There are as many variations to poly relationships as there are stars in the sky. That is as it should be given the diversity in humans. The problem comes when we decide that our variation is better than someone else's. It might well be better for us but not so much the others in our life. From birth we know that getting our own needs met is essential to survival and learn to interact with others to achieve that. In a perfect poly-icious world, the conversations we have are building blocks to agreements we make with our friends and family in order to facilitate getting the most needs met with the least amount of conflict.
Men and women are equally likely to agree to something totally at odds with themselves in the heat of passion and regret it for years afterward. One can't really point fingers either because we've all done it.
It was with these bits of wisdom that I listened to some friends vent about their poly configuration. Several people in this group are unable to stand up to a very assertive woman who seems to protect her own sense of insecurity by bullying the others into submission. It frequently amazes me to note that the people with the biggest cavern of insecurity appear to be the most accomplished and confident.
It occurred to me that the level of control and inability to have open honest feedback was very sad but also very much a poly scenario.
Anytime humans are involved things will get messy and poly is very complex to start with. Being poly or living in multipartnered relationships isn't a constant state of hippie nirvana. It is daily work and constant feedback. It is never a done deal. All agreements have to be growing and evolving living things because the relationships they manage and the people they embrace are. That's what makes poly different. Growth is not just wise to empower - it is essential when you multiply the interactions.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Monday, May 28, 2012
Sunday, May 6, 2012
Round peg; Square hole
Some days I tire of the monogamist norm being the default in all things. Facebook would not let me add my one partner's name as a middle name even when placed before my surname and hyphenated. Add my partners surname behind mine with a hyphen and we are a go. My son decided to use our hyphenated names as his surname on Facebook only. I thought it was a sweet idea and so did my partner. My other partner who is also buddies with that son felt a bit left out. I'd like to use all three surnames on Facebook and in real life. I'd like to go to Vegas and marry them both in a drunken moment. I'd like to shout the happiness of my polyamorous relationship from the mountain tops and take an ad in every paper.
Probably not going to happen and probably not very wise. It ticks me off that I have to even think twice about these things that monogamous couples do every day. It ticks me off to have to sit in the rear of the bus.
It amuses me that while I was not overly interested in any of these trappings of monogamy in my very "evolved" polyamorous relationship - until I was denied not only the legal confirmations but now a hand-fasting or ceremony of commitment violates the law. That makes me feel like a lesser citizen. That makes me angry.
I pay taxes at a higher level because my common law partner and I are taxed on our combined incomes. Revenue Canada apparently values my relationship despite the lack of ceremony but my common law polyamorous relationship doesn't count because of that same lacking ceremony. Should I choose to make it count by having a ceremony that isn't legal anyway - my relationship is criminalized.
I realize that there is a long road ahead. Making the general population aware of the happy, healthy polyamorous homes is a priority. Working around the monogamist norm default in all things to make our round peg shape out that square hole and allow us to choose any seat on the bus will take time.
When I see posters and quote images circulating which support same sex marriage, I am pleased and share or pass them along but part of me is jealous. "What about poly marriages?" What about us?"
I am deeply and overwhelmingly in love with two wonderful men and I am proud that they love me. I want to enjoy all the aspects of this relationship and wear all the labels.
Maybe I'll get a tattoo - well another one.
Or I'll write an advocacy email.
Or I'll organize an advocacy event.
Some how it pales in comparison to flying to Vegas and coming back married to both.
Elvis could do the one and then we could trip down the street for Spock to make me a bigamist.
The honeymoon would be fab. I can see us now driving around the city in a limo, standing up through the sunroof and shouting out - "It IS about the sex, dammit, Great sex!!!"
The Canadian Constitution says all citizens are equal, but some are more equal than others. Income separates us, language separates us, religion separates us, location impacts our access to services, gender still proves to be a disadvantage, and our choice in loving partners denies us the legal benefits of life time commitment. We are not equal.
If you are chaffing at this too and willing to make your voice heard amongst we who are working to remove the disparity that exists, get involved to the level of your "out-ness" and comfort. The Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association is gearing up for some awareness and advocacy projects that will make a difference and move us along the road to true equality as citizens of Canada. Watch our website at www.polyadvocacy.ca for details or email cpaa.information@gmail.com
Do it for Mrs. Bob-Carol-Ted-Alice-Fred-Sue and her husbands and wives. Do it for you.
Probably not going to happen and probably not very wise. It ticks me off that I have to even think twice about these things that monogamous couples do every day. It ticks me off to have to sit in the rear of the bus.
It amuses me that while I was not overly interested in any of these trappings of monogamy in my very "evolved" polyamorous relationship - until I was denied not only the legal confirmations but now a hand-fasting or ceremony of commitment violates the law. That makes me feel like a lesser citizen. That makes me angry.
I pay taxes at a higher level because my common law partner and I are taxed on our combined incomes. Revenue Canada apparently values my relationship despite the lack of ceremony but my common law polyamorous relationship doesn't count because of that same lacking ceremony. Should I choose to make it count by having a ceremony that isn't legal anyway - my relationship is criminalized.
I realize that there is a long road ahead. Making the general population aware of the happy, healthy polyamorous homes is a priority. Working around the monogamist norm default in all things to make our round peg shape out that square hole and allow us to choose any seat on the bus will take time.
When I see posters and quote images circulating which support same sex marriage, I am pleased and share or pass them along but part of me is jealous. "What about poly marriages?" What about us?"
I am deeply and overwhelmingly in love with two wonderful men and I am proud that they love me. I want to enjoy all the aspects of this relationship and wear all the labels.
Maybe I'll get a tattoo - well another one.
Or I'll write an advocacy email.
Or I'll organize an advocacy event.
Some how it pales in comparison to flying to Vegas and coming back married to both.
Elvis could do the one and then we could trip down the street for Spock to make me a bigamist.
The honeymoon would be fab. I can see us now driving around the city in a limo, standing up through the sunroof and shouting out - "It IS about the sex, dammit, Great sex!!!"
