I was interviewed Monday afternoon by CBC and a few of my comments, none of which were what I'd hoped would have been used, appeared in their article found here
I was interviewed Tuesday afternoon by CTV and one of my comments from the 10 minutes of chatting (and several takes of re-entering the building I did so they could have film) got into the accompanying video clip seen here
It's a bit frustrating that nothing I say of key importance gets picked up. Having sat and read all the comments on the CBC article and seen clearly that the general public doesn't realize the far reaching impact of leaving a law this vague on the books. I apologize for the delay in posting this summary as I just didn't have the bandwidth last night.
Day 2 began with the BC Attorney completing his opening statement to the court. He had given a really in-depth discussion of the history of polygamy as practiced within the context of Mormonism, First Nations and Muslims and the early history of the development of section 293. He began by discussing the legal significance of a religious context to a law. He compared the development of the incest laws in Canada to the polygamy law development and that religious freedom is not enough of a context to void a law rooted in moral principle. He disagreed with a shifting purpose of this law and said that the harms to society outweigh the individuals right to religious belief. The BC AG then moved to defining criminal polygamy. He cited his experts and the conclusion that criminal polygamy means polygyny (MFF) and that the difference between polygamy and polyamory would be too difficult to determine thus the same gender configuration of polyamory would be considered criminal polygamy under this law as well. The BC AG's presentation is lengthy and high lights quotes from experts and witnesses that he intends to call. I will leave that for future notes.
The lawyer for the AG of Canada presented her opening statement by adding to what the BC AG had already said on many points and adding that she disagreed that criminal polygamy was limited to MFF relationships but would include all forms of multiple partnered relationships. Prosecution would be dependent on a ceremony, rite or contract having been performed. Interestingly enough Justice Bauman asked the lawyer for the AG of Canada how this impacted polygynous polyamory and other configurations of polyamory and the people who had provided affidavits for the Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association. She said that would depend on the definition and form of polyamory but all forms could be prosecuted under this law if the participants have entered into a ceremony, rite or contract or otherwise formalized their union.
Next up was the lawyer representing REAL Women of Canada. He indicated that their position is that the law is constitutional in that if freedom of religion is infringed on it is justified. He cited harms to functioning society and women & children in polygamous homes. The exploitation of children and coersion of child brides was raised as substantive harms worthy of justifying the infringement of the charter in several sections.
West Coast LEAF's lawyer presented their position last of the day. LEAF's position is that the law should be read down to apply where there is exploitation and further that the court should use section 153 which defines exploitation.
The day's presentations made it clear that polygamy is seen as responsible for a wealth of abusive situations and that polyamory and any multiple relationship structure cannot be separated from this evils in the breadths of this law.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Monday, November 22, 2010
Polys in Court - first hand report - day 1
We were up early this morning and had a brisk quick walk to the BC Supreme Court building. We were quite a bit early but I wanted to be able to find the correct court room and have a seat. It was interesting to watch the various factions enter the court room. One of the other CPAA members was able to pick out familiar faces and identify people for me. Daphne Brahmn approached me and said that she'd received my email and would correct some errors in a recent article. And yes, I thanked her.
When Justice Bauman entered the room you could feel a ripple of excitement pass through the courtroom of some 150 people. The huge number of lawyers present caused them to have to seat a few lawyers in the jury benches. Justice Bauman spoke about how historic this reference question case is and that we are on a journey together into new territory.
The morning was spent hearing the lawyer for the CBC present his application to have two internet cameras set up in the court for a live feed of the proceedings with two regular cameras and operators to be used sporadically. This would require four to six hours of downtime for the court in order to set it up. The CBC also requested a change allowing them to film interviews in the corridors of the court house.
There is a directive (PD 123) in place since 2002 which is a strict policy about media access to the court room and media coverage. This application of the CBC was to seek to set that policy aside as this is a matter of tremendous public interest and their was a desire for television media to be able to report whatever is reported by other forms of media. Consent of witnesses to being televised was discussed and Justice
Bauman asked about delayed broadcasting and having his legal representative review the footage before its release.
Justice Bauman then heard from the various parties and found that the AG of Canada, West Coast LEAF, CCRC were opposed to televising the proceeding and the BC AG, the Amicus and the FLDS had reservations but most others were willing to consent or took no stand on the issue.
The BC AG said that personal witnesses should not be on camera without their expressed consent and that he felt that the video clips of testimony that have been uploaded to the internet should be ordered taken down. He suggested that their might be an invitation to television media to apply to film the closing statements of this case where evidence would be summarized and identities protected. He indicated that the schedule of some 36 witnesses and experts was locked in for timing and that a shift in this schedule to allow for installation of cameras at this late date of the case would not be optimum.
The Amicus did not object to a shared feed of opening and closing arguments but witnesses should have to provide approval individually with no burden of proof on them. As the CBC's submission came in on Friday having had months to gather this proposal, it was not acceptable and it should not be allowed to throw off the schedule of witnesses as set out and agreed upon by the legal representation of all the parties. The Amicus indicated that the issue of witnesses needing approval would take 3 or 4 days of court time which is simply not possible. This viewpoint was echoed by the lawyer for the BC Civil Liberties Association.
