Translate

Wednesday, April 29, 2015

More Marriages

At mbhs.edu Nicholas Shereiki wrote "An in-depth look at why we should legalize polygamy."
The big issue here is that the reasoning behind outlawing polygamy is flawed. Polygamy is illegal because, essentially, people find it morally abhorrent or unnatural.
Some people do invoke Discredited Arguments 4 and 5.
From a biological perspective, our commitment to monogamy as a species is questionable. Out of the roughly 5,000 species of mammal, only three to five percent are monogamous - and of those, most commit so intensely to their partner that they will not mate again even if their mate is killed. The human commitment to monogamy is nowhere near as serious, as evidenced by the number of people who remarry after divorce or a spouse's death.
Very few people have only one spouse or partner over their lifetime.
Yet in the United States, monogamy is enforced by law with criminal adultery statutes, laws against bigamy and child custody laws. While prosecutions pertaining to violations of these laws are rare, statutory penalties against these crimes range from two years' imprisonment to commitment for treatment of insanity.
Bigamy should only be a crime if done as a fraud. Having multiple spouses who have agreed to the situation should not be a crime. It should be legalized. There is no good reason to deny that an adult, regardless of orientation, gender, race, or religion, should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage (and any of those without the others) with any and all consenting adults, without prosecution, bullying, or discrimination. Let's keep the momentum going.


The writer make several references to the same-gender freedom to marry and cites an opinion from a gay writer. It is important to note that, just like everyone else, there are LGBT people who are polyamorous or polygamous, some who aren't but support the polygamous freedom to marry, and some who are against the polygamous freedom to marry.



Lies and Damned Lies About Polygamy
— — —

Monday, April 27, 2015

Will the U.S. Supreme Court Rule For Nationwide Equality?


On Tuesday, April 27, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments about several cases involving marriage laws. Here are some facts about this.

The Court has received many written arguments. What they will be hearing are oral arguments, which they can challenge and interrupt. A decision will not be made public until June.

What it boils down to is that many federal courts have told states they 1) must stop denying the limited monogamous freedom to marry to same-gender couples, and they 2) have to recognize such marriages legally entered into in other states. Some states have appealed those rulings to the Supreme Court.

There are different decisions the Court could make.

The worst-case scenario that is within the realm of possibility is that the Court will say that states may continue to have laws that deny this freedom to marry and deny recognition of such marriages entered into elsewhere. This is not likely.

It is very likely that progress will be made at the Court. The question really is how much progress. It would be a dream come true to see the Court rule for the nationwide right to full marriage equality. We should finally make it clear that an adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion, is free to marry any and all consenting adults.

That, however, is a longshot. The next best thing, and it is far more likely to happen, is for the court to rule that there is a nationwide right to the limited monogamous same-gender freedom to marry, and to do so in a way that will allow full marriage equality to be implemented within a few years.

Lawrence vs. Texas was decided in 2003, which struck down laws against "sodomy." Here, twelve years later, people in relationships that used to be criminalized may get their right to marry. So progress is being made, and it is being made faster and faster, thankfully.

People are being hurt as a result of being denied their rights. The Court can help end that. There is no good reason they shouldn't. Let's stand up for the rights of all!


See The US Supreme Court Should Rule For Equality










— — —

Saturday, April 25, 2015

A Longtime Marriage Denied Equal Treatment Under the Law

If my recollection is correct, this is the 45th ongoing relationship I've covered through exclusive interviews in which the lovers are denied the freedom to be open about their love and are, by law, denied the freedom to marry and have that marriage treated equally under the law.

The woman interviewed below is a mature professional who should be free to decide for herself  whether or not to legally marry another consenting adult, and who that person or persons will be. Yet she and her lover face discrimination and prejudice for their love, and must hide the truth from many people. They aren't hurting anyone; why should they have to hide their love and be denied their rights?
Read the interview below and see for yourself what this woman has to say. You may think this relationship is interesting, or it might make you uncomfortable, or you might find it incredibly sexy, but whatever your reaction, should these lovers be denied equal access to marriage or any other rights?

BE WARNED that the discussion briefly gets slightly explicit.



*****


FULL MARRIAGE EQUALITY: Describe yourself.

Anonymous Woman: I am 65 years old live in the New England area. I am 100% Italian and have some college education. I have one sister and only one son who is 43 now. I live a normal life. Still working in a small doctors office where my life is private. I live with my son.

