Polyamory and death

I wonder how many of us who are, or have been, in poly or otherwise open relationships have lost spouses, nesting partners and or other significant partners to death? How did the grieving process progress when you had other partners, or past partners, in the mix? Were they a liability or an asset?

Those who came before

Heinlen of course. He was an inspiration and reading his book, Stranger in a Strange Land, was a game changer for me. It was one of my first inklings that maybe it was our culture, not me, that had the problem. But he was not the first. I am impressed by Émilie du Châtelet who practiced what we would now call polyamory in the first half of the 18th Century. She was a scientist, physicist and mathematician. Her work proved that energy equals mass times speed, squared. This contributed to the science behind Einstein's General Theory of Relativity. She had lovers with her husband's consent including Voltaire who lived in their summer house where she and they collaborated; intimately and scientifically in what was called the age of enlightenment.     

I am reading Wide Open

I am reading Wide Open, My Adventures in Polyamory, Open Marriage and Loving On My Own Terms by Gracie X. This book is the compelling memoir of Gracie X. It is very, very well written.
This may be the best of many, many books I have read about polyamory, though I see it as much more than a book about poly. To me Wide Open is a book about respect. Respect in this case means to me respecting and being true about who you and others are and building a life built around consent and workability that honors that. Respect also means living that life without shame despite what the shifting winds of nomativity cultures (and/or subcultures) may cast upon us.
The introduction is by Carol Queen. That alone would have sold me on the book. I had the wonderful privilege to meet Carol at a book signing awhile back and we had a delightful conversation.
Based on what I have read so far the narrative Wide Open tells a great truth. It resonates with my own narrative and what I have found to be true in my own life of over 60 years. Thank you Gracie X for writing this book. I hope I get to meet you some day.
Poly people, we need more real life memoirs like this!

The tender mercies of poly

My first wife died in a car accident 25 years ago. One of my former partners and her husband drove through the night to be there for my kids and I. As poly people we open our hearts so much to more people and the chances for for loss are increased; but we also have the love of more people to see us through. When this former partner had a heart attack and herself died, I was able to be there for her husband. We were family.

The important thing in relationships

I think the important thing in relationships is they work for the people in the relationships. All the people touched by the relationship(s) need be treated with integrity. This requires honesty & communications. Everything else, mono, poly, sexual, asexual, friendship, family, business associates and any other labels and circumstances are just details.

Review: The Game Changer: A Memoir of Disruptive Love by Franklin Veaux

I really enjoyed Franklin Veaux's memoir. It was well written and intelligent. I would like to see more memoirs like this. Veaux takes us trough his journey toward Polyamory. I think Veaux is like a lot of us who did not turn to poly as something to try, but found in poly a description of who they already are. The principle of the book is that all people in relationships have rights. This includes those we would call "secondaries." The concept of spouses/partners having veto rights over secondaries is hurtful and demeaning and I totally agree with Veaux. I am so glad to have found this book. It's exciting to see these kind of poly memoirs being published. Veaux makes the case for poly being more than just an alternative lifestyle choice. In this book Veaux makes the case for poly being a respectable relationship orientation. Thank you Veaux for writing this book.

Thinking Anarchist Thoughts

My sweet friend Dana is afraid that at some point my wife Sofia will pull the plug on our relationship. Dana feels like there is a sword of damocles hanging over her and that wonderful connection we have. So far Sofia consents and has accepted her presence in my life, and the fact that we love each other, but is becoming more hesitant about it as we get older. I have assured Sofia I love her and intend to spend the rest of my life with her.
I recently finished reading The Game Changer: A Memoir of Disruptive Love by Franklin Veaux. That book introduced me to the relationship's bill of rights. The first of these is "to be free from coercion, violence and intimidation."
This applies to all relationships, no matter how we categorize them. This led me down a different path. Dana and I love each other but we have not had sex in decades.
We live far apart and I stay with her for a day or two every couple of months. I have been thinking for years about how to categorize this relationship. It's physically tender and emotionally intimate. I call it a romantic friendship. She has called it an emotional affair. Frankly, I am tired of applying labels that do not stick so well.
I am sliding more and more toward Relationship Anarchy.
I have assured my sweetie that if anybody, including my wife, attempts to veto and/or otherwise coerce me from seeing her; I will not be so manipulated. It's not the label that matters it's the love we share no matter how it's expressed.
I identify as poly and have lived a poly lifestyle in the past, but not so much now. My wife and sweetie identify as mono. Now I am thinking, should I identify as a relationship anarchist?
What do you think?

Poly is NOT about sex

To me poly is NOT about sex. It can include sex, but does not have to. Asexuals can practice poly, and some do! Poly, to me, is about having the ability to have multiple romantic partners, people you love romantically with the consent of all parties involved. Love and sex are like milk and cookies, great together and pretty good on their own too.

