Saturday, November 14, 2009

Support Scarleteen and Comprehensive Sex Ed for Teens

One of the causes I consider very important is comprehensive sex education for minors, and putting an end to abstinence-only sex ed, which is both irresponsible and ineffective. I'm passionate on this subject because I don't want to see any of today's youth be led down the f***ed up road I was led down, where I was given zero positive messaging about sex and some very damaging sex-negative messaging that it took many years to correct so that I could have a healthy sex life and happy relationships.

My friend Heather Corinna founded and runs the Scarleteen website which furnishes comprehensive sex education and related resources to thousands of kids who would otherwise get their sex ed the old fashioned way - either from their ill-informed friends or from elders who are too uncomfortable or too blinded by their own skewed values to manage to do more good than harm.

Like so many sex-related non-profit groups, Scarleteen is run pretty much completely by the passionate commitment of one or more people to whom the subject means a great deal, and in this case that person is Heather. Scarleteen's budget is meager and doesn't provide much in the way of financial support necessary for someone like Heather to be able to devote the huge amounts of time and effort it takes to provide the services she provides. If it were better supported, it would be able to do even more to help today's teens. Without Scarleteen, they would be left pretty much in the dark, abandoned by our society to ignorance and having risky sex and all the dangers that implies.

So I urge you to please join me in supporting Scarleteen. I'm sending in a $100 donation now - won't you do what you can, too?

Thanks!

Call for Intervenors - Canadian Polyamorists Set to Challenge Anti-Polygamy Law

We US poly activists will surely be watching this case very closely. If you are poly and Canadian, please consider responding to this call - you have an opportunity to make history here both legally and socially and help ensure relationship freedom for yourself and your brother and sister Canadian polyamorists. And though this won't set a legal precident here in the US, its success will surely be helpful in working toward global acceptance of our kind of relationships.

Although this is no laughing matter, I couldn't resist including this campy picture and a link to the Onionesque article that describes it.  These three are Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper and his supposed second and third brides. 

But back to business.  Here's a hearty "huzzah!" to the Canadian poly activists who are undertaking this important effort.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Call for Intervenors

November 13, 2009

Court case: Upcoming BC Government’s Court Reference on the Criminalization of Polygamy and Group Marriages

The BC government will shortly put a question to the Court to test the constitutionality of section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada which criminalizes people who practice polygamy or enter into any kind of “conjugal union” (i.e. a common-law marriage) with more than one person at the same time. Intervenors will have as little as 3 weeks to respond with court applications and affidavits.

It is important that polyamorists who are interested in being married to more than one person, or are living with more than one person, make the court aware of their interests and the legal arguments that the law is unconstitutional, because it infringes their Canadian Charter rights of association, religion (i.e. Wiccan or Pagan), equality, and the life, liberty and security of the person. It is not appropriate for a law which criminalizes loving, committed, consensual relationships to remain on the books, even if it is not presently being enforced. The more polyamorous interveners there are, the more strongly the court will hear this position.

PLEASE ENSURE THAT THIS CALL IS PLACED ASAP TO ALL CANADIAN POLYAMOROUS GROUPS AND LISTS TO WHICH YOU BELONG.

Who are we?

We are individual members of the Vancouver polyamory community and are active members or coordinators in Vanpoly (www.vanpoly. ca), who have joined together to coordinate an intervention by polyamorists so that the court can hear our stories and arguments. We have experience in organizing politically and legally. One of our members has offered to act as pro bono legal counsel and has successful experience in mounting constitutional challenges to Canada’s criminal code. We are also liaising with other civil and legal rights groups who are also following the BC government closely in this matter.

What are the steps in the process?

First, and as soon as possible, we need to identify potential intervenors and get their stories. When the government asks the court about the legality of this legislation, we want to be ready to finalize the sworn statements of intervenors and apply to the court within the 3 week period. If our application to the court is accepted, we will then prepare legal arguments in support of the above position, that it is not appropriate for a law which criminalizes loving, committed, consensual relationships to remain on the books. It is expected that this process will need to go very quickly.

Qualifications of an Intervenor

We are in immediate need of identifying as many potential intervenors as possible so that polyamory can be properly represented.

If you are a Canadian Resident:

1) currently living with multiple partners in a conjugal (marital or marital-like) relationships, or

2) have engaged in polyamorous relationships either in the past or currently AND have a desire to live with multiple partners in a conjugal (marital or marital-like) relationships in the future

then we ask you to email us.
While we are interested in hearing from ALL people who fit the above criteria, we are especially interested in having at least one female in a MFF (male-female- female) grouping.

