, I may not ever reach the end of the bead maze, wherein I can be a totally secure person who never experiences any jealousy. My security isn’t a solid ship. I have good days and I have bad days and I’ve found through experience that – like my anxieties, jealousy and self-esteem come and go. But, I don’t see my inability to always be self-sustainable and secure as a measure of how capable I am of forming multiple romantic relationships, nor do I think that individuals who experience little to no twists and turns on their road to personal security are the sages we ought to compare ourselves against. Anxiety, disability, queerness, and all of the things that categorise me as “other” in this society are part of the package that is me. Any partner I have will have to accept that my struggle against my anxiety; whether it involves needing reassurance in our relationship, or just having someone sit with me while my brain is telling me that I’m having a heart attack when I’m not, is part of my personal narrative.

I do think we should strive to take responsibility for our insecurities, to be open about them, and to talk about them. I think we should strive to be vulnerable not just with our partners, but with each other as a community. We should stop pretending that the ideal polyamorous relationship involves no jealousy and total compersion. We should stop shaming individuals who choose to use rules and other things that supersonic secure superhero cool poly kids can do without. We should own up to what we say: that there IS no ideal poly set up and if it works for individuals, then it works for them. I’ve found myself on many occasions, despite my belief that a relationship ending does not mean failure, judging others in my community for their relationships not “working”. Then I’ve also found myself questioning whether I could “do poly” because I experienced any jealousy at all.

Do I have a simple solution for how to deal with jealousy? No. I believe that it’s far more complex than, “You’re too insecure”. Jealousy can be a sign of insecurity, sure; but just as security is not as simple as that, neither is jealousy. I’ve found myself going along with things in relationships for fear of being the green eyed monster. In my first experience with poly, I was cheated on and used. And it would have ended sooner rather than later if I had the strength to assert my boundaries. And sure, that may have been from being insecure, but it also came from pretending to be secure; to be the ideal; to be cool with everything.

In an environment where individuals are trying so hard to be secure, shaming jealousy or “relationship problems” makes it that much harder to assert boundaries. If rules are shunned, if jealousy is seen as a sign that we’re not up to the challenge of being poly, if we’re scolded when we slow down as we pass through the bead maze, we’re never going to reach the end. If we want people to reach the place where they DO become secure, the shame around jealousy, certain relationship styles, and this obsession with complete and total compersion has to stop.

Just as it is unrealistic to expect to find the bisexual female unicorn, I feel it is unrealistic to find a person without any insecurity. And unless you plan only dating white cis heterosexual men between the ages of 18 and 49, you’re likely going to be dating a lot of individuals who’ve had their experiences not represented, who have been invalidated, who’ve dealt with marginalisation, and who have more than enough reasons to feel insecure. Overcoming that isn’t going to be as easy as reading a few articles about it. It’s going to take time to work their way through the maze.

I don’t expect any of my partners to solve my anxiety, nor do I expect them to always have the patience to tell me that my throat isn’t actually swelling up. But I do expect to have partners who understand that the things that make me doubt myself, that make me not a completely secure person; those are things that are part of the package deal. I expect partners to be able to talk to me about my feelings and work through them with me, not just toss me aside to deal with my own insecurity when I experience an emotion that’s not complete and total happiness. Maybe not being a completely secure person means I won’t ever get to sit at the cool kids table and maybe my bike will need more training wheels than others will – but I think I can be okay with that. I wish more people would be.