Posts
10:31 AM
Unknown
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
A Mixed Marriage
Posted in: 
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Television on the Edge?
I can't help but shake my head a little when a television show, and television critics or promotional media, present relationships between cousins as edgy. For example there's this report by Sarah Lynn at unrealitytv.co.uk about the show EastEnders. It includes an interview with David Witts, who plays Joey Branning. Joey's cousin is Lauren Branning.
Fans of EastEnders will no doubt be aware that the soap is about to tackle the taboo subject of incest as cousins Lauren and Joey Branning embark on an affair after both realize – and act upon – the powerful sexual attraction between them that’s been simmering for weeks.
Just like any other relationship, right?
If they really want to be edgy, television show creators will respectfully depict a passionate, happy relationship between first-degree relatives, such as full or half-blood siblings, with biggest problem for the relationship being the prejudice of others. There is no shortage of real world examples, including right here on this blog. See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
Fans of EastEnders will no doubt be aware that the soap is about to tackle the taboo subject of incest as cousins Lauren and Joey Branning embark on an affair after both realize – and act upon – the powerful sexual attraction between them that’s been simmering for weeks.
Just like any other relationship, right?
When asked, “Does Joey think it’s wrong to kiss his cousin?” David replied, “No. He’s in love and he’s thinking, ‘How can it be wrong to feel this way?’That's a good thing.
And of what could be the possible fall out for the Branning family over the affair, David said, “It could tear the family apart…Cousin relationships, including marriages, are an everyday thing in much of the world.
“Lauren and Joey both know that so they’re being really careful about how they behave together when they’re in public.
“[But] they’re not doing anything wrong. It’s not illegal to have a relationship with your cousin and they haven’t known one another for long.
“They didn’t grow up together.”
If they really want to be edgy, television show creators will respectfully depict a passionate, happy relationship between first-degree relatives, such as full or half-blood siblings, with biggest problem for the relationship being the prejudice of others. There is no shortage of real world examples, including right here on this blog. See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
Television on the Edge?
I can't help but shake my head a little when a television show, and television critics or promotional media, present relationships between cousins as edgy. For example there's this report by Sarah Lynn at unrealitytv.co.uk about the show EastEnders. It includes an interview with David Witts, who plays Joey Branning. Joey's cousin is Lauren Branning.
Fans of EastEnders will no doubt be aware that the soap is about to tackle the taboo subject of incest as cousins Lauren and Joey Branning embark on an affair after both realize – and act upon – the powerful sexual attraction between them that’s been simmering for weeks.
Just like any other relationship, right?
If they really want to be edgy, television show creators will respectfully depict a passionate, happy relationship between first-degree relatives, such as full or half-blood siblings, with biggest problem for the relationship being the prejudice of others. There is no shortage of real world examples, including right here on this blog. See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
Fans of EastEnders will no doubt be aware that the soap is about to tackle the taboo subject of incest as cousins Lauren and Joey Branning embark on an affair after both realize – and act upon – the powerful sexual attraction between them that’s been simmering for weeks.
Just like any other relationship, right?
When asked, “Does Joey think it’s wrong to kiss his cousin?” David replied, “No. He’s in love and he’s thinking, ‘How can it be wrong to feel this way?’That's a good thing.
And of what could be the possible fall out for the Branning family over the affair, David said, “It could tear the family apart…Cousin relationships, including marriages, are an everyday thing in much of the world.
“Lauren and Joey both know that so they’re being really careful about how they behave together when they’re in public.
“[But] they’re not doing anything wrong. It’s not illegal to have a relationship with your cousin and they haven’t known one another for long.
“They didn’t grow up together.”
If they really want to be edgy, television show creators will respectfully depict a passionate, happy relationship between first-degree relatives, such as full or half-blood siblings, with biggest problem for the relationship being the prejudice of others. There is no shortage of real world examples, including right here on this blog. See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Politician in Zimbabwe Prosecuted Under Incest Laws
A ZIMBABWEAN politician Fidelis Mhashu, whose wife left for the United Kingdom in 2003 and never came back, says he ended up in an incestuous relationship with his two nieces due to loneliness.Both cases resulted in the birth of four children.Mr Mhashu who is also Chitungwiza North legislator and former Minister of National Housing and Social Amenities is now facing charges of engaging in incestuous relationship under Zimbabwe traditional court system in his home area of Mhondoro.
Consensual incest should not be a crime in the first place.
Mr Mhashu (70), who later dumped both women has confessed the unlawful unions, claiming that he had been driven to incest by his wife’s departure to Britain in 2003.
It would make sense that he would seek companionship, but who he found it with has nothing to do with anything else.
He said the women, one of whom has since died, had actually become his wives.Mhondoro’s Chief Chivero fined Mr Mhashu 15 head of cattle for the offences a fortnight ago. However, the former minister said he was appealing against that ruling because of the “excessive’’ fine. The cattle are supposed to compensate the women’s families.
Hold on a minute while I check what year it is...
Mr Mhashu said although he had relationships with his two nieces, who were sisters, he had not forced or sexually abused any of them as their family is now claiming.“I was lonely when my wife and children left the country for the UK. I then requested for assistance from my nieces at family level, but, unfortunately we ended up falling in love. It is not true that I raped them.”One of the women, who was 20 years old when she began the relationship with Mr Mhashu in 2008, last week accused the former minister of neglecting her and their two children.“I have two surviving children with this man.The other one is only seven weeks old and, unfortunately, I cannot breastfeed the child.“We have no food and I am now relying on handouts from neighbours for survival.”
So this appears to be a child support issue. Making sure children are taken care of is more important than whether or not consenting adults had sex, right?
The brother said Mr Mhashu sought refuge at their family home in 2004 when he fled alleged political violence in Chitungwiza. At that time, he asked the late sister to be his private secretary.“He came with nothing, but, as an uncle, we had to accommodate him. Within a few months we discovered that he was having an incestuous relationship with my older sister.“We tried to talk to both of them, but all our advice fell on deaf ears. He would always plead with the elders to conceal the crime for fear of public embarrassment,” he said.The sister, however, died in 2007.“While my elder sister was hospitalised, he (Mhashu) requested my younger sister to assist him in caring for her. Soon after her death, we again discovered that he had begun a relationship with the younger one. We tried to warn him, but he would always plead with us promising to marry her, which he never did.’’
It appears what we have here, at worst, is a bitter fight over child support. I did not see in the articles about this whether these women are nieces through a brother or sister of Mhashu, or through his wife. I think the implication is that they are actual blood relatives of his. Of course I have no problem with any adults sharing sex and love, but I do have a problem with people who don't provide or make arrangements for their children.
Polymory, Monogamy, and Cheating
The very helpful Charlie Glickman reminds us that "Polyamory Isn't An Alternative to Cheating"...
Polyamory isn’t an alternative to cheating, it’s an alternative to monogamy.He goes on to explain...
You know what the alternative to cheating is? Honesty, communication, and abiding by your agreements. No matter what relationship works for you, no matter how many partners you have at any given time, the alternative to cheating is being honest with yourself and with your partner(s), and doing what you say you will.