The Canadian Constitution says all citizens are equal, but some are more equal than others. Income separates us, language separates us, religion separates us, location impacts our access to services, gender still proves to be a disadvantage, and our choice in loving partners denies us the legal benefits of life time commitment. We are not equal.
If you are chaffing at this too and willing to make your voice heard amongst we who are working to remove the disparity that exists, get involved to the level of your "out-ness" and comfort. The Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association is gearing up for some awareness and advocacy projects that will make a difference and move us along the road to true equality as citizens of Canada. Watch our website at www.polyadvocacy.ca for details or email cpaa.information@gmail.com
Do it for Mrs. Bob-Carol-Ted-Alice-Fred-Sue and her husbands and wives. Do it for you.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Replenishing love and finding family of choice
Life's been a whirlwind for Polly Amorie this past month. I have some newsy bits for you and some observations to share as well.
First the newsy bits:
Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association (www.polyadvocacy.ca) is looking at projects and advocacy opportunities with the legal stuff now taking a backseat. They are seeking proactive members from across Canada for various committees working on everything from moderating email lists, web design, planning conferences, developing a poly leadership network with a forum for communicating and collecting resource information to facilitate a refining of a focused advocacy effort and future legal advances for the many families practicing polyamory in Canada. Want to get involved? Contact them through the website. Recruitment for specific projects will gear up after their AGM on March 25, 2012.
Dating Challenges for Poly/Open Relationships - May 31 from 7:00 - 9:00 pm at SPARC (Sex Positive Arts and Resource Centre) 450 Montreal St, Victoria. $10 donation per person proceeds to PolyFamilyCampBC. This is a panel forum with audience discussion encouraged. Panel members will provide experienced tips on meeting men and women to date, dating couples, dating for bi-sexual men and women, dating ettiquette in general, talking to your dating partners about polyamory, opening your relationship, strategies, really bad moves and how to repair the mess. Excellent for new to poly/open relationships and those who are experienced.
PolyFamilyCampBC is scheduled for July 13 to 16 at Gordon Bay Provincial Park Group Camping area. This park is on Lake Cowichan. The site has a communal cooking shelter, hot showers and privacy for attendees to enjoy a stream of adult activities and workshop, a terrific child and youth program running concurrently and intergenerational activities as well. $40 per adult (16 yrs or older) early bird discount if you register and pay before July 1 and children/youth 15 and under are free with a one time family/tribe/camping group child/youth programming fee of $20. Registration opened March 3rd and you can access information and the registration form at http://sites.google.com/site/polyfamilycampbc/ Also please "like" the Facebook fan page PolyFamilyCampBC.
Observations: Women, poly and beautiful surroundings.
This past month I was able to attend a women's retreat at Big Fish Lodge in Port Renfrew, British Columbia. This is an amazing cozy place which can be rented by the bedroom but this group had the entire facility. There is a backpackers hostel across the street from it owned by the same group. Very friendly management and luxurious accommodations. Schedule of activities was flexible and division of provisions, cooking and clean up was well organized as was car pooling. The organizers did very well and the women attending arrived with good intentions and cooperative spirits. I tend to be a bit of an introvert in the company of women. I joke that I've lost my manual for female to female friendships and intimacy options. I made a conscious effort to participate fully though and was rewarded with some very interesting conversations and sharing moments. There were so many common discussion themes of women struggling in their relationships with their lovers, children, co-workers, extended family and with themselves. I think women in general are too hard on themselves with comparatives overwhelming from all angles and sources but poly women find dealing with their own issues an essential component of multi-partnered relationship development. These women were so gentle and supportive of each other yet sharing such a scourge of hard judgements on their own efforts. One of the chat sessions we had involved making three statements about another woman in the group that acknowledged and praised some aspect of her personality, approach to life or activities and then had you make three statements acknowledging something about yourself. I heard some amazingly insightful statements and saw the respondents moved to tears by the observations of others and the new understanding that somehow they had made an impact just being true to themselves. The statements made to me completely floored me and I was able to see clearly that the things that are key to who I want to be are observed as being who I already am. There's an epiphany for you. I had become that woman despite my hard self-judgements to the contrary. The woman I was partnered with for the exercise is a charming and very endearing transgender woman who I know well and it was a delight to make acknowledging statements about her - in fact quite difficult to select only three. I found it really tough to think of three about myself though. So what has this to do with being polyamorous? Most but not all of the women at this retreat espouse the philosophy of polyamory although not necessarily currently in a multiple partnered relationship. There was comment that some of us have more than our "share" of lovers and perhaps others could do partner respite care. While meant to be humorous the idea that we take love away from other people by having more than the western monogamous ideal is commonly expressed even in such a setting of people who understand the concept of unlimited love and compersion. Following on that discussion was a discussion on how to be more successful at meeting new partners who also espoused the philosophy of polyamory and in particular how as women to meet and date other women who were lesbian or bi-sexual and understanding of polyamory. It was interesting to hear the stories of those present who had dating nightmare stories to share. We explored back roads and lush old rainforest, had lunch and a circle gathering under a 900 year old tree. We wandered along the beachfront collecting bits of memorabilia. We did art work, needle work, played music, danced, sang, laughed, cried and talked and talked and talked and talked. We cooked for each other and ate new and different things. There was chocolate covered strawberries, wine and plenty of terrific baked goodies to spoil and feed us. And sixteen women, some who had never met before, each found that they had sixteen dear friends to take home in their heart including a new or stronger friendship with themselves.
First rule of polyamory: Be your own primary partner. Understand, accept and love yourself.
Observations: Family is defined by your own heart.