— — —

Friday, April 24, 2015

Why Not Solidarity?

Here's an older entry on the blog that is still relevant, so I'm bumping it up.

Here’s a question that touches on prejudices and solidarity as they relate to marriage equality.

How come the right to marrige fight only includes gay marriage and does not include the right for bisexuals to marry both sexes, or adult incest marriage and even more so polygamy? It obviously is not about the right to marry, so why do we lie.

I am here, fighting for full marriage equality. But it is true that there are people who only want the freedom to marry extended in a way that benefits just them or their friends. You’re right; they aren’t really fighting for the right to marry or for marriage equality, just their own freedom to marry. But there are others who fight for full marriage equality.

The question got some responses.

Mike Jones says…

Equality marriage is not about marriage equality at all. It is about promoting the gay agenda and they do not support bisexual or trans gender issues either.

The “gay agenda” - ? – You mean, like going to work, paying taxes? But even Mike can see that others are being thrown under the bus.

A polygamy according to them, should have the right to marry all that he loves and the mother of all of his children. An adult incest couple should have the right to consummate their love inmarriage, both father adn daughter and mother and son. This is all under the equality marriage banner, but they dare only raise their gay flag.

We do need solidarity. Even if someone can not tell us what "a polygamy" is.

Smooth T says…

Simply because polygamy is not our fight and neither is incest.

I see. So Martin Luther King, Jr. should have only asked for civil rights for African-Americans, not Asian-Americans or Latinos?

Incest is disgusting and it’s A FAMILY LINE THAT SHOULD NEVER BE CROSSED

Some people say that about two men having sex. You don’t have to like it to recognize that consenting adults should have their rights.

polygamy is just a patriarchal thing that puts the woman as a slave to her husband and isn’t beneficial for anyone but the man.

That would be your concept of polygyny. Full marriage equality would also allow polyandry and group marriage, and again, what consenting adults do in private should not be subject to the prejudices of others.

Alexis says…

Bisexuals *already* have the right to marry someone of the opposite sex, just not the same sex.

They should have both.

Second, incestuous and polygamous marriages being denied is not a violation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. I’m not even necessarily saying that I have a problem with them being allowed, but it’s simply not a matter of Constitutional law being broken. Denying same-sexcouples the right to marry, on the other hand, *is*.

Why is that so? Merely stating that doesn’t make it true. I’m still waiting for a good reason.

Wolfie says…

Incest marriage is self-destructive and goes against how families work.

No proof is offered, just an assertion.

Nothing wrong with Polygamy, if it is regulated and everyone is treated equally.

Well at least Wolfie is open to that.

In discussion after discussion, we fail to see a good reason why the freedom to marry should be extended to some, but not all adults. Get on the right side of history and support relationship rights for ALL adults! Support these lovers and so many others. Here's how.
— — —

Thursday, April 23, 2015

Another Couple Denied the Freedom to Marry

If my recollection is correct, this is the 44th ongoing relationship I've covered through exclusive interviews in which the lovers are denied the freedom to be open about their love and are, by law, denied the freedom to marry and have that marriage treated equally under the law.

The man interviewed below is college-educated and clearly able to make decisions for himself. He should be free to decide for himself if he should marry another consenting adult. Yet he and his lover face discrimination and prejudice for their love, and must hide the truth from many people. They aren't hurting anyone; why should they have to hide their love and be denied their rights?


Read the interview below and see for yourself what "Steve" has to say. You may think his relationship is interesting, or it might make you uncomfortable, or you might find it incredibly sexy, but whatever your reaction, should these lover be denied equal access to marriage or any other rights?


*****


FULL MARRIAGE EQUALITY: Describe yourself.

Steve: I am currently a senior in college about to graduate. I attend school and reside in a nice apartment in a major city in the northeastern U.S. My ethnic background is white, being half Italian and half Jewish. I have a medium frame and, overall I’d say I’m pretty average looking. I enjoy sports, having participated in a lot of them throughout high school and college. I come from a middle-class family consisting of my dad, mom and a younger brother.