I get that if you’re unhappy in an ostensibly monogamous relationship or if your needs aren’t being met, there can be a temptation to seek someone outside those boundaries. And you know what? People in open relationships sometimes do the same thing. After all, just because your relationship is open doesn’t necessarily mean you feel comfortable telling your partner(s) what you want, and sometimes, people cheat.
Cheating is breaking the rules, whichever rules you choose.The only sense in which polyamory is ever "an alternative to cheating" is when someone who has tried to be monogamous, who has promised to be monogamous, but has ended up cheating, is honest with himself or herself and partner and admits monogamy isn't for them, and that they are polyamorous.... if that is indeed the case. There is a difference between a polyamorous person who has tried and failed to be monogamous and someone who is hostile or destructive to their partner, and that has expressed itself in cheating. This difference must be determined or the cheater will likely cheat even in a polyamorous relationship.
All of these issues can be dealt with better if polyamorous people are protected against discrimination. Punishing people for being polyamorous makes things worse for all, including pressuring polyamorists into make promises of monogamy.
Friday, October 26, 2012
Bobbi Kistina and Nick Gordon Making News
Even though their relationships isn't incestuous biologically nor legally, the prejudice against consanguinamory is so ridiculous that the couple continues to fight off the "incest" label.
As my regular readers know, I would support them if they were, indeed, biological siblings. Whatever the case, we are talking about consenting adults here. That someone else finds their relationship strange should have no influence over their happiness. If they want to be together, nobody else should be able to stop them.
TECHNICAL ISSUE: Is there some reason why a YouTube video would get automatically removed from a Blogger posting? It's all Google, so I don't understand why the HTML coding for this video disappeared from here and I get to go get it again. Anyone know?
As my regular readers know, I would support them if they were, indeed, biological siblings. Whatever the case, we are talking about consenting adults here. That someone else finds their relationship strange should have no influence over their happiness. If they want to be together, nobody else should be able to stop them.
TECHNICAL ISSUE: Is there some reason why a YouTube video would get automatically removed from a Blogger posting? It's all Google, so I don't understand why the HTML coding for this video disappeared from here and I get to go get it again. Anyone know?
Bobbi Kistina and Nick Gordon Making News
Even though their relationships isn't incestuous biologically nor legally, the prejudice against consanguinamory is so ridiculous that the couple continues to fight off the "incest" label.
As my regular readers know, I would support them if they were, indeed, biological siblings. Whatever the case, we are talking about consenting adults here. That someone else finds their relationship strange should have no influence over their happiness. If they want to be together, nobody else should be able to stop them.
TECHNICAL ISSUE: Is there some reason why a YouTube video would get automatically removed from a Blogger posting? It's all Google, so I don't understand why the HTML coding for this video disappeared from here and I get to go get it again. Anyone know?
As my regular readers know, I would support them if they were, indeed, biological siblings. Whatever the case, we are talking about consenting adults here. That someone else finds their relationship strange should have no influence over their happiness. If they want to be together, nobody else should be able to stop them.
TECHNICAL ISSUE: Is there some reason why a YouTube video would get automatically removed from a Blogger posting? It's all Google, so I don't understand why the HTML coding for this video disappeared from here and I get to go get it again. Anyone know?
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Parents and Expectant Parents Discuss Polyamory, Open Relationships
Discussions pop up everywhere about topics like polyamory and open relationships. (As a reminder, "open relationships" and "polyamory" are not synonyms.) Discussions tend to help, as the more people talk, the more we see there is a diversity of needs when it comes to relationships and sexuality, and that polyamorous people or people in open relationships are not bad people or people nobody knows. They are quite often great people, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or heterosexual, who live next door in harmony with monogamists. An example is this poll and discussion at baby-gaga.com initiated by Abbey & Ethan. Here are some highlights...
That's what I have always wanted but DH doesn't agree. Yeah. I didn't put much thought into that part of things when I decided to marry DH.
I've always been a very monogamous person and I don't think I could actually be in a relationship with another person.
However, lately I've been wondering about other things, like threesomes. I love my husband but I miss sleeping with women. I can live without dating and being in a relationship with a woman, my husband is quite fulfilling in that, but I miss the sex. I'm afraid it would somehow harm our relationship, though.
Abbey & Ethan added...
For the people I know, it's often just sex. But there are a lot of instances where the intimacy level is brought to it's max (a max often beyond that of a monogamous relationship) with certain practices.Mama to William + 1 added...
DH would be fine with it, it's me that has reservations. I'm not afraid that I'll become emotionally attached to the woman, it's more that I like the way my relationship is with DH and I'm afraid that having sex with someone else would alter it in a negative way.Asked why she married a man, she replied...
My sexuality is a little complicated. I'm not bisexual - I don't like men enough for me to feel like the term applies. I love my husband, but beyond that I have no interest in men at all. Besides for him everyone that I've ever dated, smurfed, been attracted to, etc. has been female.
I don't know. He was my best friend and I fell in love with him. We started dating and I made it very clear at the beginning that I made no promises because at the time I wasn't sure if I'd be happy to have sex with him. But it worked out wonderfully and we seem happier than most couples I know. I'm by no means unhappy with him now, even though I can't explain why he was/is such a major exception, but sometimes I miss the sex.One*day*at*a*time...
It is a weird thing and it's pretty impossible to explain, but it is what it is.
I don't think I could do it. I would feel left out and cheated out of part of him (DH). I want 100% of him. I give him 100% of me so I expect that back. Now could we share a woman in our relationship? Yes and we have before but it was mutual, shared and never on our own. She was a part of "our" relationship not something separate on the side On a side note though DH could never share me with another man (he's told me) so it's kind of a double standard. Although it doesn't bother me because I have no desire to be with another man. Even if he was involved. I can't really say for sure that I would involve another woman again. Even though it worked before and was mostly about sex it just seems like trying again with someone else may be pressing our luck. It might not work out so well with another woman. It ended because she met someone else and is now engaged. I think part of why it worked is because her and I had been best friends since 3rd grade, when she met DH we all became friends. She never hit on him and he never did her. We were just friends. then we got adventurous.These are not "other" people. These are the people you live next to, work with, and are probably in your family. These people especially are the people you see pushing baby carriages. Isn't it ridiculous to perpetuate stigmas and discrimination against people who aren't monogamous?
Parents and Expectant Parents Discuss Polyamory, Open Relationships
Discussions pop up everywhere about topics like polyamory and open relationships. (As a reminder, "open relationships" and "polyamory" are not synonyms.) Discussions tend to help, as the more people talk, the more we see there is a diversity of needs when it comes to relationships and sexuality, and that polyamorous people or people in open relationships are not bad people or people nobody knows. They are quite often great people, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or heterosexual, who live next door in harmony with monogamists. An example is this poll and discussion at baby-gaga.com initiated by Abbey & Ethan. Here are some highlights...
That's what I have always wanted but DH doesn't agree. Yeah. I didn't put much thought into that part of things when I decided to marry DH.
I've always been a very monogamous person and I don't think I could actually be in a relationship with another person.