Canadians for Freedom of Expression's lawyer said that their viewpoint was that if someone sitting in the court room could see and hear the evidence or presentation then the televised version should be accessible to those unable to be in the court room.
West Coast LEAF's lawyer was very impassioned and said that the "Dajeuner-Mentach test" (can anyone define that reference?) did not apply because the media was seeking an expanded coverage not a lifting of a publication ban. She felt that oral testimony of witnesses should not be televised and she sited an Ontario decision indicating it would create a chilling effect on other proceedings. She said that live broadcasting was unacceptable as this court has no control of what happens in cyberspace. She expressed concern that errors may be made releasing names or comments identifying witnesses and those errors cannot be corrected with a live internet feed. These sentiments were echoed by the lawyer for CCRC and he referred to the UN Convention on Rights of the Child article 3.1 where a consideration was whether it was in the best interest of a child to proceed. He said an error or misspoken word might put a child at risk.
The lawyer for the FLDS expressed concern for his witnesses and their ability to remain anonymous while taking the stand or just sitting in the court room awaiting their time to testify and that some processes would have to be put in place.
The AG for Canada's lawyer said that she opposed the whole CBC application with exception to access to exhibits. A similar case is currently before the Supreme Court of Canada (CBC vs AG of Quebec) and the decision is pending.
We adjourned for lunch and upon our return Justice Bauman rendered his decision. He said that the CBC's application amounted to a last minute request to revisit and revise a policy established in 2002 and raised some very great privacy issues. He was unwilling to open up a policy debate for a submission that appeared on the eve of this case. He denied the CBC access to televise the proceedings but indicated that they may reapply to televise the closing statements. Their access to exhibits is same as is current at the discretion of the parties and he will consider their request for hallway interviews and advise them of his decision.
The BC AG spent the remainder of the afternoon expansively presenting his opening statement. There have been six reported prosecutions under this law since 1892. Most of these were actually adultery cases but one was Bearshinbone who was a First Nations man with several wives. All of these cases were acquitted. In 1982 the acceptance of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms brought many calls to revisit this law. In the late 1980's complaints began to filter out of Bountiful and investigations began. In 1992 the BC AG decided that prosecution was not justified under Section 1 of the Charter and asked the federal government to amend the law. The federal government refused the request. In 2002, the BC AG again found that the law was not constitutional and asked the federal government to review the law with no results. In 2006 and 2007, Special Prosecutors were appointed and each found the law was not viable for prosecution and the BC AG referred it to the Court of Appeal with no results. In 2008, a third Special Prosecutor decided to prosecute Blackmore and Oler from the community of Bountiful under this law. In 2009, the court quashed the charges as an abuse of authority. The history of this law is frustrating for those seeking to remedy the alleged abuses occurring the FLDS community of Bountiful and I one could hear that frustration in the voice of the lawyer presenting this background information to the court.
The BC AG's position has three central issues: harm, purpose and interpretation.
Harm succinctly is the idea that polygamy itself is harmful. The idea that multiple women including young girls under the patriarchal influence of one man would be coerced to accept abusive harmful treatment and young men deprived of wives to keep them from a rampage of crime would also harm the community at large. He sites anthropological research that societies of partial polygamy practiced as polygynous households (MFF) being the standard, polyandry is "vanishingly rare" (FMM) and universally monogamous societies the exception. He equates a democratic society and lower crime rates with more monogamy being practiced.
Purpose is a reference to the designed purpose of this law. The BC AG indicates that the law is meant to deter and punish behaviour that is harmful to women and children, women's equality and the peace and order of the greater community. It has a secondary purpose of selective immigration, resolving succession, divorce, remarriage and distribution of benefits in non-monogamous unions as well as harmonizing Canadian policy with other nations. The BC AG is adamant that this purpose has not shifted from the original intent of the law.
Interpretation refers to the BC AG's sense that this law can be read down to be applicable only to polygynous marriages (MFF) where it is binding on any of its participants via a rite or ceremony. He feels that one cannot differentiate between polyamory in a MFF relationship and polygyny and thus would see it included under this law. FMM, MMM, and FFF relationships do not produce the same harms or if they do these are temporary relationships and not binding in the same way to create the noted harms.
Presentations of Opening Statements of the Parties will continue tomorrow.
It has been most interesting to watch the workings of this court and see the interaction of the various participants in the court room as well as behind the scenes. Impressive to observe the wheels of justice grinding along.
When Justice Bauman entered the room you could feel a ripple of excitement pass through the courtroom of some 150 people. The huge number of lawyers present caused them to have to seat a few lawyers in the jury benches. Justice Bauman spoke about how historic this reference question case is and that we are on a journey together into new territory.
The morning was spent hearing the lawyer for the CBC present his application to have two internet cameras set up in the court for a live feed of the proceedings with two regular cameras and operators to be used sporadically. This would require four to six hours of downtime for the court in order to set it up. The CBC also requested a change allowing them to film interviews in the corridors of the court house.
There is a directive (PD 123) in place since 2002 which is a strict policy about media access to the court room and media coverage. This application of the CBC was to seek to set that policy aside as this is a matter of tremendous public interest and their was a desire for television media to be able to report whatever is reported by other forms of media. Consent of witnesses to being televised was discussed and Justice
Bauman asked about delayed broadcasting and having his legal representative review the footage before its release.