— — —

Saturday, April 18, 2015

Slow News Day in Ghana

Daniel Russell at pulse.com.gh reports...
A chief in Central Region of Ghana is said to have committed a incestuous act of sex with a mother and her daughter.
That is not incestuous. Not in the literal sense, anyway, as we'll see.
The chief in the Central Region is alleged to have had sex separately with a 55 -year old woman and her 37- year old daughter.
Why is this news?
Nana Wiredu III of Asiam is said to have admitted the offence but refused to perform rituals to pacify the gods for what is considered an abomination.
It's an offense? According to whom? Which religion are we talking about? And "admitted" probably isn't the right word. He's probably bragging.
As a result, the daughter, Ama Afull claims her business is collapsing and she wants the chief to perform the rites in order to save her.
Hmm. There are many businesses that have thrived even as their owners have all sorts of sex.
Her mother, identified as Auntie Akua wants the matter swept under the carpet in order to save the family from disgrace.
It seems a little late for that.
Ama Afful says her mother has even threatened to disown her if she goes public with the matter.
But speaking with Nhyira FM’s Naa Amerley, she claims she is being haunted by the situation is thus, left with no option but to go public to force the chief to do what is right.
Has it worked yet?

Someone having sex with one person and then later that person's parent or adult child happens more than people might think. It happens when someone has sex with their mother of father-in-law, their daughter or son-in-law, when someone has sex with their adult stepchild, and when a genetic parent has sex with their adult genetic child, whether it was a situation involving Genetic Sexual Attraction or not. Sometimes it is a matter of  cheating, as in a secret affair, which can get very ugly. Other times, it isn't cheating because there is an agreement involving polyamory or some other form of ethical nonmonogamy (perhaps even in the context of swinging), or there is no (longer) an agreement to sexual exclusivity with the first lover. And sometimes, it is together and not separately, and some of those situation involve the parent and adult child being affectionate directly with each other.

The variety is nearly endless. Usually, there isn't a correlation to negative business performance.
— — —

Friday, April 17, 2015

Polyamory Isn't All About Sex

Because of recently increased interest in polyamory, I am bumping this entry up.

Robyn Trask, writing about being poly, asks, “What’s Sex Got To Do With It?”

American culture is challenged when it comes to sex and this generates much confusion. Sex is an important part of many romantic relationships but it is not the end all and be all. Sex has been equated with romantic love for centuries and, in more recent years, with monogamous marriage and commitment. Sex, love, romance and intimacy are not all the same thing and you can have one without the other.

Polyamory is more about romance and love than sex. The non-poly world just does not seem to get it; it’s not about the sex. Yes, poly relationships include sex but just like monogamous ones people are there for love, romance, intimacy and numerous other reasons. Sex is often an important component but it is not by any means the focus and sometimes it isn’t even there.

Those who don’t understand this will be mistaken about polyamory.

We would never tolerate our personal choices in work or where we live to be dictated by the neighbors or the government and yet, as a culture, we seek to control who a person loves, how they love, what sexual activities are accepted and even how many they can love. Why, one may ask, because of SEX. Gay marriage, gay relationships, bisexual relating, polyamorous relating all include sex and sex scares most people.

It is way past time to move beyond fear and towards equality.

We know people are able to love many people. Sex is one component of a vast array of ways in which people connect. Why is it so hard to make the leap that people who love someone deeply, are committed to that connection and have a sexual relationship could also love another person as well and in the same way. Human beings do it all the time, they have an affair, they go from one relationship to another, often overlapping, and they often still have strong feelings for past lovers.

I do think cheating, divorce, and family tensions would be greatly reduced if people were honest with themselves, honest with each other, and allowed to have the relationships that are best for them. When a spouse is getting everything they need from their spouse "but...," and they can find that "but" somewhere else by also providing something in return, doesn't everybody win? And lovers have an incentive to stop fighting and make up. When people avoid being lovers because of prejudice or unjust laws, the strife is increased and they have less incentive to end the strife.
— — —

Thursday, April 16, 2015

April 17 is the National Day of Silence in the US

GLSEN's National Day of Silence takes place tomorrow, Friday, April 17.

It's a day of silence, especially in schools, to bring awareness to the prejudice, inequality, and bullying suffered by LGBT people.

Along with all allies, I also think poly people and consanguinamorous people should participate.

Everyone should have the freedom to be themselves without being bullied. Every adult should have the right to share love, sex, residence, and marriage (or any of those without the others) with ANY and ALL consenting adults, without prosecution, bullying, or discrimination. Young people should be free to develop relationships, as appropriate for their age, with their peers without being forced into a narrow heteromonogamous paradigm. Transgender, genderfluid, and other students and faculty need to see that they are supported.