However, lately I've been wondering about other things, like threesomes. I love my husband but I miss sleeping with women. I can live without dating and being in a relationship with a woman, my husband is quite fulfilling in that, but I miss the sex. I'm afraid it would somehow harm our relationship, though.
Abbey & Ethan added...
For the people I know, it's often just sex. But there are a lot of instances where the intimacy level is brought to it's max (a max often beyond that of a monogamous relationship) with certain practices.Mama to William + 1 added...
DH would be fine with it, it's me that has reservations. I'm not afraid that I'll become emotionally attached to the woman, it's more that I like the way my relationship is with DH and I'm afraid that having sex with someone else would alter it in a negative way.Asked why she married a man, she replied...
My sexuality is a little complicated. I'm not bisexual - I don't like men enough for me to feel like the term applies. I love my husband, but beyond that I have no interest in men at all. Besides for him everyone that I've ever dated, smurfed, been attracted to, etc. has been female.
I don't know. He was my best friend and I fell in love with him. We started dating and I made it very clear at the beginning that I made no promises because at the time I wasn't sure if I'd be happy to have sex with him. But it worked out wonderfully and we seem happier than most couples I know. I'm by no means unhappy with him now, even though I can't explain why he was/is such a major exception, but sometimes I miss the sex.One*day*at*a*time...
It is a weird thing and it's pretty impossible to explain, but it is what it is.
I don't think I could do it. I would feel left out and cheated out of part of him (DH). I want 100% of him. I give him 100% of me so I expect that back. Now could we share a woman in our relationship? Yes and we have before but it was mutual, shared and never on our own. She was a part of "our" relationship not something separate on the side On a side note though DH could never share me with another man (he's told me) so it's kind of a double standard. Although it doesn't bother me because I have no desire to be with another man. Even if he was involved. I can't really say for sure that I would involve another woman again. Even though it worked before and was mostly about sex it just seems like trying again with someone else may be pressing our luck. It might not work out so well with another woman. It ended because she met someone else and is now engaged. I think part of why it worked is because her and I had been best friends since 3rd grade, when she met DH we all became friends. She never hit on him and he never did her. We were just friends. then we got adventurous.These are not "other" people. These are the people you live next to, work with, and are probably in your family. These people especially are the people you see pushing baby carriages. Isn't it ridiculous to perpetuate stigmas and discrimination against people who aren't monogamous?
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Another Marriage Denied Equality Under the Law
She was generous enough with her time and privacy to be interviewed.
*****
FULL MARRIAGE EQUALITY: Is your brother your full blood brother? Is he younger than you, and if so, by how much? Do you have any other siblings?
Justher: Yes, my brother is my full blood brother. He’s a year and four months younger than me, and we have no other siblings.
FME: Describe your relationship with your brother. Do you live as though you are spouses? Does that include lovemaking?
Yes, my brother and I live as husband and wife, and it does include lovemaking, I see him as both my brother and lover. Those two roles are inseparable; at times he needs his sister, at other times he needs his lover and/or wife, so I fulfill both those roles in his life, just as he does the same in my life. It’s a bit hard to explain, but yes he’s my soul mate.
FME: What was your relationship with your brother like prior to the inclusion of sex? Did you get along? Were you raised together? Were you raised by your two biological parents?
Yes we were raised by our biological parents, and my brother and I always got along extremely well together.
FME: When/how did you first realize sex with your brother was a possibility and that you wanted it?
I guess I was around 14 when I first started having sexual feelings toward my brother; I started to see him as the boy in my life as opposed to just my brother.
FME: Did you make the first move? How did it happen?
I made the first move, and it was planned on my part. I took small steps at first holding his hand, hugging and trying to kiss him. I was feeling I wanted him as more my boyfriend than my brother.
FME: Did getting together with him progress in stages over time, or what it a sudden event?
It did progress in stages; it wasn’t a sudden event. I guess you could say I slowly seduced him. I was falling in love with him.
FME: Are you exclusive with each other?
Yes, we are exclusive with each other. He’s been the only romantic interest in my life, but I am bi-sexual and have experiences with other girls in my life. My brother knows this about me and has no problems with it. I’ve never had any sexual feelings for anyone else in my family.
FME: Some say a consanguinamorous brother and sister are kinky by definition, but I disagree and notice that most consanguinamorous relationships look like any other relationship, although usually with much more intensity. Are you into any kinks you'd like to mention? Do you feel like your relationship is taboo, and if so, do you like that or get a thrill from that? Or does it feel normal?
Haha, I guess I'm a bit kinky. Sexually there isn’t really anything I wouldn’t do for him, but aside from anal/oral sex (some woman aren’t into that at all) our sex lives are pretty normal. I do have fantasies, but that’s all they are. I don’t see anything taboo in our relationship. The sneaking around we did when we were teenagers was a bit thrilling; also the fact that we were doing something most people would never dream of doing is a bit thrilling too, but all in all I see us as just normal.
FME: Does anyone in your life know the full, true nature/history of your relationship and how did they find out? How have they reacted? Are you able to act like a couple in public? What kind of steps, if any, have you had to take to keep your privacy?
Our lawyer knows the truth. The paperwork I had to fill out to get custody of our child required me to turn over certain documents. He supports us. My brother’s workplace also knows we live together and I’m dependent on him, but they don’t know we’re a romantic couple; it’s for insurance coverage only. Yes, we can act as a couple/family in public as the people around us know us as an unwed couple only, not brother and sister. I don’t use my real name for anything.
FME: What do you want to say to people who disapprove of your relationship, or disapprove of anyone having this kind of relationship? What's your reply to those who would say that if a brother and sister have this kind of relationship, it is only because the sister is being victimized by the brother?
I’d like to ask them to please try and understand us and get to know us before they pass any judgment on us. We hurt no one and keep to ourselves. Brothers and sisters can and do fall deeply in love with each other. We’re only human and we lead normal decent lives; we’re productive members of society and just like anyone else, just trying to get by. And I’m hardly a victim. I do what I do out of love.
FME: What advice do you have for parents who find out their children (perhaps still living at home) are involved with each other?
I’d ask them to talk it over with their children and make sure their involvement is for all the right reasons, and to make sure no one is being hurt. If it’s out if love for each other, then I’d give them my full support.
FME: If you could get legally married, and that included protections against discrimination, harassment, etc., would you?
Yes, I’d marry my brother in a heartbeat. We have exchanged our own vows with each other and in our eyes we are married to one another.
FME: Any plans for the future?
My plans are to live with my brother for the rest of my life and grow old together.
FME: Do you know in-person others who have had relationships like yours?
Sadly, I don’t know of any others in person like myself, only those on the Internet. Those I get to know and find sincere I believe, others are fakers. I don’t understand why anyone would fake being involved in incest, but it does happen a lot. To them I’d say “Get a life.”
****
Dear readers, don’t you agree with me that it is extremely unfair to deny consenting adults like Justher and her brother the right to marry? Isn’t it ridiculous that in many places, they still can’t be honest about their relationship? Thanks again to Justher for sharing.
If you are in a relationship like the one Justher has, know someone who is, support those who are, or just want to know more about such relationships, I’m not aware of any better place to discuss them than the Kindred Spirits forum. Also, please join the group I Support Full Marriage Equality on Facebook.