What would it mean to be an intervenor?

1. You would need to give legal counsel some facts as to your polyamorous lifestyle which would be written up in a statement, which you will be asked to swear on oath is true. This statement would be filed in court. Your name and your address along with the statements in your affidavit would then be public. However, you would NOT need to name your partners.

2. You may find that your name and other information in your affidavit is in the news. You would NOT need to speak to media or answer their questions as you could refuse to respond to any media enquiries.

3. You would NOT need to incur court costs. You would need to pay for the affidavit to be sworn if you are in a city other than Vancouver. (If this is a concern, please advise and we will look for donations toward the cost.)

Who do I contact for more information or to offer to be an intervenor?

Please email Melly at ms.mellyn@gmail. com.

Thank you for your attention to this.

Sunday, November 1, 2009

Monogamy vs. Polyamory Debated on CNN.com Live

Within the last week CNN.com Live hosted an excellent debate on monogamy, polyamory, and human instinct. Representing the polyamorous viewpoint by telephone were Family web series creator Terisa Greenan and one of her partners, Scott Campbell. Terisa and Scott did an excellent job of answering questions and clearing up some common misconceptions about polyamory.

By the way, you can see the most excellent season finale of "Family" at the link I just provided complete with de rigueur cliffhanger ending. Fun seeing Chris Bingham of Bone Poets Orchestra and Gaia Consort before that, who with his partner in love and music, Sue Tinney, write and perform the fine Family soundtrack.

Back to the CNN piece. Also in the clip is Nisa Muhammad of the Wedded Bliss Foundation. I must say that though some of her statements are fairly accurate, much of it is, at least from my experience and personal perspective, total crap. But I admit that I'm biased. Still, she almost by rote makes all the BS claims put forth by the marriage movement, i.e, those determined to perpetuate the fairy tale that does so much damage by creating false expectations about marriage and monogamy, that is that traditional monogamous marriage, preferably between one man and one woman, is the only legitimate option, the only way to find sexual and emotional fulfillment in a relationship.

Also interviewed but sadly not included in this clip other than their images are Drs. David Barash and Judith Eve Lipton, a married couple, researchers and authors of books that include The Myth of Monogamy. What they had to say went a long way toward debunking the notion that monogamy is "natural." I appreciate their candidness and their willingness to take the risk of saying what is true but also controversial. I particularly appreciated their affirming that monogamy and polyamory are both choices, neither perfect but both legitimate.

According to Barash's Wikipedia page, he "has been named one of the country's '101 Most Dangerous Professors,' by right-wing writer David Horowitz." Sounds like my kind of guy.

Here's the clip CNN.com is making available - enjoy!

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Polyamorous Personal Development Guru Steve Pavlina and Wife Separate

After posting very candidly to their very popular personal development website early this year about their decision to open their marriage, I'm sorry to say that author and personal development guru Steve Pavlina and his wife, Erin, have decided to divorce.  Steve cites polyamory as part of the reason in his recent blog post entitled Separation.

Steve says that the communication demands were too much for them to handle.  Yes, there is a big investment of time and energy up front when a married couple transitions to an open marriage.  I imagine both are very busy people from what I see of their work, and they are raising two young children, so maybe they underestimated how much time and emotional energy would be required to accomplish what they intended. It's easy to do.

But that's not all of it. Steve writes that the poly path and the emotional intimacy and self-examination required along the way revealed truths that pointed them toward separating as the best course.   So it sounds like polyamory didn't kill the marriage, it just revealed flaws and truths that now point them in different directions. 

This is one of those situations that makes a good example of why I say that polyamory isn't for sissies.  Not that the Pavlinas are sissies, certainly not.  I mean that it's not for the faint of heart because growth does indeed happen, and sometimes with it, change that is unpredictable.  Still, theirs is a good example of how polyamory can serve to further us on our paths to living an authentic life, even when that involves the pain of ending relationships in order to establish new relationships more suitable to who we are.   

In any case, I wish Steve and Erin well as they continue to pursue their own paths to fulfillment and happiness.

Friday, October 16, 2009

Army Disciminates Against Bereaved Poly Family, ACLU Saves the Day

I was dismayed but not surprised to have learned just yesterday,  via an alert subscriber to a poly email list focused on poly southerners, about the following story reported there.  It well illustrates that Don't Ask Don't Tell is not the only discriminatory military law that needs to be put out of our misery.