One of my partners had surgery just over a week ago. It was supposed to be day surgery as it was a laproscopic gall bladder removal but there was a chance that they'd keep him in overnight. I accompanied him to the hospital and was prepared to wait with him until they took him to the operating room. The nursing staff had other ideas and I was handed a piece of paper with a number to call and a time when he'd likely be back from recovery to the day surgery area. I'd take the day off work but decided to go to work since he didn't need me. I called at the appointed time and was told that they didn't have anyone by that name. So I went to the hospital, presented the paper and said I had a receipt for my boyfriend could they please return him. The receptionist called around and found that they had just moved him to another area and I found him. I was allowed in to see him briefly as he was still quite sleepy from the anesthesia. The nurse wanted me to take his prescriptions to the pharmacy for him since I'd be waiting for at least an hour more. I said that I didn't have his wallet for his benefits card and likely he'd have to do it himself. "Oh, You're not family then." she says. I said I live with him, he's just not on my benefits plan. "Oh, so not his wife. We best leave them then." she says and shoos me into the waiting room. Well I was a bit offended. And I spent a fair bit of time thinking about documents that ought to be in place as we grow older to ensure that he and my other partner and I are not excluded from decisions and access to each other in this kind of situation. My other partner's estranged wife was quite ill a few years back and the hospital would only talk to him about her care as he is still legally her husband. Her step-mother was quite incensed about it. He and I talked about it at the time because the reverse would be true too. They'd only talk to the ex and I'd be excluded. With the decision on section 293 comes relief as we have no ceremony to bind us and make us illegal yet we have no ceremony or documents to bind us and define our family for instances like this. We don't count. I don't think the state should define what constitutes "family" and "next of kin". I think that we should be able to define that ourselves.
On the flip side of that, our house has a basement suite which our landlord has been unable to rent since evicting the last tenants in mid November. Recently a lovely woman and her toddler daughter have moved in. The owner of the house is aware that we are a poly triad but also I gather the tenants of the house and suite have not always got along. For either reason, the owner told this new tenant not to approach us. He didn't tell us that and we'd not comply anyway because we don't roll like that. My one partner introduced himself at the first polite moment and told her to drop in anytime to meet the rest of us. She had us down for coffee a few nights later when we all home. She's a dead ringer for one of my best friend from kindergarten through high school days. Looks very much like her, sounds like her and has similar mannerisms. She's glad to have neighbours who are open minded and easy to get along with. We've had several interactions since and look forward to a friendly relationship. She invited herself and her daughter to Christmas 2012 family dinner and our monthly board games night. She and her daughter are welcome additions to our house and our household. We have kids, dating partners of kids, roommates, ex spouses, ex spouses' parents, parents, close friends and now neighbours who are our family of choice.
Second rule of polyamory: Family, Tribe or Poly-cule includes the far reaches of your heart. Love (with all its forms and faces) is an unlimited replenishing resource that can be shared exponentially if you set it free. Knowing that sets you free at the same time.
First the newsy bits:
Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association (www.polyadvocacy.ca) is looking at projects and advocacy opportunities with the legal stuff now taking a backseat. They are seeking proactive members from across Canada for various committees working on everything from moderating email lists, web design, planning conferences, developing a poly leadership network with a forum for communicating and collecting resource information to facilitate a refining of a focused advocacy effort and future legal advances for the many families practicing polyamory in Canada. Want to get involved? Contact them through the website. Recruitment for specific projects will gear up after their AGM on March 25, 2012.
Dating Challenges for Poly/Open Relationships - May 31 from 7:00 - 9:00 pm at SPARC (Sex Positive Arts and Resource Centre) 450 Montreal St, Victoria. $10 donation per person proceeds to PolyFamilyCampBC. This is a panel forum with audience discussion encouraged. Panel members will provide experienced tips on meeting men and women to date, dating couples, dating for bi-sexual men and women, dating ettiquette in general, talking to your dating partners about polyamory, opening your relationship, strategies, really bad moves and how to repair the mess. Excellent for new to poly/open relationships and those who are experienced.
PolyFamilyCampBC is scheduled for July 13 to 16 at Gordon Bay Provincial Park Group Camping area. This park is on Lake Cowichan. The site has a communal cooking shelter, hot showers and privacy for attendees to enjoy a stream of adult activities and workshop, a terrific child and youth program running concurrently and intergenerational activities as well. $40 per adult (16 yrs or older) early bird discount if you register and pay before July 1 and children/youth 15 and under are free with a one time family/tribe/camping group child/youth programming fee of $20. Registration opened March 3rd and you can access information and the registration form at http://sites.google.com/site/polyfamilycampbc/ Also please "like" the Facebook fan page PolyFamilyCampBC.
Observations: Women, poly and beautiful surroundings.
This past month I was able to attend a women's retreat at Big Fish Lodge in Port Renfrew, British Columbia. This is an amazing cozy place which can be rented by the bedroom but this group had the entire facility. There is a backpackers hostel across the street from it owned by the same group. Very friendly management and luxurious accommodations. Schedule of activities was flexible and division of provisions, cooking and clean up was well organized as was car pooling. The organizers did very well and the women attending arrived with good intentions and cooperative spirits. I tend to be a bit of an introvert in the company of women. I joke that I've lost my manual for female to female friendships and intimacy options. I made a conscious effort to participate fully though and was rewarded with some very interesting conversations and sharing moments. There were so many common discussion themes of women struggling in their relationships with their lovers, children, co-workers, extended family and with themselves. I think women in general are too hard on themselves with comparatives overwhelming from all angles and sources but poly women find dealing with their own issues an essential component of multi-partnered relationship development. These women were so gentle and supportive of each other yet sharing such a scourge of hard judgements on their own efforts. One of the chat sessions we had involved making three statements about another woman in the group that acknowledged and praised some aspect of her personality, approach to life or activities and then had you make three statements acknowledging something about yourself. I heard some amazingly insightful statements and saw the respondents moved to tears by the observations of others and the new understanding that somehow they had made an impact just being true to themselves. The statements made to me completely floored me and I was able to see clearly that the things that are key to who I want to be are observed as being who I already am. There's an epiphany for you. I had become that woman despite my hard self-judgements to the contrary. The woman I was partnered with for the exercise is a charming and very endearing transgender woman who I know well and it was a delight to make acknowledging statements about her - in fact quite difficult to select only three. I found it really tough to think of three about myself though. So what has this to do with being polyamorous? Most but not all of the women at this retreat espouse the philosophy of polyamory although not necessarily currently in a multiple partnered relationship. There was comment that some of us have more than our "share" of lovers and perhaps others could do partner respite care. While meant to be humorous the idea that we take love away from other people by having more than the western monogamous ideal is commonly expressed even in such a setting of people who understand the concept of unlimited love and compersion. Following on that discussion was a discussion on how to be more successful at meeting new partners who also espoused the philosophy of polyamory and in particular how as women to meet and date other women who were lesbian or bi-sexual and understanding of polyamory. It was interesting to hear the stories of those present who had dating nightmare stories to share. We explored back roads and lush old rainforest, had lunch and a circle gathering under a 900 year old tree. We wandered along the beachfront collecting bits of memorabilia. We did art work, needle work, played music, danced, sang, laughed, cried and talked and talked and talked and talked. We cooked for each other and ate new and different things. There was chocolate covered strawberries, wine and plenty of terrific baked goodies to spoil and feed us. And sixteen women, some who had never met before, each found that they had sixteen dear friends to take home in their heart including a new or stronger friendship with themselves.