Don't Ask Don't Tell

My first wife Cindy had a lover who was the husband of a couple who were also friends of ours. His wife was also named Cindy. They had a Don't Ask Don't Tell (DADT) arrangement. Having a wife and a lover with the same name must have been very convenient for him.
It was so awkward for my Cindy and I though. My Cindy and he, my girlfriend Mary and I would go fun double dates.
But, it felt icky to me like we were sneaking around. His Cindy knew he was seeing someone else but not that that someone else was my Cindy. I considered his Cindy as a friend. I left it for them (he and the two Cindys) to work out and it didn't last long. We went separate ways.
I prefer to be open and for all parties to know. I do not like DADT. But, what if your metamour is in a DADT and that's fine with your partner?

In defense of (some) cheaters

Around 1990 Morning Glory Zell-Ravenheart coined the word "polyamory" but people were wired for non-monogamy long before that. Read Sex At Dawn…
Ethical non-monogamy is a relatively new concept as an acceptable lifestyle (among a minority of people.) I believe there are still a lot of people who do not yet know there are ethical alternatives to cheating and are torn between their non-monogamous nature and cultural expectations. I went through cycles of cheating and self loathing before my enlightenment.

Our Boundary

I met Sofia, a woman I am crazy about. I married her. Then later in life when I learned about poly and looked back on my past of living a poly lifestyle with Mary and Cindy and learning about poly more I realized being poly is something I am.

Sofia and I talked about it, explored it, she realized she is firmly monogamous. I love her so much I decided I did not want to lose her. We worked it out. I can't be monogamous with my heart but I can with my dick. And, so I am. Every day I wake up with the knowledge that it is worth it. Sofia, is worth it. But, I do love other women. Sofia knows it, so does Dana, that's our boundary and it seems to be holding.

I still self identify as poly. Sexually mono; by choice due to circumstances, romantically and emotionally poly. At least today.

Advice - should I tell him I'm poly?

First I hope you bring it up. But, be prepared for this, it will likely never be the same between you two after you do.

Even if he says no, hell no. He may not trust you around male friends again. You gotta be prepared for that.

You gotta ask yourself some questions: Is that a price I am willing to pay for being honest about who I am? If he says no, hell no, will I want to stay in my marriage? Being poly and living a poly lifestyle are two sides of the same coin. If he says no, hell no, will at least being honest about my relationship orientation and desires be enough if I don't get to live it?

On the other hand, if you don't ask, he will never have the opportunity to say yes.

My Life on the Swingset: Review

Last night Cooper S. Beckett signed my Kindle. Cooper was at Good Vibrations on Polk Street in San Francisco reading excerpts from his book, My Life on the Swingset. I read this book shortly after it came out and I have heard Beckett on the Swingset Podcast, and other podcasts, I have listened to.

Beckett did not look like I pictured him. Of course not! Mostly, that's why I went, driving over 120 miles in order to put a face to the voice, to the book. He looked like someone I could sit down and have a beer with. I didn't expect that. I hope my questions did not sound too inane.

About the book - I really liked Beckett's book, way more than I expected to. I told him that. He said that's what he likes most to hear.

What I didn't expect was the spirituality angle toward the end of his book. I see that too in the sex positive movement. To me it is spiritual, and so much more.

What we call sex positivity; in my opinion it's not just about sex, or love, or even spirituality. It's a liberation movement, in my opinion. It's a movement that set me free from my own guilt, shame and regret I felt over my own past, over my own non-monogamy, over my own passion, love, guilt, jealousy, possessiveness and insecurity over my humanity.

Sex, passion, love, emotion (yea, I am poly); all of these are part of what we call being human. This is how we bond, how we communicate. The powers of oppression have a stake in making us feel guilt, shame and regret over our own humanity. That's how they get Kansans to vote those to power folks against the interest of Kansans. Their message is, you are a perv, vote for us and we can give you salvation. They know, being a perv is being human. Knowing that, and manipulating that, is an evil act. Knowing that, and accepting that, and celebrating that, is a super power. 

Free people to be human, to love who they love, to have sex bound only by consent, free people from guilt and shame and you cannot control them. This, in my mind, is the sleeper liberation movement of the 21st century. In my opinion, this is what the sex positive movement does. I think Beckett gets that. This is such an exciting time to be alive and Beckett's book is part of that wave.

This's is why I think Beckett's book is so good, it's important. It's not just a book about swinging, this is a book about being free to experience the human experience in its totality and bliss.

This book is about freedom for me, freedom to be authentic to our human sometimes pervy nature. Freedom to connect just the way we are, now that's spiritual! That's exactly why we often say "oh God" just as we slip into orgasm... 

Looking forward to marriage

Palo Alto Window

A little data to put this in context:

• About half of all marriages end in divorce.
• A recent study suggests that when you test for all kinds of non-monogamy (cheating and/or consensual) (emotional and/or sexual) relationships around 70 percent of all marriages are non-monogamous to some degree at least at some point.
• In 1948 the Kinsey report found about half of all married men have had sex outside their marriage. Since then women, statistically, have caught up.