Justice Bauman then heard from the various parties and found that the AG of Canada, West Coast LEAF, CCRC were opposed to televising the proceeding and the BC AG, the Amicus and the FLDS had reservations but most others were willing to consent or took no stand on the issue.
The BC AG said that personal witnesses should not be on camera without their expressed consent and that he felt that the video clips of testimony that have been uploaded to the internet should be ordered taken down. He suggested that their might be an invitation to television media to apply to film the closing statements of this case where evidence would be summarized and identities protected. He indicated that the schedule of some 36 witnesses and experts was locked in for timing and that a shift in this schedule to allow for installation of cameras at this late date of the case would not be optimum.
The Amicus did not object to a shared feed of opening and closing arguments but witnesses should have to provide approval individually with no burden of proof on them. As the CBC's submission came in on Friday having had months to gather this proposal, it was not acceptable and it should not be allowed to throw off the schedule of witnesses as set out and agreed upon by the legal representation of all the parties. The Amicus indicated that the issue of witnesses needing approval would take 3 or 4 days of court time which is simply not possible. This viewpoint was echoed by the lawyer for the BC Civil Liberties Association.
Canadians for Freedom of Expression's lawyer said that their viewpoint was that if someone sitting in the court room could see and hear the evidence or presentation then the televised version should be accessible to those unable to be in the court room.
West Coast LEAF's lawyer was very impassioned and said that the "Dajeuner-Mentach test" (can anyone define that reference?) did not apply because the media was seeking an expanded coverage not a lifting of a publication ban. She felt that oral testimony of witnesses should not be televised and she sited an Ontario decision indicating it would create a chilling effect on other proceedings. She said that live broadcasting was unacceptable as this court has no control of what happens in cyberspace. She expressed concern that errors may be made releasing names or comments identifying witnesses and those errors cannot be corrected with a live internet feed. These sentiments were echoed by the lawyer for CCRC and he referred to the UN Convention on Rights of the Child article 3.1 where a consideration was whether it was in the best interest of a child to proceed. He said an error or misspoken word might put a child at risk.
The lawyer for the FLDS expressed concern for his witnesses and their ability to remain anonymous while taking the stand or just sitting in the court room awaiting their time to testify and that some processes would have to be put in place.
The AG for Canada's lawyer said that she opposed the whole CBC application with exception to access to exhibits. A similar case is currently before the Supreme Court of Canada (CBC vs AG of Quebec) and the decision is pending.
We adjourned for lunch and upon our return Justice Bauman rendered his decision. He said that the CBC's application amounted to a last minute request to revisit and revise a policy established in 2002 and raised some very great privacy issues. He was unwilling to open up a policy debate for a submission that appeared on the eve of this case. He denied the CBC access to televise the proceedings but indicated that they may reapply to televise the closing statements. Their access to exhibits is same as is current at the discretion of the parties and he will consider their request for hallway interviews and advise them of his decision.
The BC AG spent the remainder of the afternoon expansively presenting his opening statement. There have been six reported prosecutions under this law since 1892. Most of these were actually adultery cases but one was Bearshinbone who was a First Nations man with several wives. All of these cases were acquitted. In 1982 the acceptance of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms brought many calls to revisit this law. In the late 1980's complaints began to filter out of Bountiful and investigations began. In 1992 the BC AG decided that prosecution was not justified under Section 1 of the Charter and asked the federal government to amend the law. The federal government refused the request. In 2002, the BC AG again found that the law was not constitutional and asked the federal government to review the law with no results. In 2006 and 2007, Special Prosecutors were appointed and each found the law was not viable for prosecution and the BC AG referred it to the Court of Appeal with no results. In 2008, a third Special Prosecutor decided to prosecute Blackmore and Oler from the community of Bountiful under this law. In 2009, the court quashed the charges as an abuse of authority. The history of this law is frustrating for those seeking to remedy the alleged abuses occurring the FLDS community of Bountiful and I one could hear that frustration in the voice of the lawyer presenting this background information to the court.
The BC AG's position has three central issues: harm, purpose and interpretation.
Harm succinctly is the idea that polygamy itself is harmful. The idea that multiple women including young girls under the patriarchal influence of one man would be coerced to accept abusive harmful treatment and young men deprived of wives to keep them from a rampage of crime would also harm the community at large. He sites anthropological research that societies of partial polygamy practiced as polygynous households (MFF) being the standard, polyandry is "vanishingly rare" (FMM) and universally monogamous societies the exception. He equates a democratic society and lower crime rates with more monogamy being practiced.
Purpose is a reference to the designed purpose of this law. The BC AG indicates that the law is meant to deter and punish behaviour that is harmful to women and children, women's equality and the peace and order of the greater community. It has a secondary purpose of selective immigration, resolving succession, divorce, remarriage and distribution of benefits in non-monogamous unions as well as harmonizing Canadian policy with other nations. The BC AG is adamant that this purpose has not shifted from the original intent of the law.
Interpretation refers to the BC AG's sense that this law can be read down to be applicable only to polygynous marriages (MFF) where it is binding on any of its participants via a rite or ceremony. He feels that one cannot differentiate between polyamory in a MFF relationship and polygyny and thus would see it included under this law. FMM, MMM, and FFF relationships do not produce the same harms or if they do these are temporary relationships and not binding in the same way to create the noted harms.