First rule of polyamory: Be your own primary partner. Understand, accept and love yourself.
Observations: Family is defined by your own heart.
One of my partners had surgery just over a week ago. It was supposed to be day surgery as it was a laproscopic gall bladder removal but there was a chance that they'd keep him in overnight. I accompanied him to the hospital and was prepared to wait with him until they took him to the operating room. The nursing staff had other ideas and I was handed a piece of paper with a number to call and a time when he'd likely be back from recovery to the day surgery area. I'd take the day off work but decided to go to work since he didn't need me. I called at the appointed time and was told that they didn't have anyone by that name. So I went to the hospital, presented the paper and said I had a receipt for my boyfriend could they please return him. The receptionist called around and found that they had just moved him to another area and I found him. I was allowed in to see him briefly as he was still quite sleepy from the anesthesia. The nurse wanted me to take his prescriptions to the pharmacy for him since I'd be waiting for at least an hour more. I said that I didn't have his wallet for his benefits card and likely he'd have to do it himself. "Oh, You're not family then." she says. I said I live with him, he's just not on my benefits plan. "Oh, so not his wife. We best leave them then." she says and shoos me into the waiting room. Well I was a bit offended. And I spent a fair bit of time thinking about documents that ought to be in place as we grow older to ensure that he and my other partner and I are not excluded from decisions and access to each other in this kind of situation. My other partner's estranged wife was quite ill a few years back and the hospital would only talk to him about her care as he is still legally her husband. Her step-mother was quite incensed about it. He and I talked about it at the time because the reverse would be true too. They'd only talk to the ex and I'd be excluded. With the decision on section 293 comes relief as we have no ceremony to bind us and make us illegal yet we have no ceremony or documents to bind us and define our family for instances like this. We don't count. I don't think the state should define what constitutes "family" and "next of kin". I think that we should be able to define that ourselves.
On the flip side of that, our house has a basement suite which our landlord has been unable to rent since evicting the last tenants in mid November. Recently a lovely woman and her toddler daughter have moved in. The owner of the house is aware that we are a poly triad but also I gather the tenants of the house and suite have not always got along. For either reason, the owner told this new tenant not to approach us. He didn't tell us that and we'd not comply anyway because we don't roll like that. My one partner introduced himself at the first polite moment and told her to drop in anytime to meet the rest of us. She had us down for coffee a few nights later when we all home. She's a dead ringer for one of my best friend from kindergarten through high school days. Looks very much like her, sounds like her and has similar mannerisms. She's glad to have neighbours who are open minded and easy to get along with. We've had several interactions since and look forward to a friendly relationship. She invited herself and her daughter to Christmas 2012 family dinner and our monthly board games night. She and her daughter are welcome additions to our house and our household. We have kids, dating partners of kids, roommates, ex spouses, ex spouses' parents, parents, close friends and now neighbours who are our family of choice.
Second rule of polyamory: Family, Tribe or Poly-cule includes the far reaches of your heart. Love (with all its forms and faces) is an unlimited replenishing resource that can be shared exponentially if you set it free. Knowing that sets you free at the same time.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Invisibility or misinformation - which is worse?
The response to the long awaited decision on the BC Supreme reference case concerning the Canadian Polygamy Law was a bit of a disappointment. The general media heaved a collective sigh of relief that status quo would be maintained and them thar Mormons would now be dealt with "properly". Our elected legislators in Ottawa stood and applauded the decision in the House of Commons. All is right with the world now and we can go back to not knowing or caring about some people in the interior of British Columbia.
Well...not quite.
The heretofore mostly silent majority of folks living in some form of multiple partnered relationship but NOT living in Bountiful were suddenly quite vocal on the matter. Some were also initially sighing in relief that their situation, like mine, falls into the loop hole provided by Justice Bauman. No ceremony - not illegal. On the other hand, that also means we don't "count" as a long term committed relationship simply because we have no ceremony. (Common Law unions are certainly recognized and taxed as married by our federal government.) Those who have had a ceremony or some form of commitment event now wonder when the cops will be at the door to break up their homes.
Those who practice polygamy and fall under the Mormon group targetted by this law whether infact happily so or not - women and men - are living in fear of being arrested and their children sleepless with an understanding that they may be ripped from their parents at any point.
The reality is that the judicial and family services systems do not have the resources to break up the homes of every family practicing multiple partner unions. The focus on Bountiful is not even doable in terms of court resources, or foster homes for children and no one is going to pull up in a bus to take away all the children as was done in Texas.
What IS happening? The BC AG has begun the process of selecting a special prosecutor to pursue charges and the process will be long, drawn out and difficult for all concerned. Laying charges and gathering evidence when victims and witnesses are terrified of the fall out to their participation both in terms of legal ramifications and sanctions from superiors in their church, will continue to be a huge barrier. Victims of abuse getting support and help will continue to be another barrier. Changes to the family law under the Family Law Act just passed last fall have redefined "domestic violence" to include coersion and mental/emotional abuse and made violation of a restraining order punishable by 2 years in jail. These and other changes via this new law will amend other related legistlation and are a good big step towards helping but will be 18 months or so to implement. (Question: When the perpetrator of the abuse is also a current victim of abuse perpetrated by an authority figure outside of the home - who is charged?)