LGBT, poly, and consanguinamorous students and faculty still have to deal with hateful policies and attacks, but with your help, that will continue to change.
— — —

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

We Get Letters

"Somebody" left a comment that was somewhat explicit in talking about a few sexual encounters he had relevant to the topics of this blog. If you want the details they are here and below.

— — —

The US Supreme Court Should Rule for Equality

In June 2013, the US Supreme Court took baby steps forward towards full marriage equality. Since then, state and federal courts and the Obama Administration have been taking more steps forward. But there is still a long way to go and still wasteful resistance to progress.

There have been one or two bumps in the courtroom progress, but for the most part, the courts have been moving this issue forward.

The Court should consolidate and consider many federal cases now in the system. We want the US Supreme Court to make the best possible ruling, which is to recognize relationship rights, including full marriage equality, for all adults nationwide.

The Court should rule that…



An adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion, should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any and all consenting adults, without prosecution, harassment, or discrimination.


There are many reasons why the Court should do this.
— — —

Monday, April 13, 2015

Game of Thrones is Back

Do you like to watch? In case you don't know, there's an ongoing secret relationship between a sister and brother.

Here's something from moviepilot.com by about a "Controversial Incest Scene"...


— — —

Wednesday, April 8, 2015

When Celebutants Want to Make Waves

Themes and instances of consanguineous sex and consanguinamory have always been in our stories. You can see it in the classic Greek myths, you can find it in the Bible. Whether literature and theater that has been acclaimed and enduring, or modern erotica, consanguinamory has been there.

That’s because it has always been a part of life; not for everyone, but for many people. There has been everything from one-time recreational dalliances to lifelong passionate romances.


So it isn’t surprising when “reality” television stars joke about, tease, or mimic consanguineous sexuality.


Visibility is generally good. It generally moves things forward and lets people know they aren’t alone. It can be helpful even if it is used so shock or get publicity. It can be negative, however, if consanguineous sex is used to galvanize an audience in their prejudices and negativity. And while performing artists can put on a show for a camera or a live audience that most people will recognize as “just for show” and then go about their lives, there are people who have to hide their love and have to strictly guard their privacy for fear of hate and even criminal prosecution.


We’ve talked about the Kardashians before. From time to time, they make news for toying with themes of consanguinamory. The rest of this entry is about recent social media offerings by sisters Kylie and Kendall Jenner (part of the Kardashian universe), so if you don’t want to read about them you can skip it.


— — —

Wednesday, April 1, 2015

A Quick, Positive Explanation of Ethical Nonmonogamy

At hercampus.com we get an "Ode to Polyamory" by Magdalene Bedi...
The standard expectation for relationships in America is a rigid cycle of dating, commitment, monogamy, and marriage. Deviation is considered abnormal and pitiable (such as the single spinster/cat lady trope).
Yes, that may be the expectation, but how many of the supposedly monogamous relationship are actually monogamous?
A choice separate from monogamy is thought to be unhealthy or a sign of irresponsibility, which leads many to actively seek out marriage and commitment even if they otherwise wouldn’t (a possible contributing factor to divorce rates).
Many people have felt pressured into promise monogamy when they really had no business doing so. But let's note that marriage and commitment are not actually the same as monogamy. You can have both of those things without monogamy.
What many don’t realize is that polyamory isn’t restricted to a man with multiple wives or girlfriends. It can be a single person in four different relationships, three people in a relationship with each other, etc. and it’s not restricted to specific genders or gender roles.
Right. Polyamorous relationships are very, very diverse in both structure and how they've lived out.
Polyamory, which can be defined as “the state of being in love or romantically involved with more than one person at the same time,” can be just as emotionally fulfilling as a standard, monogamous relationship. So can open relationships, which generally entail only one romantic relationship but multiple sexual relationships.
I'm so glad that polyamory and open relationships were not equated. Some polyamorous relationships are closed, some are open. Many people in open relationships are committed to social and legal monogamy and would not describe themselves as polyamorists.


Generally, it is very good general, surface explanation that there are ethical alternatives to monogamy. It is good to see more and more articles like this. Increasing awareness is very important to reaching full marriage equality.
— — —