Presentations of Opening Statements of the Parties will continue tomorrow.
It has been most interesting to watch the workings of this court and see the interaction of the various participants in the court room as well as behind the scenes. Impressive to observe the wheels of justice grinding along.
Standing Tall for what you believe
In all fairness, I've never been one to stand by and allow situations that are an affront to my sense of right and wrong to pass without some comment or action. I've advocated for mental health consumer survivors, non-profit housing, single parents, battered women, and victims of sexual abuse. I have taken on the woes of the bruised and broken-hearted and made some attempt to help, support and sustain them. I firmly believe as Sonia Johnson said,
“One determined person can make a significant difference; a small group of determined people can change the course of history.”
So it is not surprising to those who know me that I would weigh in on something so very personal as the freedom to love whom I please. Here we stand on the eve of a historic moment for Canada, where we as free citizens in a democratic society can question the validity and fairness of our laws and request that they be reviewed, modified and struck down if necessary to ensure that the greater good of our community and the freedoms of individuals are balanced.
It was with much thought and discussion with my family and friends that my partners and I put our three big toes into the pond of judiciary consultation. I filed my affidavit as a witness on behalf of the Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association who is an interested party in the BC Supreme court case beginning tomorrow in Vancouver. As preliminary to this case, we were interviewed by the Times Colonist and posed for photos. The article is linked to this blog posting. It has been picked up in papers across Canada and actually had us on the front page of The Province. This was somewhat of a surprise but the tone of the article while searching for a sexy scandalous edge is really quite positive and we are pleased with it. This was definitely a nice balance to previous articles that appeared in the Vancouver Sun.
We've received much positive feedback and some rather negative feedback. I imagine that there will be more. The following is one such note that came to me today by way of Facebook:
Dear Polly Amorie:
.
I was really surprised to read this article in the paper about you and your lifestyle.
Your probably are going to get some positive response and some not postive response.
To be quite honest I think the lifestyle you are living is not acceptable.
But that is my opinion.
But if the three of you are happy then all the power to you.
All you are doing is trying to justify that cheating on your partner is okay.
But its clear that none of you have respect for one another or for your relationships, and to live this lifestyle with your children in the house, you are giving them a wrong impression on what a healthy, committed , honest relationship really is."
"It makes healthy loving relationships look like a lie. You dont really love each other or your relationship, you love sex. Really, that is all your relationships is all about sex.
It was a disguisting comment you made that your men are heat seeking missles and you are the heat. And that your mother taught you to share. You are just living like a slut, sorry, but the whole article just sounds like its centered around sex. Yes , sex is a huge part of a relationship but you are all playing with fire because someone will eventually get hurt very deeply. As far as I can see you are all screwed up and have relationship issues."
"And if you live this lifestyle why do you need to broadcast it to everyone in the paper and want everyone to know what your life is like."
"I hope to God, that this lifestyle is never made legal. Its making a mockery out of relationships and marriage, and your children are going to never be able to function in a healthy loving relationship, because you are suppose to be their teachers and you are teaching wrong ways of living in a loving healthy relationship."
"Your article was disguisting, and you should all be ashamed of yourself. Please dont try and justify that any of this is a proper way of living , because its not."
"Your all in it for sex, thats it."
"J--- P---"
Dear J---P---:
Sex sell newspapers. Of course that would be what is inferred by key parts of that story. You can't imagine how difficult it is to sit and discuss your personal life with a complete stranger and a small tape machine. You can't imagine how bizarre it is to be asked "who sleeps in the middle?". I have six children and people constantly ask me if I've ever heard of birth control. One gets used to having random strangers feel they have the right, nay obligation, to advise you of your morality, or lack there of, in their opinion. I did not go to the Times Colonist and ask to have my home analyzed for all the world to see. I did see a law that is very vague and inclusive of many people who are doing no one any harm and are in fact building solid loving homes that produce children who are strong and able to contribute outstandingly to the greater community. I did see a law that by criminalizing multiple partner homes has made it much harder for women and children who may be experiencing abuse to get the help they need by encouraging seclusion and secrecy. I have called for the light to be shone on this law and the truth to be thrown onto the table for Canadians to see what is happening and find a new and inclusive way of dealing with all of these issues. I don't think polyamory is for you or most other people. I did not agree to be a witness for this case nor be interviewed for this article so that I might "broadcast" behaving like a "slut". I did it to stand up for men and women who are happy and living a loving life to be free to do so without fear of prosecution and so that any men, women and children who may be in abusive situations are able to seek help without fear of reprisals in addition to prosecution.
Polyamory does not make a mockery of monogamy. It is merely another variation of interpersonal relationships. The idea that any relationship configuration is superior or more morally attuned than another is mired in insecurity and a need to control wealth, land and women. I do not bemoan you for your opinions nor your choice of monogamy however effectively practiced. I have found a loving and supportive partnership and I could not for a moment consider living my life without either one of them. I love them dearly and they have taught me what it is to have a healthy balanced loving relationship where all partners are supported and empowered to rise to the fullness of their potential. I don't need to justify myself as I am proud to love my partners and grateful beyond expression that they have found it in their hearts to love me. I intend to grow old with these men and I am confident that the future will be all that and more. My children have learned that love should and can be given and received with respect and integrity. I have children of whom I am very proud and I work for a Canada that continues to be accepting and inclusive for them.