Long term problems are not eradicated overnight. Polyamorists and indeed all other people living in multiple partner homes struggle with the mud slung by the notion that this patriarchal polygamy gone wrong situation is not only the norm but the ONLY possible outcome. We are invisible in the fog surrounding it. We are lost and while Newt Gingrich's press wasn't particularly positive imagery for polyamory, at least brings up the concept that there are other scenarios.
Occasionally we get lovely stories of happy families in the media - usually around Valentine's Day. The general population does not appear to want to hear about loving families with multiple partnered adults. They want to read about the nasty men with lots of women and kids who milk the welfare system and are just perverts. Even when the story IS about happy folks, the comments in response convey the doubt that anyone with too much sex and love in their life is suspect.
(Personally, I think its sad that we have to see other people as miserable as we are ourselves or worse in order to feel better. Life is an all you can eat buffet. You choose to partake of what is available or you dare to ask for a custom menu. Too much sex or love or cheeseburgers is really a very personal assessment. Too much for me might be nothing for you or far beyond your quota and tolerance. That's the great thing about being human - we're different. The mindset that "different" is wrong has got to go.)
We need to keep polyamory and the good stuff that we experience in the media. Invisibility hurts us and feeds the hype that all multiple partnered relationships have bad outcomes. We need to dare to keep asking for that custom menu and make it known that there are other happy functional options to monogamy. Options that deserve recognition in the media and in law.
Well...not quite.
The heretofore mostly silent majority of folks living in some form of multiple partnered relationship but NOT living in Bountiful were suddenly quite vocal on the matter. Some were also initially sighing in relief that their situation, like mine, falls into the loop hole provided by Justice Bauman. No ceremony - not illegal. On the other hand, that also means we don't "count" as a long term committed relationship simply because we have no ceremony. (Common Law unions are certainly recognized and taxed as married by our federal government.) Those who have had a ceremony or some form of commitment event now wonder when the cops will be at the door to break up their homes.
Those who practice polygamy and fall under the Mormon group targetted by this law whether infact happily so or not - women and men - are living in fear of being arrested and their children sleepless with an understanding that they may be ripped from their parents at any point.
The reality is that the judicial and family services systems do not have the resources to break up the homes of every family practicing multiple partner unions. The focus on Bountiful is not even doable in terms of court resources, or foster homes for children and no one is going to pull up in a bus to take away all the children as was done in Texas.
What IS happening? The BC AG has begun the process of selecting a special prosecutor to pursue charges and the process will be long, drawn out and difficult for all concerned. Laying charges and gathering evidence when victims and witnesses are terrified of the fall out to their participation both in terms of legal ramifications and sanctions from superiors in their church, will continue to be a huge barrier. Victims of abuse getting support and help will continue to be another barrier. Changes to the family law under the Family Law Act just passed last fall have redefined "domestic violence" to include coersion and mental/emotional abuse and made violation of a restraining order punishable by 2 years in jail. These and other changes via this new law will amend other related legistlation and are a good big step towards helping but will be 18 months or so to implement. (Question: When the perpetrator of the abuse is also a current victim of abuse perpetrated by an authority figure outside of the home - who is charged?)
Long term problems are not eradicated overnight. Polyamorists and indeed all other people living in multiple partner homes struggle with the mud slung by the notion that this patriarchal polygamy gone wrong situation is not only the norm but the ONLY possible outcome. We are invisible in the fog surrounding it. We are lost and while Newt Gingrich's press wasn't particularly positive imagery for polyamory, at least brings up the concept that there are other scenarios.
Occasionally we get lovely stories of happy families in the media - usually around Valentine's Day. The general population does not appear to want to hear about loving families with multiple partnered adults. They want to read about the nasty men with lots of women and kids who milk the welfare system and are just perverts. Even when the story IS about happy folks, the comments in response convey the doubt that anyone with too much sex and love in their life is suspect.
(Personally, I think its sad that we have to see other people as miserable as we are ourselves or worse in order to feel better. Life is an all you can eat buffet. You choose to partake of what is available or you dare to ask for a custom menu. Too much sex or love or cheeseburgers is really a very personal assessment. Too much for me might be nothing for you or far beyond your quota and tolerance. That's the great thing about being human - we're different. The mindset that "different" is wrong has got to go.)
We need to keep polyamory and the good stuff that we experience in the media. Invisibility hurts us and feeds the hype that all multiple partnered relationships have bad outcomes. We need to dare to keep asking for that custom menu and make it known that there are other happy functional options to monogamy. Options that deserve recognition in the media and in law.
Sunday, November 27, 2011
So...are you guys going to have to split up now?
I've been asked this a lot in the past few days.
Short answer - No. Our relationship is actually legal under this decision.
Chief Justice Bauman's decision managed to give everyone something, nobody everything and rallied the troops from the sideline groups that stood by and said it had no impact on them. That is a victory for Canadians in general and a step forward in the process of having judicial change and social change have more than a passing acquaintance.
Long Answer - Chief Justice Bauman upheld s 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada or the Polygamy Law saying that while it infringed on various charter rights that was okay considering that preventing harms to children was a higher priority. He also interpreted a definition to terms like "conjugal union" and "marriage". He said that a "conjugal union" of concern to this law was one where a "sanctioning event" had occurred officiated by an authority and recognized by the community as the starting point of recognition of the "marriage". Polyamorous relationships he saw as ones where no such event was an essential belief for the relationship to exist and that common law unions were not included in conjugal union by virtue of his interpretation. He did not agree that marriage should fall under the charter definitions for freedom of expression either.
And that means what? That means that the triad household in which I live is excluded and perfectly legal but a similar family who has had say a Wiccan handfasting complete with Priest who is licensed under BC law to perform weddings would likely be considered in violation of the law whether they are polygynous (one man with several wives), polyandrous (one woman with several husbands) or several people of same gender. The licensed official would be in violation and any guests would also be implicated in the offense.