You can read other interviews like this here.
If you are in, or have been in, a “forbidden” consensual relationship, and want to be interviewed, please contact me at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com.
Another Marriage Denied Equality Under the Law
She was generous enough with her time and privacy to be interviewed.
*****
FULL MARRIAGE EQUALITY: Is your brother your full blood brother? Is he younger than you, and if so, by how much? Do you have any other siblings?
Justher: Yes, my brother is my full blood brother. He’s a year and four months younger than me, and we have no other siblings.
FME: Describe your relationship with your brother. Do you live as though you are spouses? Does that include lovemaking?
Yes, my brother and I live as husband and wife, and it does include lovemaking, I see him as both my brother and lover. Those two roles are inseparable; at times he needs his sister, at other times he needs his lover and/or wife, so I fulfill both those roles in his life, just as he does the same in my life. It’s a bit hard to explain, but yes he’s my soul mate.
FME: What was your relationship with your brother like prior to the inclusion of sex? Did you get along? Were you raised together? Were you raised by your two biological parents?
Yes we were raised by our biological parents, and my brother and I always got along extremely well together.
FME: When/how did you first realize sex with your brother was a possibility and that you wanted it?
I guess I was around 14 when I first started having sexual feelings toward my brother; I started to see him as the boy in my life as opposed to just my brother.
FME: Did you make the first move? How did it happen?
I made the first move, and it was planned on my part. I took small steps at first holding his hand, hugging and trying to kiss him. I was feeling I wanted him as more my boyfriend than my brother.
FME: Did getting together with him progress in stages over time, or what it a sudden event?
It did progress in stages; it wasn’t a sudden event. I guess you could say I slowly seduced him. I was falling in love with him.
FME: Are you exclusive with each other?
Yes, we are exclusive with each other. He’s been the only romantic interest in my life, but I am bi-sexual and have experiences with other girls in my life. My brother knows this about me and has no problems with it. I’ve never had any sexual feelings for anyone else in my family.
FME: Some say a consanguinamorous brother and sister are kinky by definition, but I disagree and notice that most consanguinamorous relationships look like any other relationship, although usually with much more intensity. Are you into any kinks you'd like to mention? Do you feel like your relationship is taboo, and if so, do you like that or get a thrill from that? Or does it feel normal?
Haha, I guess I'm a bit kinky. Sexually there isn’t really anything I wouldn’t do for him, but aside from anal/oral sex (some woman aren’t into that at all) our sex lives are pretty normal. I do have fantasies, but that’s all they are. I don’t see anything taboo in our relationship. The sneaking around we did when we were teenagers was a bit thrilling; also the fact that we were doing something most people would never dream of doing is a bit thrilling too, but all in all I see us as just normal.
FME: Does anyone in your life know the full, true nature/history of your relationship and how did they find out? How have they reacted? Are you able to act like a couple in public? What kind of steps, if any, have you had to take to keep your privacy?
Our lawyer knows the truth. The paperwork I had to fill out to get custody of our child required me to turn over certain documents. He supports us. My brother’s workplace also knows we live together and I’m dependent on him, but they don’t know we’re a romantic couple; it’s for insurance coverage only. Yes, we can act as a couple/family in public as the people around us know us as an unwed couple only, not brother and sister. I don’t use my real name for anything.
FME: What do you want to say to people who disapprove of your relationship, or disapprove of anyone having this kind of relationship? What's your reply to those who would say that if a brother and sister have this kind of relationship, it is only because the sister is being victimized by the brother?
I’d like to ask them to please try and understand us and get to know us before they pass any judgment on us. We hurt no one and keep to ourselves. Brothers and sisters can and do fall deeply in love with each other. We’re only human and we lead normal decent lives; we’re productive members of society and just like anyone else, just trying to get by. And I’m hardly a victim. I do what I do out of love.
FME: What advice do you have for parents who find out their children (perhaps still living at home) are involved with each other?
I’d ask them to talk it over with their children and make sure their involvement is for all the right reasons, and to make sure no one is being hurt. If it’s out if love for each other, then I’d give them my full support.
FME: If you could get legally married, and that included protections against discrimination, harassment, etc., would you?
Yes, I’d marry my brother in a heartbeat. We have exchanged our own vows with each other and in our eyes we are married to one another.
FME: Any plans for the future?
My plans are to live with my brother for the rest of my life and grow old together.
FME: Do you know in-person others who have had relationships like yours?
Sadly, I don’t know of any others in person like myself, only those on the Internet. Those I get to know and find sincere I believe, others are fakers. I don’t understand why anyone would fake being involved in incest, but it does happen a lot. To them I’d say “Get a life.”
****
Dear readers, don’t you agree with me that it is extremely unfair to deny consenting adults like Justher and her brother the right to marry? Isn’t it ridiculous that in many places, they still can’t be honest about their relationship? Thanks again to Justher for sharing.
If you are in a relationship like the one Justher has, know someone who is, support those who are, or just want to know more about such relationships, I’m not aware of any better place to discuss them than the Kindred Spirits forum. Also, please join the group I Support Full Marriage Equality on Facebook.
You can read other interviews like this here.
If you are in, or have been in, a “forbidden” consensual relationship, and want to be interviewed, please contact me at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com.
Monday, October 22, 2012
Still Much Ignorance of Polyamory
Carter West writes at thevarsity.ca, which is "University of Toronto's Student Newspaper Since 1880" that "Schools shouldn't be promoting polyamory."
Just responding to that title, I want to know what is meant by "promoting?" In so far as relationships and family are discussed at school, it would be negligent of academia to deny that polyamory exists, and that some people find polyamorous relationships to be the ones in which they function best. It is destructive for schools to ignore polyamory or any other consensual adult relationships. Some students are polyamorous, even if they aren't in any relationship at all.
But it turns out that the piece is referencing the poster I blogged about that was actually attempting to depict bisexuality...
Just responding to that title, I want to know what is meant by "promoting?" In so far as relationships and family are discussed at school, it would be negligent of academia to deny that polyamory exists, and that some people find polyamorous relationships to be the ones in which they function best. It is destructive for schools to ignore polyamory or any other consensual adult relationships. Some students are polyamorous, even if they aren't in any relationship at all.
But it turns out that the piece is referencing the poster I blogged about that was actually attempting to depict bisexuality...
Last month, the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) began hanging posters for their “safe and positive spaces” campaign. The content of these advertisements for equity were washroom stick figures in love. Entitled “Love has no gender,” the poster sports the rainbow of possible couplings: male stick figures with female stick figures, male sticks with male sticks, female sticks with female sticks. Two couplings are triplets of bathroom signifiers: one female figure with two male figures and two male figures with one female.
At least Carter West caught that. West then goes into an explanation of GRINDR. Then, with a sad lack of solidarity, West writes...
The purpose of this diversion into GRINDR is to illustrate a development that appropriately reflects the truths of polyamory. It is a sex-based practice that fulfills the libido and satisfies the heart about as much as a mirage. I make no exceptions to this claim. If the polyamrous can demonstrate that they can stay with their people, raise many children, and show that this arrangement is capable of making useful contributions to society as a long-term effort, then showing the next generation TDSB’s “love has no gender” poster will be perfectly appropriate. Until then it is irresponsible for the School Board to promote a lifestyle that has its advocates in the classroom but none as living examples of the success of multi-party stable relationships.
