Polyamory activism

The heart of activism is going to bat for an idea larger than yourself, knowing that through your boldness you can change the world for the better, educate, make someone else's life easier, contribute to the evolution of a government, minority or cause because you feel the issues and people involved are misunderstood or undervalued.

very well said Rarechild! You think things out well and then articulate them well. I admire that.

-sorry, catching up on this thread.... some good stuff in here!
 
uh, wasn't it more "open" in relationship style, rather than "poly?"

:p
A lot of hippies had the concept of "we only have sex with people we love and we love everyone" this is similar to a lot of poly aproaches I have been exposed to. The word love is used very lightly in alot of cases we see. We both know that love is not a requirement in intimacy for a lot of those around us.
 
I bet we've touched a lot of lives on here, whether we know it or not. Perhaps it's the simplest form of activism there is? Maybe we can invoke a quiet poly revolution?

Coming from a somewhat activist background I have to admit I have lost my energy for this one (poly activism that is).... I go to our local Pride Parade every year and have done so since the very first one 14 years ago. I go now to find my community all together and celebrating difference. Back in the day it was from an activist stance as we were yelled at and things thrown at us. Back then it was a 100 or more people. This past summer it was over 10,000 queer friendly people! That is about the same size as the town I grew up in! I weep to think of the change I have participated in. I thought it so small at the time, and it was, but just by being me and being strong in my convictions that the life I lead was a positive one I helped make that change. I don't for one second think that just because I am not out there asserting my rights by yelling and holding banners that I am not making a difference. Even if people don't agree with me, and I am sure there are many, I still make a difference in creating a way for them to decide that they disagree with me.
 
People don't go from gay-basher to tolerant because of an activist campaign. They meet someone who they respect and admire as a person, find out they're gay and realize the error of their ways. Or not

Agreed! Of course I didn't know that back then and there was strength in numbers and at least people saw we existed... besides, one doesn't have to be marching to be an activist. I think I always will be an activist.

You are right though, I made the most difference by knowing people and them experiencing my differences.
 
You are right though, I made the most difference by knowing people and them experiencing my differences.

This is the way I have found most beneficial in getting to know people from differing cultures and backgrounds. It brings in the human factor where we realize that we are all very similar in so many ways.
 
Every one has valued points in this for sure. I respect that.

I am just going to accept that I just enjoy my life and don't want or expect anything beyond simply sharing love. I can work that into societal norms and if individuals don't like how I live my life they won't be included into it.

I'm very black and white; Your in or out, accept or don't, I'd love to get to know you, but if I don't it will have little on my happiness.

This isn't about staying in the closet..I'm certainly not. It's about not feeling that I am in a closet at all..that is where the self generated isolation comes from. Just be proud and happy.

This also isn't about sitting back and letting others pave a path for me. I'm not on anyones path but my own and Redpepper's. I don't care what group I get lumped into because of the dynamic in my love life. I'm in my own group, the only paving that happens on my path is done with the people in my life.

Politics and movements just aren't my thing...I'm bowing out on this one.

This is exactly what I think we are talking about Mono. We live our life to the best of our ability and this in itself makes a difference. Whether we intend it to or not... if you really didn't care you wouldn't be on this forum no?
 
if you really didn't care you wouldn't be on this forum no?


You're right..I just get sidetracked from focussing on the positives I can contribute and dwelling on the negatives. I have some transitional anger issues to deal with. Be patient.
 
" I have some transitional anger issues to deal with. Be patient." mono.
Oh I am baby. I love you endlessly regardless. You know that. Just reminding :)
 
The first step of activism is to be noticed in a social setting. Let "normal" people see people of your group as "real people." I have seen this over and over. Like a racist person will start accepting a person of a different color once they know them on a personal level. Or a homophobic parent may become more tolerant when their child comes out in the open.

I think polyamory is in this stage, where we are being noticed by society. Hopefully, society will not see our lifestyle as a threat and our rights will grow. It will also grow as an outgrowth of gay and secular rights.

So I see a lot of local activism just by coming out poly. We still have need for more national and international activism, but I think the biggest changes come from the combined local activism.
 
I'm curious what specific rights we are looking for?
I guess the big rights are mostly marriage/family rights that gays have been fighting for. They could all be summed up into making polygamy legal. However, the rights will be added piecemeal probably. So the major rights that we could use that comes from marriage are

1) Kids should not be taken just because someone lives with multiple lovers.
2) Ability to visit partners in a hospital.
3) Insurance benefits apply to loved ones.
4) Tax benefits.

Beyond that, make polyamory not a reason that a person can be fired from a job.
 
1) Kids should not be taken just because someone lives with multiple lovers.
2) Ability to visit partners in a hospital.
3) Insurance benefits apply to loved ones.
4) Tax benefits.

Beyond that, make polyamory not a reason that a person can be fired from a job.

How would we define what a valid polyamorous relationship would be for these rights? Would it be a period of time like common law marriages, vows, and a legal agreement?

My concern is that the fluid and sometimes brief duration of poly relationships would make it very hard to substantiate granting these rights. Polygamy is a binding approach to relationships which society can at least accept for that. Gay marriage is still between two individuals that also are offering a lifelong commitment at least on paper, which again society understands. Poly prides itself on fluidness and non-binding approaches.

Is there a criteria you have in mind?
This is not an argument but genuine curiosity.
 