Polly Amorie
“One determined person can make a significant difference; a small group of determined people can change the course of history.”
So it is not surprising to those who know me that I would weigh in on something so very personal as the freedom to love whom I please. Here we stand on the eve of a historic moment for Canada, where we as free citizens in a democratic society can question the validity and fairness of our laws and request that they be reviewed, modified and struck down if necessary to ensure that the greater good of our community and the freedoms of individuals are balanced.
It was with much thought and discussion with my family and friends that my partners and I put our three big toes into the pond of judiciary consultation. I filed my affidavit as a witness on behalf of the Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association who is an interested party in the BC Supreme court case beginning tomorrow in Vancouver. As preliminary to this case, we were interviewed by the Times Colonist and posed for photos. The article is linked to this blog posting. It has been picked up in papers across Canada and actually had us on the front page of The Province. This was somewhat of a surprise but the tone of the article while searching for a sexy scandalous edge is really quite positive and we are pleased with it. This was definitely a nice balance to previous articles that appeared in the Vancouver Sun.
We've received much positive feedback and some rather negative feedback. I imagine that there will be more. The following is one such note that came to me today by way of Facebook:
Dear Polly Amorie:
" I am just writing you to let you know that I read the article about you and your partners in the Times Colonist."
"I know you from Esquimalt and met you through C--- I was really surprised to read this article in the paper about you and your lifestyle.
Your probably are going to get some positive response and some not postive response.
To be quite honest I think the lifestyle you are living is not acceptable.
But that is my opinion.
But if the three of you are happy then all the power to you.
All you are doing is trying to justify that cheating on your partner is okay.
But its clear that none of you have respect for one another or for your relationships, and to live this lifestyle with your children in the house, you are giving them a wrong impression on what a healthy, committed , honest relationship really is."
"It makes healthy loving relationships look like a lie. You dont really love each other or your relationship, you love sex. Really, that is all your relationships is all about sex.
It was a disguisting comment you made that your men are heat seeking missles and you are the heat. And that your mother taught you to share. You are just living like a slut, sorry, but the whole article just sounds like its centered around sex. Yes , sex is a huge part of a relationship but you are all playing with fire because someone will eventually get hurt very deeply. As far as I can see you are all screwed up and have relationship issues."
"And if you live this lifestyle why do you need to broadcast it to everyone in the paper and want everyone to know what your life is like."
"I hope to God, that this lifestyle is never made legal. Its making a mockery out of relationships and marriage, and your children are going to never be able to function in a healthy loving relationship, because you are suppose to be their teachers and you are teaching wrong ways of living in a loving healthy relationship."
"Your article was disguisting, and you should all be ashamed of yourself. Please dont try and justify that any of this is a proper way of living , because its not."
"Your all in it for sex, thats it."
"J--- P---"
Dear J---P---:
Sex sell newspapers. Of course that would be what is inferred by key parts of that story. You can't imagine how difficult it is to sit and discuss your personal life with a complete stranger and a small tape machine. You can't imagine how bizarre it is to be asked "who sleeps in the middle?". I have six children and people constantly ask me if I've ever heard of birth control. One gets used to having random strangers feel they have the right, nay obligation, to advise you of your morality, or lack there of, in their opinion. I did not go to the Times Colonist and ask to have my home analyzed for all the world to see. I did see a law that is very vague and inclusive of many people who are doing no one any harm and are in fact building solid loving homes that produce children who are strong and able to contribute outstandingly to the greater community. I did see a law that by criminalizing multiple partner homes has made it much harder for women and children who may be experiencing abuse to get the help they need by encouraging seclusion and secrecy. I have called for the light to be shone on this law and the truth to be thrown onto the table for Canadians to see what is happening and find a new and inclusive way of dealing with all of these issues. I don't think polyamory is for you or most other people. I did not agree to be a witness for this case nor be interviewed for this article so that I might "broadcast" behaving like a "slut". I did it to stand up for men and women who are happy and living a loving life to be free to do so without fear of prosecution and so that any men, women and children who may be in abusive situations are able to seek help without fear of reprisals in addition to prosecution.
Polyamory does not make a mockery of monogamy. It is merely another variation of interpersonal relationships. The idea that any relationship configuration is superior or more morally attuned than another is mired in insecurity and a need to control wealth, land and women. I do not bemoan you for your opinions nor your choice of monogamy however effectively practiced. I have found a loving and supportive partnership and I could not for a moment consider living my life without either one of them. I love them dearly and they have taught me what it is to have a healthy balanced loving relationship where all partners are supported and empowered to rise to the fullness of their potential. I don't need to justify myself as I am proud to love my partners and grateful beyond expression that they have found it in their hearts to love me. I intend to grow old with these men and I am confident that the future will be all that and more. My children have learned that love should and can be given and received with respect and integrity. I have children of whom I am very proud and I work for a Canada that continues to be accepting and inclusive for them.
Polly Amorie
Monday, November 1, 2010
The momentum for change begins with the efforts of the individuals
Here are the first few events for November where poly people are gathering to celebrate community and donate funds to the Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association www.polyadvocacy.ca
November 3 – Nanaimo, BC at the ACME Food Co on Commercial Street. Look for the parrot. Passing the hat for CPAA from 7:30pm.