They should give love with the heart the value of two and stay well out of the bedroom guest list.What tripe. It is bad enough West dismisses the fact that the poster was trying to depict bisexuality, but to make such an ignorant statement about polyamory and polyamorists when there have never been more positive examples, is extremely disappointing.
West is now in the process of being informed that polyamorists are diverse and are everywhere, and many polyamorists have lasting, happy relationships that are about much more than sex. Here are some of the comments left on the website when I checked...
E...
Wow… You clearly haven’t done much research on polyamory, as there are many people in polyamorous relationships that are not just about sex, long term, and raise healthy children.Connor Alexander...
By your standards monogamy shouldn’t be on the poster either. It certainly hasn’t met your criteria for ‘successful’ relationships. My advice would be to do a little more research on polyamory. From what I’ve read here, you have a very poor grasp on it.MegC...
You do realize, of course, that as long as the public discussion about polyamory looks like this — strongly stated but uninformed opinions that it can’t work and is inappropriate to even mention in front of children — it will be very hard for those who successfully live with multiple loving relationships to be comfortably out, proving they exist and aren’t a threat to the greater culture of monogamy. The “polyamorist agenda” is not coming to get your children or your partner. But don’t expect to see successful polyamorous folks begging to be scrutinized under your moral microscope. Force them to remain at the margins, and you get to claim they are a fringe subculture that threatens the core values that define society. Neat.Alan M...
Criminy, your lack of the *slightest* research about polyamory before pompously saying you know it all is embarrassingly pathetic. You come off sounding like a privileged 12-year-old who’s never seen a library or the internet.J. Doe...
The Varsity published this crap? Seriously, come on. Some freshman thinks hooking up with guys on Grindr = polyamory? Jeez.
Still Much Ignorance of Polyamory
Carter West writes at thevarsity.ca, which is "University of Toronto's Student Newspaper Since 1880" that "Schools shouldn't be promoting polyamory."
Just responding to that title, I want to know what is meant by "promoting?" In so far as relationships and family are discussed at school, it would be negligent of academia to deny that polyamory exists, and that some people find polyamorous relationships to be the ones in which they function best. It is destructive for schools to ignore polyamory or any other consensual adult relationships. Some students are polyamorous, even if they aren't in any relationship at all.
But it turns out that the piece is referencing the poster I blogged about that was actually attempting to depict bisexuality...
Just responding to that title, I want to know what is meant by "promoting?" In so far as relationships and family are discussed at school, it would be negligent of academia to deny that polyamory exists, and that some people find polyamorous relationships to be the ones in which they function best. It is destructive for schools to ignore polyamory or any other consensual adult relationships. Some students are polyamorous, even if they aren't in any relationship at all.
But it turns out that the piece is referencing the poster I blogged about that was actually attempting to depict bisexuality...
Last month, the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) began hanging posters for their “safe and positive spaces” campaign. The content of these advertisements for equity were washroom stick figures in love. Entitled “Love has no gender,” the poster sports the rainbow of possible couplings: male stick figures with female stick figures, male sticks with male sticks, female sticks with female sticks. Two couplings are triplets of bathroom signifiers: one female figure with two male figures and two male figures with one female.
At least Carter West caught that. West then goes into an explanation of GRINDR. Then, with a sad lack of solidarity, West writes...
The purpose of this diversion into GRINDR is to illustrate a development that appropriately reflects the truths of polyamory. It is a sex-based practice that fulfills the libido and satisfies the heart about as much as a mirage. I make no exceptions to this claim. If the polyamrous can demonstrate that they can stay with their people, raise many children, and show that this arrangement is capable of making useful contributions to society as a long-term effort, then showing the next generation TDSB’s “love has no gender” poster will be perfectly appropriate. Until then it is irresponsible for the School Board to promote a lifestyle that has its advocates in the classroom but none as living examples of the success of multi-party stable relationships.
They should give love with the heart the value of two and stay well out of the bedroom guest list.What tripe. It is bad enough West dismisses the fact that the poster was trying to depict bisexuality, but to make such an ignorant statement about polyamory and polyamorists when there have never been more positive examples, is extremely disappointing.
West is now in the process of being informed that polyamorists are diverse and are everywhere, and many polyamorists have lasting, happy relationships that are about much more than sex. Here are some of the comments left on the website when I checked...
E...
Wow… You clearly haven’t done much research on polyamory, as there are many people in polyamorous relationships that are not just about sex, long term, and raise healthy children.Connor Alexander...
By your standards monogamy shouldn’t be on the poster either. It certainly hasn’t met your criteria for ‘successful’ relationships. My advice would be to do a little more research on polyamory. From what I’ve read here, you have a very poor grasp on it.MegC...
You do realize, of course, that as long as the public discussion about polyamory looks like this — strongly stated but uninformed opinions that it can’t work and is inappropriate to even mention in front of children — it will be very hard for those who successfully live with multiple loving relationships to be comfortably out, proving they exist and aren’t a threat to the greater culture of monogamy. The “polyamorist agenda” is not coming to get your children or your partner. But don’t expect to see successful polyamorous folks begging to be scrutinized under your moral microscope. Force them to remain at the margins, and you get to claim they are a fringe subculture that threatens the core values that define society. Neat.Alan M...
Criminy, your lack of the *slightest* research about polyamory before pompously saying you know it all is embarrassingly pathetic. You come off sounding like a privileged 12-year-old who’s never seen a library or the internet.J. Doe...
The Varsity published this crap? Seriously, come on. Some freshman thinks hooking up with guys on Grindr = polyamory? Jeez.
Saturday, October 20, 2012
The Grey Divorcee
As the baby-boomer generation ages, more of its members have been divorced than in any prior generation at any point in history. Add to this the more complex marital biographies of average baby-boomers [second marriage, recently divorced, ever divorced], and you cannot ignore the growing prevalence of divorce in our society.
The study concludes that as widowhood has declined over the past two decades, the divorce rate among the middle-aged and seniors has doubled. Also of note in this demographic is that, among divorced seniors, they achieved this status much earlier in their lives than in the past.
Another conclusion drawn by this study is that over the next two decades, as the growth of the "older" population accelerates, so will the divorce rate among mature adults.
One option to consider is separate maintenance. This option, although not for everyone, has the advantage of allowing an unemployed spouse to maintain health insurance coverage. In most cases, this saves the unemployed spouse approximately $500 per month by not having to pay an insurance premium.
If you are over 50 and facing the tough options of divorce in Oakland County, contact us for a free consult. We can provide you with answers to your questions and concerns.
www.waterfordlegal.com
info@waterfordlegal.com
Friday, October 19, 2012
Origins of the Incest Taboo
When someone asks why consanguinamory (consensual incest or consanguineous sex) is taboo, someone will usually provide an explanation like this one...