Marriage is changing, and has been for a while. It’s not that folks are making a mockery of marriage; it's that marriage itself is being redefined. It’s a cultural thing. It's not about the decline of "traditional values." You can blame it on equal rights, or no-fault divorce laws, or birth control, or porn, or the Internet. The fact is it’s all of these and none of these and really it's so much more! It's about freedom, freedom and responsibility to define your relationships.

Just as we have banned slavery we have freed people in marriage. Remember, it was just 50 years ago that the last laws against interracial marriage were overturned in our country. Couples can choose to define roles in their relationships based on "traditional values." But, it is increasingly not the default.

About 10 percent of all people are gay and same sex marriage is legal and also not traditional. Same sex couples have also been freed to marry, despite traditions and laws that in the past were to the contrary. Traditional marriage is on the way out. Marriage has changed.

What is marriage becoming? Marriage is and is becoming more and more a conversation. Marriage is and is becoming an ongoing conversation about mutually compatible wants, expectations and boundaries that may evolve during a marriage. That conversation can last the entire marriage; changing and evolving. This conversation includes not just who does the dishes, laundry, childcare and who works at what employment. Increasingly the conversation about mutually compatible wants, expectations and boundaries has come to include monogamy/non-monogamy.

I have known a lot of couples; some same sex, some interracial, some nudist, some open sexually and/or emotionally, and yes; some very very traditional and monogamous. Some are happy and some are not. The common thread I have found is that people get along, communicate and are dedicated, in their own way, to their marriage.

I am thinking of some swingers I have met. They have a good marriage, get along great and enjoy going to swinging venues and doing what they enjoy doing. It's what they do. They enjoy doing it. What's wrong with that?

I think all people are entitled to define their own lives and personal relationship styles. I think people are better off doing what they are inclined to do. If a person is not inclined toward monogamy, what's wrong with them marrying someone who at least accepts their inclination, or maybe is similarly inclined?

So, what is “traditional” anyway? Is traditional the same as normal? If statistically around 70 percent of all marriages are non-monogamous some way at least at some point, is the normal a sort of quasi-monogamy? Is being normal being kinda monogamish?

I think that Christopher Ryan was correct when he said that monogamy is like vegetarianism. It may be desirable and we may really want to live it, but that doesn't stop bacon from smelling really good!

Multiamory

I think it’s time to consider a new term. I cringe at the thought of yet another term; because in the sex positive culture I love, we have so many terms to decode and keep up with that it’s hard to know how to correctly express ideas and feelings at times. The twist is, this is not about sex. This is about emotions. This is about feelings. This is about love.

This is my opinion:

There is currently the word polyamory. As a noun it is recognized as meaning the state or practice of having more than one open romantic relationship at a time. In other words, under this definition, polyamory means a lifestyle, that often is assumed to include sex as well as emotional attachment with multiple partners.
For many of us "poly" is defined as being something else too. Folks are recognizing that some of us are incapable of being romantically attached to just one person over a long period at a time. We commonly say we are “wired poly.”
Being "wired" implies a (relationship) orientation. Orientations are facts. Facts are facts, feelings are feelings, no matter what the responding lifestyle is, no matter whether they are ethical or not and that may or may not include sex. Of course this does not absolve people of responsibility for their actions. It may provide context however.
As someone who is pushing 60 I can assure you this "poly wiring" did not kick in 20 years-ish ago when Morning Glory Zell coined the word polyamory. Before the 1990s kicked in, wired poly folks usually either cheated or stuffed it; or both. Many, maybe most, still do. Rarely then were folks able to live a poly lifestyle.
The problem is many folks do not consider folks who are “wired poly” cheaters or “wired poly” stuffers as poly people. Therefore I propose a new term for “wired poly” people.

Multiamory - an orientation that reflects the involuntary inability of a "multiamorous" person to be romantically emotionally attached to just one person over a long period at a time, no matter what their lifestyle either romantically or sexually. Multiamory, as used here, is not a synonym of polyamory. But it is a synonym of the term "wired poly."

Here are some of the possible expressions of mutltiamory. Remember, the focus here is on emotional "romantic" attachment, not sex. Since this about orientation open consent cannot be a defining factor:

Multiamory

A multiamorous person in a romantic situation with one or more other multiamorous persons that's like an open polyamorous lifestyle that may, or may not, include sex on the part of some or all of the people involved where both parties have romantically intimate emotional attachments outside the arrangement.

Multi-monoamory

A multiamorous person in a relationship with an emotionally monogamous (monoamory?) person. Examples can include a traditional monogamous relationship, in all sexual aspects, relationship where one person has but does not act on intense romantic feelings outside the relationship. It can also include "swingers" who are both open sexually, where only one person has romantic emotional attachments outside the arrangement that the one person keeps to themselves.

Multi-cheater

A multiamorous person living an emotionally monogamous (monoamory) lifestyle, but with one or both parties having secret romantic loves that are more than crushes, and that may or may not include sex. This, as an example, is often called "an emotional affair."