November 5 – VanIsle-Poly celebrating 10 years of poly community building in Victoria, BC at the Tudor House Sports Bar. Poly pins to anyone donating to CPAA from 7:00pm.
November 5 – Vanpoly will host its polyamory celebration event on Friday November 5 at a house party. 12 years of Vanpoly to celebrate! Potluck, discussion (on the court case and otherwise) , fun times and old/new friends. We’ll also figure out a way to raise a few bucks for the CPAA!
November 17 – What is Polyamory? Panel Discussion, 7-9 pm at the David Strong Bldg, C103, UVic, Cash donations to CPAA . Sponsored by Poly101 on Campus and Victoria Poly 101 in Victoria, BC
Remember to message me with your events at vanisle_poly@yahoo.com and I'll post them here and tweet them from polychickbc
November 5 – VanIsle-Poly celebrating 10 years of poly community building in Victoria, BC at the Tudor House Sports Bar. Poly pins to anyone donating to CPAA from 7:00pm.
November 5 – Vanpoly will host its polyamory celebration event on Friday November 5 at a house party. 12 years of Vanpoly to celebrate! Potluck, discussion (on the court case and otherwise) , fun times and old/new friends. We’ll also figure out a way to raise a few bucks for the CPAA!
November 17 – What is Polyamory? Panel Discussion, 7-9 pm at the David Strong Bldg, C103, UVic, Cash donations to CPAA . Sponsored by Poly101 on Campus and Victoria Poly 101 in Victoria, BC
Remember to message me with your events at vanisle_poly@yahoo.com and I'll post them here and tweet them from polychickbc
Friday, October 29, 2010
Party On in support of the Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association
November 22nd is the beginning of the BC Supreme court case referencing secition 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada (the polygamy law).
Let's make November Party On for Poly month!!!
Have a meet & greet, polyamory awareness event, house party whatever suits your community!!
Talk about the case! Be informed and inform others! View our presentation at
http://www.slideshare.net/polychickbc/cpaa-presentation10-23-2010
Encourage donations to help us finance the legal costs and potential transportation of witnesses.
support@polyadvocacy.ca
Participate in our policy statement forums.
Forward details of when and where your November events are being held and we will list them on the CPAA website, in this blog and I'll tweet about it too.
Let's make November Party On for Poly month!!!
Have a meet & greet, polyamory awareness event, house party whatever suits your community!!
Talk about the case! Be informed and inform others! View our presentation at
http://www.slideshare.net/polychickbc/cpaa-presentation10-23-2010
Encourage donations to help us finance the legal costs and potential transportation of witnesses.
support@polyadvocacy.ca
Participate in our policy statement forums.
Forward details of when and where your November events are being held and we will list them on the CPAA website, in this blog and I'll tweet about it too.
Poly Living 2010 wrap up and Poly Leaders Network Summit
Sunday was the closing day of the Poly Living 2010 conference.
1st session for me was Who is the Poly Community? which was a very interesting look at a survey done in 2000 by Loving More with respondents submitting survey forms at a conference and by mail in responses. The Kinsey Institute has the survey archived as an SPSS file but the raw data appears to have been lost. That's unfortunate because the context of the survey forms filled out would be an excellent addition to the process of analysis. The presenters noted that the data entry to the SPSS file would have some inaccuracies as there were fill in the blanks answers which would be hard to code. Also one third of the respondents did not answer the questions which identified their gender and sexual orientation. There was discussion about the phrasing of questions being as issue with a desire for anonymity being more sought ten years ago when the survey was done. Demographics drawn from the survey showed a broad range of ages with many in their early thirties, having a higher level of income, moderate personal income but higher household income. Forty per cent were divorced at least once and seventy per cent were childless. Comments from the audience suggested that the sample was perhaps biased if these survey forms were obtained at a conference as perhaps the parenting poly people were home with the kids. Survey questions regarding when the respondents told various people in their lives about being poly were interesting and possibly indicative of the time frame of the sample group. There was strong indication that female respondents had more positive feedback when coming out to most of their contacts but this seemed to diminish with advancing age and higher education. It was suggested that this might indicate a bias against senior sexuality and higher education require work places being less responsive to poly. It was noted that the group CARAS is working on a survey project.
2nd session - Creating Tribe was a discussion of Intentional family building presented by Erosong House of Seattle. This is a six bedroom house of six adults who are all very active in the greater Seattle poly community. They have shared ideas and values such as being a sex positive, pagan friendly, polyamorous, clothing optional group of loving adults with crystal will (free and responsible in their choices). They began as a triad with wonderful communication processes developed and now include a large interconnected web of lovers, metamours and family (the cloud beyond the web of lovers). There is a mailing list, a google calendar, a weekly potluck and several other events through out the year that welcome community members and new folks. Erosong house members are busy building and contributing in pagan, kink and poly communities in the Seattle area and very well connected to communities in San Francisco, Hawaii, Victoria BC and so on. Anyone of a like mind is welcome to visit Erosong and attend any of their events but moving into the home requires an interview. The meshing of personalities and values is key to the success of this tribe.