I appreciated this clarification. I've been saying for years that this law includes a lot more people that the FLDS families at Bountiful. And now that the judge has clarified this we have other groups getting into the frey of conversation in the media and behind the scenes. What? You can't include US in this...it is about those people at Bountiful. Well no it ain't. It is about tarnishing a whole lot of people in families that are healthy and empowering households with a wide brush so that we can help a small group of women and children who are under the harmful and unrighteous dominion of a handful of men. A very noble intent but is it worth it? Chief Justice Bauman and lots of other people think that sparing one child these kind of harms is worth it. I'm inclined to agree. If, that is, I was convinced prosecuting under this law could be an effective remedy to the harms and abuse that was described in the court proceedings, I'd say go for it too. Unfortunately that is not the case in the history of this law. Chief Justice Bauman places a great deal of trust in the abilities of police and ministry officials to parse the culture of Bountiful and break through the silence of fear. His interpretation gives them the approval to proceed but really doesn't give them much help in being any more successful at getting convictions than prior to his decision. That victims will be any more likely to come forward because of this decision and provide evidence such that prosecutions will be successful is a dream that can not be substantiated by anyone who has worked with battered women and abused children. Add to this the idea of betrayal of God, family and implicating oneself in a crime.
If you want to save the women and children at Bountiful, you have to help them understand the idea of unrighteous dominion (where the man given authority over you can be unworthy of that authority by virtue of his behaviour and motivations and in fact NOT acting as God has approved) and that they can be true to their faith in an empowering and respectful relationship. They must be reminded that they also have God's gift of agency - the right to choose between right or wrong for themselves as individuals. God desires happiness and fulfilled potential for all according to their own beliefs. This happens between their ears and not in a court room.
Perhaps this law needs a family mediation component where rather than a prison term, a Judge might sentence the multi-partnered adults to counselling with a polyamory friendly professional or attendance at a women's group teaching co-dependency recovery and self-esteem empowerment. Perhaps evidence of harms ought to be another qualifier in the interpretation of whether or not an offense had occurred and conditional for a conviction.
Whatever the end result, few of the parties are completely satisfied with the ruling and there is a good possibility of appeal. To resolve problems at Bountiful, we need more than an exterior hue and cry. Like any situation of domestic abuse the best cure and only effective cure comes from the people in the situation when they are ready and willing to make changes. Saying that they are all brainwashed is offensive and not conducive to resolving the situation either.
It will takes more than police and ministry intervention to convince any abused woman that she is worth loving and has an obligation to be proactive in finding her own happiness and happiness for her children. Ask anyone who works in a women's transition house about how many women from the general population of any city never quite get that message.
Chief Justice Bauman clearly doesn't want these women and children lost in the battle for rights of the adults and yet it is asking way to much of this law and the limited support resources available for those same children in the aftermath of any prosecutions of those same women implicated by their husbands.
Short answer - No. Our relationship is actually legal under this decision.
Chief Justice Bauman's decision managed to give everyone something, nobody everything and rallied the troops from the sideline groups that stood by and said it had no impact on them. That is a victory for Canadians in general and a step forward in the process of having judicial change and social change have more than a passing acquaintance.
Long Answer - Chief Justice Bauman upheld s 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada or the Polygamy Law saying that while it infringed on various charter rights that was okay considering that preventing harms to children was a higher priority. He also interpreted a definition to terms like "conjugal union" and "marriage". He said that a "conjugal union" of concern to this law was one where a "sanctioning event" had occurred officiated by an authority and recognized by the community as the starting point of recognition of the "marriage". Polyamorous relationships he saw as ones where no such event was an essential belief for the relationship to exist and that common law unions were not included in conjugal union by virtue of his interpretation. He did not agree that marriage should fall under the charter definitions for freedom of expression either.
And that means what? That means that the triad household in which I live is excluded and perfectly legal but a similar family who has had say a Wiccan handfasting complete with Priest who is licensed under BC law to perform weddings would likely be considered in violation of the law whether they are polygynous (one man with several wives), polyandrous (one woman with several husbands) or several people of same gender. The licensed official would be in violation and any guests would also be implicated in the offense.
I appreciated this clarification. I've been saying for years that this law includes a lot more people that the FLDS families at Bountiful. And now that the judge has clarified this we have other groups getting into the frey of conversation in the media and behind the scenes. What? You can't include US in this...it is about those people at Bountiful. Well no it ain't. It is about tarnishing a whole lot of people in families that are healthy and empowering households with a wide brush so that we can help a small group of women and children who are under the harmful and unrighteous dominion of a handful of men. A very noble intent but is it worth it? Chief Justice Bauman and lots of other people think that sparing one child these kind of harms is worth it. I'm inclined to agree. If, that is, I was convinced prosecuting under this law could be an effective remedy to the harms and abuse that was described in the court proceedings, I'd say go for it too. Unfortunately that is not the case in the history of this law. Chief Justice Bauman places a great deal of trust in the abilities of police and ministry officials to parse the culture of Bountiful and break through the silence of fear. His interpretation gives them the approval to proceed but really doesn't give them much help in being any more successful at getting convictions than prior to his decision. That victims will be any more likely to come forward because of this decision and provide evidence such that prosecutions will be successful is a dream that can not be substantiated by anyone who has worked with battered women and abused children. Add to this the idea of betrayal of God, family and implicating oneself in a crime.
If you want to save the women and children at Bountiful, you have to help them understand the idea of unrighteous dominion (where the man given authority over you can be unworthy of that authority by virtue of his behaviour and motivations and in fact NOT acting as God has approved) and that they can be true to their faith in an empowering and respectful relationship. They must be reminded that they also have God's gift of agency - the right to choose between right or wrong for themselves as individuals. God desires happiness and fulfilled potential for all according to their own beliefs. This happens between their ears and not in a court room.
Perhaps this law needs a family mediation component where rather than a prison term, a Judge might sentence the multi-partnered adults to counselling with a polyamory friendly professional or attendance at a women's group teaching co-dependency recovery and self-esteem empowerment. Perhaps evidence of harms ought to be another qualifier in the interpretation of whether or not an offense had occurred and conditional for a conviction.