While I think genetic diversity is usually a good thing as long as it doesn't suppress a genetic advantage, if humans were naturally inclined to seek genetic diversity, I think we would not have seen so much segregation based on skin color and ethnicity over the years, or a taboo against interracial marriages. Even in the most progressive communites, people still often segregate themselves on the basis of skin color. Furthermore, studies have shown and experience with Genetic Sexual Attraction has shown that people are often strongly attracted to those genetically similar to them. It is prepubescent ultrafamiliarity in socialization and externally imposed taboos that often squelch such attraction.
I think it is likely that humans in the past were not aware of, or concerned with, genetic diversity because they didn't know about genes. They could see that offspring often resembled their parents, but for all they knew, that was the will of the gods or the fates.
Taboos against consanguineous sex were more likely imposed because parents, especially fathers, used the sexuality of their children to form partnerships and gain power. In patriarchal societies, daughters were traded away via arranged marriage into other families to buy favor, and sons were expected to marry for dowries and alliances and such. It was more difficult for this to happen, especially in cultures that demanded a bride marry with her virginity and have only her husband as a sexual partner, if the siblings were having sex with each other or a parent.
It was probably more about power and control, and marriage bans and laws against consensual sex are still about those things. We see that happening now, and so we have good reason to believe it happened in the past. What do you think?
See this Frequently Asked Question for more.
The reason we mate up with persons not of our own blood is to build genetic diversity and, whether we accept it or not, attempt to create more superior humans.
While I think genetic diversity is usually a good thing as long as it doesn't suppress a genetic advantage, if humans were naturally inclined to seek genetic diversity, I think we would not have seen so much segregation based on skin color and ethnicity over the years, or a taboo against interracial marriages. Even in the most progressive communites, people still often segregate themselves on the basis of skin color. Furthermore, studies have shown and experience with Genetic Sexual Attraction has shown that people are often strongly attracted to those genetically similar to them. It is prepubescent ultrafamiliarity in socialization and externally imposed taboos that often squelch such attraction.
I think it is likely that humans in the past were not aware of, or concerned with, genetic diversity because they didn't know about genes. They could see that offspring often resembled their parents, but for all they knew, that was the will of the gods or the fates.
Taboos against consanguineous sex were more likely imposed because parents, especially fathers, used the sexuality of their children to form partnerships and gain power. In patriarchal societies, daughters were traded away via arranged marriage into other families to buy favor, and sons were expected to marry for dowries and alliances and such. It was more difficult for this to happen, especially in cultures that demanded a bride marry with her virginity and have only her husband as a sexual partner, if the siblings were having sex with each other or a parent.
It was probably more about power and control, and marriage bans and laws against consensual sex are still about those things. We see that happening now, and so we have good reason to believe it happened in the past. What do you think?
See this Frequently Asked Question for more.
Origins of the Incest Taboo
When someone asks why consanguinamory (consensual incest or consanguineous sex) is taboo, someone will usually provide an explanation like this one...
While I think genetic diversity is usually a good thing as long as it doesn't suppress a genetic advantage, if humans were naturally inclined to seek genetic diversity, I think we would not have seen so much segregation based on skin color and ethnicity over the years, or a taboo against interracial marriages. Even in the most progressive communites, people still often segregate themselves on the basis of skin color. Furthermore, studies have shown and experience with Genetic Sexual Attraction has shown that people are often strongly attracted to those genetically similar to them. It is prepubescent ultrafamiliarity in socialization and externally imposed taboos that often squelch such attraction.
I think it is likely that humans in the past were not aware of, or concerned with, genetic diversity because they didn't know about genes. They could see that offspring often resembled their parents, but for all they knew, that was the will of the gods or the fates.
Taboos against consanguineous sex were more likely imposed because parents, especially fathers, used the sexuality of their children to form partnerships and gain power. In patriarchal societies, daughters were traded away via arranged marriage into other families to buy favor, and sons were expected to marry for dowries and alliances and such. It was more difficult for this to happen, especially in cultures that demanded a bride marry with her virginity and have only her husband as a sexual partner, if the siblings were having sex with each other or a parent.
It was probably more about power and control, and marriage bans and laws against consensual sex are still about those things. We see that happening now, and so we have good reason to believe it happened in the past. What do you think?
See this Frequently Asked Question for more.
The reason we mate up with persons not of our own blood is to build genetic diversity and, whether we accept it or not, attempt to create more superior humans.
While I think genetic diversity is usually a good thing as long as it doesn't suppress a genetic advantage, if humans were naturally inclined to seek genetic diversity, I think we would not have seen so much segregation based on skin color and ethnicity over the years, or a taboo against interracial marriages. Even in the most progressive communites, people still often segregate themselves on the basis of skin color. Furthermore, studies have shown and experience with Genetic Sexual Attraction has shown that people are often strongly attracted to those genetically similar to them. It is prepubescent ultrafamiliarity in socialization and externally imposed taboos that often squelch such attraction.
I think it is likely that humans in the past were not aware of, or concerned with, genetic diversity because they didn't know about genes. They could see that offspring often resembled their parents, but for all they knew, that was the will of the gods or the fates.
Taboos against consanguineous sex were more likely imposed because parents, especially fathers, used the sexuality of their children to form partnerships and gain power. In patriarchal societies, daughters were traded away via arranged marriage into other families to buy favor, and sons were expected to marry for dowries and alliances and such. It was more difficult for this to happen, especially in cultures that demanded a bride marry with her virginity and have only her husband as a sexual partner, if the siblings were having sex with each other or a parent.
It was probably more about power and control, and marriage bans and laws against consensual sex are still about those things. We see that happening now, and so we have good reason to believe it happened in the past. What do you think?
See this Frequently Asked Question for more.
Business Courts Begin Statewide in January
 |
| Governor Rick Snyder |
The central idea behind the specialized tribunals is to require electronic case and document filings. According to the recent Senate Fiscal Agency analysis, the business courts would:
- Have exclusive jurisdiction over all business or commercial disputes with an amount in controversy in excess of $25,000;
- Any cause of action arising, in whole or in part, from a business or commercial dispute would be assigned to the business court;
- Require all circuit courts with more than 3 sitting judges to submit a plan for the implementation of a business tribunal to the State Court Administrative Office;
- Counties with fewer than 3 judges have the option of submitting an administrative order for SCAO review for a specialized business court with concurrent jurisdiction with the county trial court;
- Cases will be assigned to business court judges via a blind draw;
- Business court cases are required to be filed electronically;
- Require that the judges assigned to the business courts be trained by the Michigan Judicial Institute; and
- Any cases that are pending on the various county pilot programs remain on that docket until they are completed.
We will see if this new specialized court prunes the docket of the county courts of general jurisdiction. Here at the Law Blogger, this seems like a good idea.
www.clarkstonlegal.com
info@clarkstonlegal.com
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Polyamory Rising
Thanks in no small part to the Browns and their TLC television show, "Sister Wives," awareness of consensual polygamy (especially plural marriages) is increasing. The same goes for the Showtime's Polyamory show. Both shows and related media and discussion will contribute to relationship rights for poly people, including the freedom to marry and, ultimately, full marriage equality.
The Browns lead a forum at UNLV, prompting some news coverage. Here's a report from Paul Takahashi at lasvegassun.com...