The final closing circle of the conference made it possible for us to applaud the hard work of the well organized group of volunteers & presenters responsible for an excellent experience and share our support for their continued efforts.
Following the conference there was a summit of the Poly Leaders Network with the leaders of poly groups and projects from across the US and Canada. We had a brief meeting of introductions on Sunday night and spent most of Monday discussing, conferring and networking about our projects and programs. The support and encouragement for us in our upcoming court case with reference to the Criminal Code's polygamy law was overflowing, empowering and very moving. The cheer of "CAN - NA- DA! CAN - NA- DA! CAN - NA- DA!" will long be remembered. The interest and offers of advice, assistance and collaboration were invaluable.
This inconsequential woman simply practicing polyamory in my corner of Canada left Seattle on Monday evening bursting at the seams with inspiration, ideas and a sense of being part of something pretty damn terrific. Thanks, folks. I will hold fast to that and walk my path with boosted pride.
1st session for me was Who is the Poly Community? which was a very interesting look at a survey done in 2000 by Loving More with respondents submitting survey forms at a conference and by mail in responses. The Kinsey Institute has the survey archived as an SPSS file but the raw data appears to have been lost. That's unfortunate because the context of the survey forms filled out would be an excellent addition to the process of analysis. The presenters noted that the data entry to the SPSS file would have some inaccuracies as there were fill in the blanks answers which would be hard to code. Also one third of the respondents did not answer the questions which identified their gender and sexual orientation. There was discussion about the phrasing of questions being as issue with a desire for anonymity being more sought ten years ago when the survey was done. Demographics drawn from the survey showed a broad range of ages with many in their early thirties, having a higher level of income, moderate personal income but higher household income. Forty per cent were divorced at least once and seventy per cent were childless. Comments from the audience suggested that the sample was perhaps biased if these survey forms were obtained at a conference as perhaps the parenting poly people were home with the kids. Survey questions regarding when the respondents told various people in their lives about being poly were interesting and possibly indicative of the time frame of the sample group. There was strong indication that female respondents had more positive feedback when coming out to most of their contacts but this seemed to diminish with advancing age and higher education. It was suggested that this might indicate a bias against senior sexuality and higher education require work places being less responsive to poly. It was noted that the group CARAS is working on a survey project.
2nd session - Creating Tribe was a discussion of Intentional family building presented by Erosong House of Seattle. This is a six bedroom house of six adults who are all very active in the greater Seattle poly community. They have shared ideas and values such as being a sex positive, pagan friendly, polyamorous, clothing optional group of loving adults with crystal will (free and responsible in their choices). They began as a triad with wonderful communication processes developed and now include a large interconnected web of lovers, metamours and family (the cloud beyond the web of lovers). There is a mailing list, a google calendar, a weekly potluck and several other events through out the year that welcome community members and new folks. Erosong house members are busy building and contributing in pagan, kink and poly communities in the Seattle area and very well connected to communities in San Francisco, Hawaii, Victoria BC and so on. Anyone of a like mind is welcome to visit Erosong and attend any of their events but moving into the home requires an interview. The meshing of personalities and values is key to the success of this tribe.
The final closing circle of the conference made it possible for us to applaud the hard work of the well organized group of volunteers & presenters responsible for an excellent experience and share our support for their continued efforts.
Following the conference there was a summit of the Poly Leaders Network with the leaders of poly groups and projects from across the US and Canada. We had a brief meeting of introductions on Sunday night and spent most of Monday discussing, conferring and networking about our projects and programs. The support and encouragement for us in our upcoming court case with reference to the Criminal Code's polygamy law was overflowing, empowering and very moving. The cheer of "CAN - NA- DA! CAN - NA- DA! CAN - NA- DA!" will long be remembered. The interest and offers of advice, assistance and collaboration were invaluable.
This inconsequential woman simply practicing polyamory in my corner of Canada left Seattle on Monday evening bursting at the seams with inspiration, ideas and a sense of being part of something pretty damn terrific. Thanks, folks. I will hold fast to that and walk my path with boosted pride.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Poly Living 2010 - day two
Saturday's sessions - There were three streams of sessions and these are the ones I attended.
1st session: Wandering Hearts - This session was presented by Dawn Davidson and Gary Jacobson who have maintained a long distance polyamorous relationship for 29 years. (Holy smokes!) Poly people communicate like all married couples should. They have to because Poly communication pitfalls have spikes. It is easy to forget to communicate and communication styles can be part of the problem. Some resources suggested to help learn how to communicate more effectively were:
*Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Compassion, Rosenberg, Marshall,
*The Enchantment of Opposites: How to Create Great Relationships, Taylor, Patricia Huntington
*The Five Love Languages: How to Express Heartfelt Committment to Your Mate, Chapman, Gary
Four things impact long distance relationships more than local relationships:
1. Communication and communication styles
2. Resources - financial, time and personal energy levels
3. other relationships - honesty & respect
4. love
An excellent tip was to put your long distance lover in your emergency contacts on your cell phone so that in the event of something happening to you, they will be contacted. Something that is often not done and the long distance lover is not informed by surviving local family and friends until months or years later if at all.
Suggested resource was "The Complete Idiots Guide to Long Distance Relationships" by Seetha Nanarayan.