Whatever the end result, few of the parties are completely satisfied with the ruling and there is a good possibility of appeal. To resolve problems at Bountiful, we need more than an exterior hue and cry. Like any situation of domestic abuse the best cure and only effective cure comes from the people in the situation when they are ready and willing to make changes. Saying that they are all brainwashed is offensive and not conducive to resolving the situation either.
It will takes more than police and ministry intervention to convince any abused woman that she is worth loving and has an obligation to be proactive in finding her own happiness and happiness for her children. Ask anyone who works in a women's transition house about how many women from the general population of any city never quite get that message.
Chief Justice Bauman clearly doesn't want these women and children lost in the battle for rights of the adults and yet it is asking way to much of this law and the limited support resources available for those same children in the aftermath of any prosecutions of those same women implicated by their husbands.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
On the precipice of history
On Wednesday of this week coming (November 23rd), Chief Justice Robert Bauman will release his decision with regards to the BC Supreme Court reference case on section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada (known as the Polygamy Law). Both the legal counsel involved in the case and the media will be in a lock down room and allowed to view the decision and reasons on that morning slightly before it is released on the court's website. The judgement will be posted here on Wed Nov 23 at 10 am:
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/
Please watch for follow up blog postings and resources at the Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association's website at www.polyadvocacy.ca
I will also blog about it and the impact of the decision on polyamourous households in British Columbia and across Canada.
It is with mixed emotions - excitement, fear, and relief among others - that I wait for this decision to be released. One can ponder all the possible outcomes and their ramifications but really we just have to wait and see. Am I likely to be faced with prosecution? Probably not but for sure not right away. There's an RCMP investigation in process regarding trafficking of BC girls to Warren Jeffs in Texas that will have to be complete and then they'll focus on Bountiful. I think that it was pretty clear in the proceedings that all sides have a problem with the law as it stands. I think some direction on interpretation to make it possible to prosecute under this law is the worst that can happen. I felt that the plight of honourable loving polyamorous families was heard by Chief Justice Bauman and I believe any such interpretation will not include us. Direction that the law is written so poorly that interpretation would in essence rewrite the law is the best outcome for all really. Legislation that leaves no loop holes for those who truly do not have the best interest of others at heart and a zero tolerance for the abuse of men, women and children wherever it is found are shared interests in all of the participants in this case. Legislation that does not criminalize the victims ought to be a key here as well.
I don't think that there are many who have read the press or the actual documentation from the proceedings that would see the victims of abuse at Bountiful and other such colonies continue to suffer. The problem is in assuming all multi-partnered households operate the same way. Abuse is found in monogamous homes and perfectly healthy families exist in a multi-partnered families. The structure of the relationship does not protect the individuals from being presupposed to abusive relationships nor accepting a growingly abusive relationship as it insidiously begins with that first inappropriate comment or action. The core of it is between the ears of each and every one of us. Self-esteem and those inner tapes from our childhood that tell us how to treat other people and what to expect and accept from other people.
How do you legislate that? In a monogamous setting when the spouse is battered enough, the abuser is thrown in jail - maybe- there are restraining orders - maybe- there is court ordered treatment for addictions and psychiatry - maybe. The resources are not there really to support any kind of recovery but it can take place to varying degrees. The victims have transitional housing, financial help, counselling and more often long term adjustments and deep poverty. The courts are involved, the police, the children's ministry, non-profit support services, church groups, family members. Legislation that is clear is difficult to enforce when intimate relationships and domestic abuse or child abuse occurs. The end to abuse starts between the ears of the victim and the abuser. They have to understand what is really occurring and why it is not acceptable. When we truly believe that we deserve no better treatment or some higher power demands that we endure or participate in verbal, emotional or physical treatment of ourselves or another such that we/they are battered and miserable to ANY degree - not just when they arrive in the emergency ward - the input of friends, family, police or ministry personnel may or may not have much of an impact. The message has to get past the ears, through all that grey matter and into the heart and belief system of the individuals.
The message that human life is meant for exploration, growth, freedom and happiness and that every human has a right to be happy, appreciated and loved. Every human being has a right to expect those who love them to treat them with respect and kindness. You don't have to do anything to deserve it. You exist and thus deserve it same as those who would deny your happiness in preference to their own.
The province of British Columbia just introduced amendments to its Family Relations Act to address domestic abuse and look at these issues from the perspective of the well being of the children involved. In a nutshell, all decisions are to be based on what is best for the child and all other rights take a second place to that. Terminology that is gender based or a bit antagonistic (parental support now instead of maintenance etc.) will be removed.
The law and those who enforce it begin to speak to the sense of self of the parents and child and the mission of parenthood which is the well being of the child. Legislation valuing people is a good step towards those people valuing themselves.
Regardless of the decision in this case and the process of appeal or amending legislation that may take years, the work at Bountiful - and anywhere domestic and child abuse is secreted in homes of every description across Canada - has only just begun. Eradicating domestic and child abuse in my life time is a dream that I continue to dream. What a wonderful country we'd live in where every child - male or female - grew up to experience a life where intimate partners' and family members' support and empowerment is the norm and stories of domestic abuse and child abuse are only in the history books.
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/
Please watch for follow up blog postings and resources at the Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association's website at www.polyadvocacy.ca
I will also blog about it and the impact of the decision on polyamourous households in British Columbia and across Canada.
It is with mixed emotions - excitement, fear, and relief among others - that I wait for this decision to be released. One can ponder all the possible outcomes and their ramifications but really we just have to wait and see. Am I likely to be faced with prosecution? Probably not but for sure not right away. There's an RCMP investigation in process regarding trafficking of BC girls to Warren Jeffs in Texas that will have to be complete and then they'll focus on Bountiful. I think that it was pretty clear in the proceedings that all sides have a problem with the law as it stands. I think some direction on interpretation to make it possible to prosecute under this law is the worst that can happen. I felt that the plight of honourable loving polyamorous families was heard by Chief Justice Bauman and I believe any such interpretation will not include us. Direction that the law is written so poorly that interpretation would in essence rewrite the law is the best outcome for all really. Legislation that leaves no loop holes for those who truly do not have the best interest of others at heart and a zero tolerance for the abuse of men, women and children wherever it is found are shared interests in all of the participants in this case. Legislation that does not criminalize the victims ought to be a key here as well.