Apparently a long-term M/F/M/F poly quad with several children was doing what I've believed for a long time could be an entirely sensible solution to the burden of extended isolation and loneliness partners of deployed servicemen and servicewomen regularly have to endure. Both men were in the Army stationed at Ft. Campbell, KY, which straddles the Tennessee/Kentucky state line.

Tragically, one of the men has been killed in combat. As if this grieving family hadn't already been through enough, in the process of assigning survivor benefits the Army learned about the quad arrangement, decided to deny benefits to the widow and insisted on paternity testing to find out which man fathered the children - AND, the surviving husband in the quad faced a dishonorable discharge and loss of his career.

In the civilian world, it is my understanding that legally the father of a child is whomever is legally married to the woman who gave birth to the child. Of course, the Army operates under a different code, specifically the Uniform Code of Military (In)Justice ("UCMJ"), and it was unwilling to pay benefits to a soldier's legal child if he was not the biological father of the child.  It was reported that the widow admitted that the quad was never really sure which man is the biological father of which children because they never worried about such things.

It was also said that the Judge Advocate General office declined to get involved in defending this family. However, the good news is that the ACLU was very happy to step in and quite effectively resolved the problem, partly by threatening national media attention. Due to the ACLU's efforts the widow will get her full benefits as will all of the fallen soldier's children. Hooray!  The status of the surviving husband's threatened discharge was not mentioned, but hopefully the ACLU was able to prevent that as well.  .

Of course, this was a difficult story to keep quiet, and the remaining triad continues to experience various kinds of oppression from locals bigots so is planning to move out of the area.

I don't know whether the soldiers in question were enlisted or officers. It's long been my understanding that the UCMJ's morality laws against adultery were much more aggressively enforced as to the behavior of officers than they ever were as to that of enlisted soldiers. Someone I know who knows about such things told me within the last year that the Army is no longer prosecuting adultery, having higher priorities for which to use its resources, yet here this story is. It may be that once the family configuration was disclosed, the Army believed it was compelled to enforce it's laws.

As the practice of polyamory continues to gain popularity, more such situations may well arise. The ACLU has many more resources than does the polyamory community, so we can only hope that it will continue to step up and help out. As for the rest of we polyamorists, it would be a good idea to write the ACLU a check for as much as we can afford and make it clear the reason for the donation.

I'm sending them $100 right now. How about you?

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Abstinence Only Sex Ed Funding Rears It's Irresponsible Head Again

If you, as I, oppose taxpayer-funded abstinence-only sex education, you'll be disappointed to learn that on last Tuesday night, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) pushed through an amendment in the Senate Finance Committee authorizing $50 million in funding for abstinence-only programs as part of Health Care Reform - despite over 10 years of evidence that these programs do not work.

By a razor-thin vote of 12-11, the Senators on the Finance Committee gave conservative ideology a victory over science and common sense.

Please take a moment to tell your Senators it's time to stop these programs once and for all!

In fact, Advocates for Youth worked with coalition partners around the country, and October was  launched as National Sex Ed Month of Action. Their hope was - and is - to build support in Congress for the REAL Act and comprehensive sex education.

It's been a 10-year fight to end funding for these harmful and ineffective programs. President Obama has called for their elimination. Democrats in the House and Senate have held firm through budget negotiations.

This fight has been long, but - with the end in sight - it is more important than ever that we all make our voices heard.

Ask your Senators to strip the Hatch Amendment from Health Care Reform. It's easy to do, just fill in your info and click send, the letter is already written for you. Don't let 12 Senators undermine sex education in the United States!

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Practical Polyamory is one of The Daily Reviewer's Top 100 Sex Blogs


I am pleased today to learn that this blog has been recognized by The Daily Reviewer as one of it's Top 100 Sex Blogs based on reader votes.  I don't consider this blog a sex blog, but it's certainly sex-positive, and I'm happy for the award regardless.  I am also honored to be included in the fine company of Cunning Minx's Polyamory Weekly, Heather Corinna's Scarleteen (sex ed info for teens), Ask Dan and Jennifer, Susie Bright's Journal, and the Savage Love Podcast. (Click the award above to see all of the winners.) Interestingly, there only seem to be 40 blogs listed in this category - maybe they're still soliciting suggestions.

The Daily Reviewer reviews and rates blogs on a huge variety of subjects, not just sex, and since the award can only be had via reader votes, I'm now going to impersonate an American Idol contestant and thank all my fans for the honor of this award.  (A trip or a cash prize some day maybe??? - Naah, forget it, such a suggestion might seem ungrateful...) 

Joking aside, I really do appreciate the readers who went to the trouble of making the recommendation and pledge to continue to bring you the best social commentary and polyamory information available.