2nd session - Emotional Edge Play with Anita Wagner and her wonderful handouts. This was a discussion of how poly relationship dynamics and Kink relationship dynamics can work in collaboration effectively. Many of the same issues of jealousy and negotiations are at play in both relationship forms. A very interesting discussion with reference to an article in Loving More Magazine this month entitled "Navigating Polyamorous BDSM Relationships by Kathy Labriola. Kathy says that people in kink relationships are able to sustain poly relationships more often because BDSM clearly defines relationships and communication is essential. Discussion points of interest were that an ended relationship is often seen as failure when it should be seen as graduation. There is a difference between "Me Poly" where individual needs are paramount and "We poly" where the group's needs are the priority. Anita said that 75% of people in the US kink scene (public) identify as polyamorous. Jealousy tweaks are different and there is a need for "symbolic specialness" in poly relationships where we have a certain words or activities etc that we only do with that partner.
3rd session - Canadian Charter Rights Case - Zoe Duff and Carol Chaunteuse (representatives of the Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association. This was a historic background and current legal activities around section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada also known as the polygamy law. A snappy power point slide show and excellent talk by the two presenters was well received. This blog will be monitoring the case as it progresses. For details and background see www.polyadvocacy.ca
Update: Presentation uploaded for your perusal
http://www.slideshare.net/polychickbc/cpaa-presentation10-23-2010
4th session - Negotiations and Boundaries - Angela Smith. A very interesting presentation including role play and discussion around the processes involved in communicating changes and needs in any relationship but specifically a broader polyamorous configuration. There were some very dramatic moments in the discussion some of which were real interactions on real issues. Well done and thought provoking.
Evening plenary address - Christopher Ryan (author of Sex at Dawn)
Interesting talk with regards to his research on social, anthropological and economical origins of human relationship forms. His conclusions are that human love is not necessarily sexually exclusive and that while one can choose to practice monogamy that doesn't mean the attractiveness of others is not still there. Excellent graphics in his presentation including a video clip from South Park where the kids blame global warming for a man's desire to have sex with more than one woman.
Excellent day. More tomorrow.
1st session: Wandering Hearts - This session was presented by Dawn Davidson and Gary Jacobson who have maintained a long distance polyamorous relationship for 29 years. (Holy smokes!) Poly people communicate like all married couples should. They have to because Poly communication pitfalls have spikes. It is easy to forget to communicate and communication styles can be part of the problem. Some resources suggested to help learn how to communicate more effectively were:
*Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Compassion, Rosenberg, Marshall,
*The Enchantment of Opposites: How to Create Great Relationships, Taylor, Patricia Huntington
*The Five Love Languages: How to Express Heartfelt Committment to Your Mate, Chapman, Gary
Four things impact long distance relationships more than local relationships:
1. Communication and communication styles
2. Resources - financial, time and personal energy levels
3. other relationships - honesty & respect
4. love
An excellent tip was to put your long distance lover in your emergency contacts on your cell phone so that in the event of something happening to you, they will be contacted. Something that is often not done and the long distance lover is not informed by surviving local family and friends until months or years later if at all.
Suggested resource was "The Complete Idiots Guide to Long Distance Relationships" by Seetha Nanarayan.
2nd session - Emotional Edge Play with Anita Wagner and her wonderful handouts. This was a discussion of how poly relationship dynamics and Kink relationship dynamics can work in collaboration effectively. Many of the same issues of jealousy and negotiations are at play in both relationship forms. A very interesting discussion with reference to an article in Loving More Magazine this month entitled "Navigating Polyamorous BDSM Relationships by Kathy Labriola. Kathy says that people in kink relationships are able to sustain poly relationships more often because BDSM clearly defines relationships and communication is essential. Discussion points of interest were that an ended relationship is often seen as failure when it should be seen as graduation. There is a difference between "Me Poly" where individual needs are paramount and "We poly" where the group's needs are the priority. Anita said that 75% of people in the US kink scene (public) identify as polyamorous. Jealousy tweaks are different and there is a need for "symbolic specialness" in poly relationships where we have a certain words or activities etc that we only do with that partner.
3rd session - Canadian Charter Rights Case - Zoe Duff and Carol Chaunteuse (representatives of the Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association. This was a historic background and current legal activities around section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada also known as the polygamy law. A snappy power point slide show and excellent talk by the two presenters was well received. This blog will be monitoring the case as it progresses. For details and background see www.polyadvocacy.ca
Update: Presentation uploaded for your perusal
http://www.slideshare.net/polychickbc/cpaa-presentation10-23-2010
4th session - Negotiations and Boundaries - Angela Smith. A very interesting presentation including role play and discussion around the processes involved in communicating changes and needs in any relationship but specifically a broader polyamorous configuration. There were some very dramatic moments in the discussion some of which were real interactions on real issues. Well done and thought provoking.
Evening plenary address - Christopher Ryan (author of Sex at Dawn)
Interesting talk with regards to his research on social, anthropological and economical origins of human relationship forms. His conclusions are that human love is not necessarily sexually exclusive and that while one can choose to practice monogamy that doesn't mean the attractiveness of others is not still there. Excellent graphics in his presentation including a video clip from South Park where the kids blame global warming for a man's desire to have sex with more than one woman.
Excellent day. More tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