I see it as an evolving process. The basic idea would be that if some group of people wanted to forma family, they could sign some legal contracts to make it official. It could be three lovers. Or it could be a woman, her aunt and her child. Or any group of people that believe they are going to be together long enough to want to go through the legalities. (Let the marriage ceremony or family agreement ceremony be something deparate and up to culture or individual preference.)

Down the road, I could see standard "family agreement" packages. Like a 7 year marriage contract. Or polyfidelity long term contract. Or any other arrangement that is standard enough that lawyers can draw up some standard agreements.

There are always to end the contract early, but the people in it are protected from some of the risk they took. So you would have similar concepts to alimony or child support for breking the contract early.

So while I see polyamory as being relatively fluid in relationship status, many legal arrangements are based on assuming that the partner will be there long term. That allows for one person to quit working to raise a kid. Or allows for some people to pool their money to send one of them to college.

So those who do not feel they can commit to a period of time together, they should not enter into such an agreement.

The common law issue is very interesting. It is designed to protect people who adopt a relationship where marriage rights are to be assumed. However, with polyamory, it is hard to guess what relationship they should be assigned since there are so many options. I am divided on whether common law marriage should go away. So I will pass on speculating on that for now.

Lots of stuff to think on.
 
The basic idea would be that if some group of people wanted to forma family, they could sign some legal contracts to make it official. It could be three lovers. Or it could be a woman, her aunt and her child. Or any group of people that believe they are going to be together long enough to want to go through the legalities. (Let the marriage ceremony or family agreement ceremony be something deparate and up to culture or individual preference.)

Down the road, I could see standard "family agreement" packages. Like a 7 year marriage contract. .

This almost sounds like a "family freedom" approach, regardless of the love dynamics. I think this may be a more acceptable approach to mainstream society and doesn't directly strike any fundamentalist cords. This would be a good start I think.

We are not asking anyone to accept and recognize polyamory directly, but representing the freedom to form families of various natures. As long as the rights and health of possible children are addressed and the administration is manageable, the arguments against such an approach would lose a lot of weight.

hmmm...more thinking indeed.
 
I'm not sure how I will feel about poly marriage as an issue five, ten, or twenty years down the road, but right now it is pretty irrelevant, I think.

Why?

Because you don't ask for the moon first. First, you ask for the smaller, simpler items.

Examples:

~ equal treatment in child custody (poly parents shouldn't lose custody simply because
of his/her polyamorous lovestyle.

~ hospital visitation rights

~ non-discrimination in employment and housing


Tax and insurance benefits/issues are also for a future time--if ever--, not our moment. What we need, first, is to be otherwise treated as valid people in valid relationships. But we're nowhere near the historical point of unfoldment in which we should be demanding, or even requesting, to have our relationships be treated as comparable to marriage under the law.

Consider how daunting the whole question is! How many people should be allowed to legally marry one another and thereby have all of the legal consequences of marriage? How could society adjust and adapt to a legal system with, say, 10 person marriages? (That would be a huge bureaucratic technical problem to solve!)

We've got to win some easier issues and then see where we want to take it from there. Why not start with pushing for legislation which protects poly parent child custody?
 
1) Kids should not be taken just because someone lives with multiple lovers.
2) Ability to visit partners in a hospital.
3) Insurance benefits apply to loved ones.
4) Tax benefits.

Beyond that, make polyamory not a reason that a person can be fired from a job.

I agree with everything with the exclusion of health care rights. This is just me thinking on a realistic level. As it is, fewer and fewer companies (in the US) offer health insurance benefits. If I were an employer and was asked to provide insurance to not only my worker and his/her spouse and child(ren), but also to two or three or more other spouses who do not work for my company, I'd scoff at the notion. I just don't think it's fair. Gay marriage is different in that it is still a one-on-one commitment asking for the same rights as a male-female union. It's just an extension of legal rights to the gay community through legal bonds. Polygamy rights as far as health coverage take it to a whole new, and I think unfair for employers, level.
The rest you discussed is more personal and family right oriented, for example hospital visits. I can make more sense of that in my own head. They are more family oriented and personal rights and freedoms oriented. No one has to pay out for these rights to be granted, so there isn't a reason to oppose them IMO.
 
Why not start with pushing for legislation which protects poly parent child custody?

That is a very good start!

I've caught a glimpse of disapproval towards my relationship in regards to Redpepper's son seeing even the most innocent of affection between us. I usually ignore any exploration of this topic with the openly disaproving as I know I can become emotionaly charged. I don't have a lot of buttons to push, but the ones I have are big and I can go on the offensive which I know leads to more negativity.
 
Close to home

The first step of activism is to be noticed in a social setting. Let "normal" people see people of your group as "real people." I have seen this over and over. Like a racist person will start accepting a person of a different color once they know them on a personal level. Or a homophobic parent may become more tolerant when their child comes out in the open.

I agree that many times prejudice and discrimination is conquered when a person is able to experience it through the eyes of someone they care about.

I am thinking of a story about a woman who adopted an African child, and her father, who had always been racist, finally came to terms with his prejudice when he witnessed his new grandchild being treated unfairly by others at an airport. It was a really powerful story.
The father told his daughter, in tears, that he had never realized how ugly his racism was until he saw it through the eyes of his grandson.
 
Back
Top