I don't think that there are many who have read the press or the actual documentation from the proceedings that would see the victims of abuse at Bountiful and other such colonies continue to suffer. The problem is in assuming all multi-partnered households operate the same way. Abuse is found in monogamous homes and perfectly healthy families exist in a multi-partnered families. The structure of the relationship does not protect the individuals from being presupposed to abusive relationships nor accepting a growingly abusive relationship as it insidiously begins with that first inappropriate comment or action. The core of it is between the ears of each and every one of us. Self-esteem and those inner tapes from our childhood that tell us how to treat other people and what to expect and accept from other people.
How do you legislate that? In a monogamous setting when the spouse is battered enough, the abuser is thrown in jail - maybe- there are restraining orders - maybe- there is court ordered treatment for addictions and psychiatry - maybe. The resources are not there really to support any kind of recovery but it can take place to varying degrees. The victims have transitional housing, financial help, counselling and more often long term adjustments and deep poverty. The courts are involved, the police, the children's ministry, non-profit support services, church groups, family members. Legislation that is clear is difficult to enforce when intimate relationships and domestic abuse or child abuse occurs. The end to abuse starts between the ears of the victim and the abuser. They have to understand what is really occurring and why it is not acceptable. When we truly believe that we deserve no better treatment or some higher power demands that we endure or participate in verbal, emotional or physical treatment of ourselves or another such that we/they are battered and miserable to ANY degree - not just when they arrive in the emergency ward - the input of friends, family, police or ministry personnel may or may not have much of an impact. The message has to get past the ears, through all that grey matter and into the heart and belief system of the individuals.
The message that human life is meant for exploration, growth, freedom and happiness and that every human has a right to be happy, appreciated and loved. Every human being has a right to expect those who love them to treat them with respect and kindness. You don't have to do anything to deserve it. You exist and thus deserve it same as those who would deny your happiness in preference to their own.
The province of British Columbia just introduced amendments to its Family Relations Act to address domestic abuse and look at these issues from the perspective of the well being of the children involved. In a nutshell, all decisions are to be based on what is best for the child and all other rights take a second place to that. Terminology that is gender based or a bit antagonistic (parental support now instead of maintenance etc.) will be removed.
The law and those who enforce it begin to speak to the sense of self of the parents and child and the mission of parenthood which is the well being of the child. Legislation valuing people is a good step towards those people valuing themselves.
Regardless of the decision in this case and the process of appeal or amending legislation that may take years, the work at Bountiful - and anywhere domestic and child abuse is secreted in homes of every description across Canada - has only just begun. Eradicating domestic and child abuse in my life time is a dream that I continue to dream. What a wonderful country we'd live in where every child - male or female - grew up to experience a life where intimate partners' and family members' support and empowerment is the norm and stories of domestic abuse and child abuse are only in the history books.
Friday, November 11, 2011
In appreciation for the freedom to question and seek social change
Today is Remembrance Day in Canada and it is appropriate to make some comment in one's status on various social networking places and in one's blog about it. I was looking for quotes, music and so on to make for more creativity. I googled through quotes about soldiers, remembrance day, and heroes. One quote about their being no unwounded soldiers in war and several others noting that the face of heroism was not gender nor racially exclusive caught my eye. It occurs to me that the very fact that I can sit here typing in the comfort of my home living in contravention of a law that I dare to question publicly and as a woman speaks so many volumes about the heroes that have made this not a miracle but an acceptable part of the culture in which I live.
Some of those heroes and heroines have identified faces and well known names but most are tucked away in the fabric of history. Those who lost their lives making sure that this country was and remains free to develop its own form of democracy have most certainly made the ultimate gift to our country and the world. Those who spent their lives at much cost lobbying, advocating and raising the alarm for social, political and legislative change are also heroes to us and future generations. Regardless of whether I agree with their viewpoints or not there have been and are so many courageous people at work in building the country as we have achieved it and moving for advances. They are heroes as well. Anytime you step into a voting poll and make your mark you ensure that the next generation has that right and become a part of their heroic past.
It is appropriate also today to ponder the pending decision on section 293 and realize that without the sacrifices and efforts of the heroes and heroines that we remember today we'd not have the freedom to question this law and speak out for the rights of a minority of Canadians who live in loving healthy relationships with multiple partners. It has been both scary and exciting to be involved in this process of seeking standing federal law to acknowledge social change and respect human rights. You get a chill when you realize that you are participating in a historic moment.
Canada has a long history of brave people daring to be in the forefront of inclusive acceptance and safe harbours for those who would not find them elsewhere. I look forward to being part of the fabric of this page in history where loving is no longer criminalized.
I am grateful for the freedom to dare to try to see that happen.
Some of those heroes and heroines have identified faces and well known names but most are tucked away in the fabric of history. Those who lost their lives making sure that this country was and remains free to develop its own form of democracy have most certainly made the ultimate gift to our country and the world. Those who spent their lives at much cost lobbying, advocating and raising the alarm for social, political and legislative change are also heroes to us and future generations. Regardless of whether I agree with their viewpoints or not there have been and are so many courageous people at work in building the country as we have achieved it and moving for advances. They are heroes as well. Anytime you step into a voting poll and make your mark you ensure that the next generation has that right and become a part of their heroic past.
It is appropriate also today to ponder the pending decision on section 293 and realize that without the sacrifices and efforts of the heroes and heroines that we remember today we'd not have the freedom to question this law and speak out for the rights of a minority of Canadians who live in loving healthy relationships with multiple partners. It has been both scary and exciting to be involved in this process of seeking standing federal law to acknowledge social change and respect human rights. You get a chill when you realize that you are participating in a historic moment.
Canada has a long history of brave people daring to be in the forefront of inclusive acceptance and safe harbours for those who would not find them elsewhere. I look forward to being part of the fabric of this page in history where loving is no longer criminalized.
I am grateful for the freedom to dare to try to see that happen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