That was just one of the examples of how they're opening minds. Good for them! The newspaper also included an edited version of question-and-answer session, and you should click through to read it...
It is sad that people feel pressured to hide their marriages.
Finally, at gonzotimes.com, Alexis offered an introduction to the world of polyamory...
The Browns lead a forum at UNLV, prompting some news coverage. Here's a report from Paul Takahashi at lasvegassun.com...
Kody Brown, center, is flanked by two of his four ‘Sister Wives,” Christine, at left, and Meri, at right.
There are more than 850 societies around the world that practice polygamy, and an estimated 30,000 or more plural families living in the United States, Blumer said. However, because of a negative cultural stigma and legal concerns, most plural families live largely in secrecy.How ridiculous it is that people perpetuate such bigotry.
When the Brown family came out to their monogamous friends relatives some 20 years ago, it strained relationships and broke some bonds.
The Browns also suffered repercussions when their family made national headlines after "Sister Wives" first aired. Meri lost her job, Kody lost a couple of advertising clients and Robyn had a difficult time finding work.
For a couple of years, the family also faced legal prosecution.
The Browns also shared their views of what it means to be a feminist in a plural marriage and how they empathize with proponents for gay marriage.Good or them for expressing and promoting solidarity!
"I believe that I was able to choose our family structure," Kody Brown said. "It should be the right of every citizen in this country to be able to choose their family structure."
The family also shared the decision to come out about their plural marriage.
"I felt like there were so many stereotypes about plural marriages," Kody Brown said. "When I talked with my children about doing the show, I said we have an opportunity to not only change our world, but to change the world for everyone else."
Las Vegas resident Tracy Enriquez, 47, watches "Sister Wives" regularly and said the show changed her views on plural marriage. Seeing the family in person solidified her views, she said.
"At first, I thought it was crazy, but when I saw how much they love each other, it kind of changed my views," she said. "If they don't force people into their lifestyle, I don't see anything wrong with it. I respect them."
That was just one of the examples of how they're opening minds. Good for them! The newspaper also included an edited version of question-and-answer session, and you should click through to read it...
Are most people out like you are?
Kody: Almost all of our friends who are in plural marriage are closeted to some level. People are careful not to flaunt it, even in small and remote towns.
It is sad that people feel pressured to hide their marriages.
What are your views of patriarchy and feminism? Polygamy is often seen as a patriarchy and bad for women.Clearly, these are women who make up their own minds.
Janelle: Patriarchy has a very negative connotation for me. It's true that Kody is the glue that holds us together, but I definitely have my voice. I feel very liberated. I have a career, my independence and freedom. I've never had to stay at home with sick kids or worry too much about what's for dinner. I can have my cake, and eat it too.
Meri: I agree. I've become so independent in some ways.
Christine, a homemaker: I feel our family is very patriarchal, but it's exactly what I wanted. I just want to be a princess in life.
There are negative stereotypes about polygamy. How are you different from Warren Jeffs and FLDS?Although the Browns prefer their marital construct be referred to as plural marriage, like all consensual polygamy, I consider it form of polyamory. Kathy Labriola has written about "The Polyamorous Couple Next Door" at twodaymag.com. Here's Part 1...
Kody: We are Fundamentalist Mormons, not the LDS or FLDS. Jeffs – who was the leader of the FLDS – built up a fiefdom around him. He took the voice away from his wives and children. My belief is that my wives should have their voice and should be able to make choices. As a family, we make choices together.
Janelle: I was able to choose my family. In some Mormon sects, marriages are arranged. In our community, we don't assign spouses. We also wait to get married after we turn 18 years old. The only common thing is we worship from the same scripture as the LDS.
Christine: We also have access to the outside world, the Internet and TV. We want the world for our children, for them to go to college and travel.
Meri: I recently ran a 5K in Utah to get people out of the FLDS. (Audience applauds.)
Janelle: Secrecy is bad, because it allowed people like Warren Jeffs to abuse. That abuse persists, because people were more afraid of the government than Jeffs.
Kody: We're don't mean to criticize the FLDS. That is a community that needs our empathy and support. We can save our criticism for their leadership.
There may be married couples right on your block, or even next door to you, who are in an open or polyamorous relationship without anyone outside the family being aware of it. In fact, it has been impossible for researchers to estimate how many couples practice some form of non-monogamy because the vast majority of these couples are very careful to keep their lifestyle secret.She goes on to give some examples of people involved in these relationships. And here is Part 2.
As a counselor in private practice, I get calls every day from married couples all over the country who have made an agreement to allow each other to have outside sexual or romantic relationships. The usual reasons they give for keeping this from their families, friends, and co-workers? Fears of their children being taken away from them, being ostracized by family members, being rejected by their friends, or losing their jobs. These fears are usually at least partially based on reality, as many couples have experienced negative consequences when they “came out of the closet” or if others accidentally found out about their open marriage.
My experience counseling couples has convinced me of one thing regardless of whether your marriage is explicitly monogamous or polyamorous: If your relationship is strong, stable, and happy, your spouse is unlikely to leave you for someone else, even if they have outside partners. People generally leave their marriages because they are unhappy, not because they have another lover.Turns out that she wrote mostly about open marriages and cheating, and not polyfidelity.
Finally, at gonzotimes.com, Alexis offered an introduction to the world of polyamory...
To use the most inclusive definition, polyamory – often shortened to ‘poly’ – is “ethical consensual nonmonogamy”. More specifically, it’s typically used to describe multiple romantic relationships; and it’s contrasted with swinging, which typically involves having multiple sexual relationships (often in the presence of emotional monogamy). However, polyamory is not ‘cheating’: ‘cheating’ involves breaking rules, and by the definition given above, polyamory only describes situations in which all involved have actively consented to the arrangement.
Polyamory Rising
Thanks in no small part to the Browns and their TLC television show, "Sister Wives," awareness of consensual polygamy (especially plural marriages) is increasing. The same goes for the Showtime's Polyamory show. Both shows and related media and discussion will contribute to relationship rights for poly people, including the freedom to marry and, ultimately, full marriage equality.
The Browns lead a forum at UNLV, prompting some news coverage. Here's a report from Paul Takahashi at lasvegassun.com...
That was just one of the examples of how they're opening minds. Good for them! The newspaper also included an edited version of question-and-answer session, and you should click through to read it...
It is sad that people feel pressured to hide their marriages.
Finally, at gonzotimes.com, Alexis offered an introduction to the world of polyamory...
The Browns lead a forum at UNLV, prompting some news coverage. Here's a report from Paul Takahashi at lasvegassun.com...
Kody Brown, center, is flanked by two of his four ‘Sister Wives,” Christine, at left, and Meri, at right.
There are more than 850 societies around the world that practice polygamy, and an estimated 30,000 or more plural families living in the United States, Blumer said. However, because of a negative cultural stigma and legal concerns, most plural families live largely in secrecy.How ridiculous it is that people perpetuate such bigotry.
When the Brown family came out to their monogamous friends relatives some 20 years ago, it strained relationships and broke some bonds.
The Browns also suffered repercussions when their family made national headlines after "Sister Wives" first aired. Meri lost her job, Kody lost a couple of advertising clients and Robyn had a difficult time finding work.
For a couple of years, the family also faced legal prosecution.
The Browns also shared their views of what it means to be a feminist in a plural marriage and how they empathize with proponents for gay marriage.Good or them for expressing and promoting solidarity!
"I believe that I was able to choose our family structure," Kody Brown said. "It should be the right of every citizen in this country to be able to choose their family structure."
The family also shared the decision to come out about their plural marriage.
"I felt like there were so many stereotypes about plural marriages," Kody Brown said. "When I talked with my children about doing the show, I said we have an opportunity to not only change our world, but to change the world for everyone else."
Las Vegas resident Tracy Enriquez, 47, watches "Sister Wives" regularly and said the show changed her views on plural marriage. Seeing the family in person solidified her views, she said.
"At first, I thought it was crazy, but when I saw how much they love each other, it kind of changed my views," she said. "If they don't force people into their lifestyle, I don't see anything wrong with it. I respect them."
That was just one of the examples of how they're opening minds. Good for them! The newspaper also included an edited version of question-and-answer session, and you should click through to read it...
Are most people out like you are?
Kody: Almost all of our friends who are in plural marriage are closeted to some level. People are careful not to flaunt it, even in small and remote towns.
It is sad that people feel pressured to hide their marriages.
What are your views of patriarchy and feminism? Polygamy is often seen as a patriarchy and bad for women.Clearly, these are women who make up their own minds.
Janelle: Patriarchy has a very negative connotation for me. It's true that Kody is the glue that holds us together, but I definitely have my voice. I feel very liberated. I have a career, my independence and freedom. I've never had to stay at home with sick kids or worry too much about what's for dinner. I can have my cake, and eat it too.
Meri: I agree. I've become so independent in some ways.
Christine, a homemaker: I feel our family is very patriarchal, but it's exactly what I wanted. I just want to be a princess in life.
There are negative stereotypes about polygamy. How are you different from Warren Jeffs and FLDS?Although the Browns prefer their marital construct be referred to as plural marriage, like all consensual polygamy, I consider it form of polyamory. Kathy Labriola has written about "The Polyamorous Couple Next Door" at twodaymag.com. Here's Part 1...
Kody: We are Fundamentalist Mormons, not the LDS or FLDS. Jeffs – who was the leader of the FLDS – built up a fiefdom around him. He took the voice away from his wives and children. My belief is that my wives should have their voice and should be able to make choices. As a family, we make choices together.
Janelle: I was able to choose my family. In some Mormon sects, marriages are arranged. In our community, we don't assign spouses. We also wait to get married after we turn 18 years old. The only common thing is we worship from the same scripture as the LDS.
Christine: We also have access to the outside world, the Internet and TV. We want the world for our children, for them to go to college and travel.
Meri: I recently ran a 5K in Utah to get people out of the FLDS. (Audience applauds.)
Janelle: Secrecy is bad, because it allowed people like Warren Jeffs to abuse. That abuse persists, because people were more afraid of the government than Jeffs.
Kody: We're don't mean to criticize the FLDS. That is a community that needs our empathy and support. We can save our criticism for their leadership.
There may be married couples right on your block, or even next door to you, who are in an open or polyamorous relationship without anyone outside the family being aware of it. In fact, it has been impossible for researchers to estimate how many couples practice some form of non-monogamy because the vast majority of these couples are very careful to keep their lifestyle secret.She goes on to give some examples of people involved in these relationships. And here is Part 2.
As a counselor in private practice, I get calls every day from married couples all over the country who have made an agreement to allow each other to have outside sexual or romantic relationships. The usual reasons they give for keeping this from their families, friends, and co-workers? Fears of their children being taken away from them, being ostracized by family members, being rejected by their friends, or losing their jobs. These fears are usually at least partially based on reality, as many couples have experienced negative consequences when they “came out of the closet” or if others accidentally found out about their open marriage.
My experience counseling couples has convinced me of one thing regardless of whether your marriage is explicitly monogamous or polyamorous: If your relationship is strong, stable, and happy, your spouse is unlikely to leave you for someone else, even if they have outside partners. People generally leave their marriages because they are unhappy, not because they have another lover.Turns out that she wrote mostly about open marriages and cheating, and not polyfidelity.
Finally, at gonzotimes.com, Alexis offered an introduction to the world of polyamory...
To use the most inclusive definition, polyamory – often shortened to ‘poly’ – is “ethical consensual nonmonogamy”. More specifically, it’s typically used to describe multiple romantic relationships; and it’s contrasted with swinging, which typically involves having multiple sexual relationships (often in the presence of emotional monogamy). However, polyamory is not ‘cheating’: ‘cheating’ involves breaking rules, and by the definition given above, polyamory only describes situations in which all involved have actively consented to the arrangement.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
A Place to Talk
Lately, it seems that I can't let a week go by without posting something from Kindred Spirits, which I consider the best forum to discuss consanguinamory. If there is a better one, I'm not aware of it.
Here is something a woman in her 20s. I have edited the typing errors. She wrote about her relationship with her brother, which didn't involve sex until they were adults, the trouble she got from one of their siblings who has some suspicions, and finding the forum...
Most psychologists say that it’s the genetic thing or mental illness or like a girl I know that’s gone back to sharing a house (as she said) with her dad when her marriage broke up after 5 years. But what we had wasn’t that. On one of the sites there were a few postings that sounded a bit like us... normal. In a few cases there was a posting about a sister and brother who loved each other. Other posters tried to get her to talk about times, places, who did what. Etc.... but all she kept posting was that she loved him (brother) in one of her postings there was the name of this site. I still don’t fully understand most of my feelings. And don’t talk about it with anyone... esp. not friends.It's great that there is a place for siblings, parents and their adult children, aunts, uncles, nieces, and nephews, and even cousins to talk about their romantic, sexual, or spousal relationships among friends, supporters, and people who know what they are going through. If you sign up for the forum, be sure to read and follow the rules or you won't last very long.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Dexter Inspires More Talk About Television Siblings
As we noted around the turn of the year, the television show "Dexter" has a plotline of interest to this blog. Over at pajiba.com, Dustin Rowles lists "5 TV Siblings Better Suited to Incest Plotlines than Dexter and Debra Morgan."
Have you noticed, folks? Incest is all the rage on the television these days. It’s been a major plot point in shows like “The Borgias,” “Game of Thrones,” “Boardwalk Empire,” and even the last season of a comedy, “Bored to Death.” It came out of left field at the end of last season’s “Dexter,” and it’s still bubbling beneath the surface of Dexter and Debra’s current television relationship. Will they, or won’t they?Many adopted siblings, stepsiblings, half-siblings, and full-blood siblings (long lost or raised together) explore and experiment, or have lifelong spousal relationships, or having something between. Why shouldn't television reflect that reality?
One couple on the list?
Dean and Sam Winchester (I can only imagine the amount of fan fic already devoted to this)I don't know about that. There is a lot!
Because of lingering prejudices and discrimination, including in the laws of many places, it can be handy plot device.
There were many comments left after this little list.
