Review of BTEU Poly Panel
By continuing to browse this web site you are certifying your agreement to its terms of use; please read them if you have not done so already.
| Workshop | Beyond the Edge University Poly Panel |
|---|---|
| Location | The Wet Spot (Seattle) |
| Panel Facilitator | Allena |
| Date | Friday, Jan. 21, 7-9pm, 1999 |
| Cost | $5 |
| Participant skill level | intermediate discussion |
| Panelist skill level | experienced in poly relationships |
| Organization | on time and coordinated |
| Site | comfortable |
January's class at Beyond the Edge University was a panel on poly relationships. I participated as one of ten panelists. One of the panelists, a veteran of previous poly discussions, told me before we started that there wasn't a lot of difference between panel and audience. This turned out to be mostly true.
Allena started the panel by saying that she welcomed participation from the audience. I wondered how that was going to work; I've seen audience participation unravel a presentation. In this instance it worked really well, for two reasons. First, everyone present, both on the panel and in the audience, had consciously thought about their relationships and how they function, and could make clear and brief presentations.
The main reason it worked is that Allena is an excellent panel facilitator. She can cut off a ramble, move on to another question, bring the conversation back to the panel, gently curb the ebullient personalities and bring out the shy ones. Because she knew many people in the room, she specifically called on them to add to the discussion if she thought they had a point that needed to be made.
This was a discussion of multiple relationships in general, but there was a specific emphasis on relationships within the BDSM framework. Relationship descriptions include Top and bottom, Dom and sub, Master or Mistress and slave. The power exchange in these relationships adds another dimension to negotiations between romantic and sexual partners. Panel participants noted that submissive people need to pay attention to their own needs and clearly articulate them.
One of the differences between panelists and audience was that the panelists gave a brief biography: how I got into poly. So we acted as a set of examples of types of relationship. We ranged in age from reasonably young to reasonably experienced. The older panelists (including me!) were able to give some of the history of how our culture has looked at poly over time. Open marriage was the operative term in the 70s. Polyfidelity came into vogue a little later. Now, the word polyamorous generally stretches to cover the same relationship territory.
The panel leaned a little toward the bi/heterosexual; the men on the panel were both Tops, and the women were mostly bottomish. Allena balanced this by calling on audience members who were female Tops and women who were mostly lesbian to contribute to the conversation. I would have liked to hear more from gay men, whose world is mostly closed to me. There was some discussion about whether sexual orientation made a difference to the style of relationship, but it seemed, as we pooled our collective experience, that the same relationship models were used by people with very different sexual orientations.
There was considerable discussion about the effect of multiple partners on the children in the relationship. Some parents were concerned about state intervention in their families should their sexual interests become public information, particularly in cases where the parents have separated and one parent is hostile. Other parents worried that their children would become attached to people who weren't in their lives for long. On the positive side, parents noted that multiple partners give children multiple role models for parenting, and help spread the child care burden.
A great deal of the discussion centered on the book The Ethical Slut. Many panelists and audience members practiced the model that you have one primary partner and other secondary partners, and that all the relationships are built around explicit contracts. A very popular panel question was: what are the rules in your relationship? Panelists contributed stories about times their rules were broken, usually unintentionally, and the sometimes amusing and sometimes painful consequences that followed.
That discussion moved naturally into a conversation about emotion. Here the assembled group seemed to find less common ground. Some said "Your emotions are your responsibility." People in established relationships were more swayed by their partner's emotions and more likely to change what they were doing to accomodate them. We didn't seem to have an obviously excellent model for what an emotion is, when it can be expressed, how it can be expressed, and what the relationship-preserving response to emotion can be. It seemed to be the most problematic area in handling multiple relationships. Panelists and audience agreed that sometimes, asking for a reassurance "Do you still love me?" can result in the response, "Actually, no, and I'm leaving you."
I found being on the panel to be an thought provoking experience. This was not an occasion on which I had more information than anyone else. We all had our own experiences, and everyone had spent some time thinking about these issues and working through them with their partners. The participants did not hesitate to gently challenge one another where it seemed we hadn't thought our positions through. However, I felt that everyone who spoke was heard respectfully by a sympathetic audience. I'd highly recommend this discussion both as an audience member and as a panelist.
This is the copy of Allena's handout from this panel.
There are numerous books, articles and web sites pertaining to polyamory and polyfidelity. Following are just a few of the many resources available.
BOOKS
nonfiction
Polyamory: The New Love Without Limits by Dr. Deborah Anapol
The Ethical Slut: A Guide to Infinite Sexual Possibilities by Dossie Easton and Catherine A. Liszt
Loving More: The Polyfidelity Primer by Ryam Nearing
Lesbian Polyfidelity by Celeste West
The Lesbian Polyamory Reader: Open Relationships, Non-Monogamy, and Casual Sex edited by Marcia Munson Judith P. Stelbourn, Ph.D.
Open Marriage by Nena and George O'neill (published in 1972)
fiction
Many books by Robert Heinlein, notably Stranger in a Strange Land, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Time Enough For Love.
Many books by Samuel R. Delany
The Harrad Experiment by Robert H. Rimmer (published in 1966)
Small Changes, Vida, and Woman on the Edge of Time by Marge Piercey
Macho Sluts and Melting Point by Pat Califia
INTERNET SITES
POLY E-MAIL LISTS
Poly Mailing List
Send email to: listserv@polyamory.org. And in the body type only:
subscribe poly firstname lastname
Alt.polyamory
Newsgroup for discussing polyamory and related issues. Use
your newsreader or web browser to access this group.
Sea-Poly
To subscribe, go to http://www.egroups.com/group/sea-poly/ and follow the instructions.
Poly-dykes
For lesbian and bisexual women send mail to
Majordomo@QueerNet.ORG with the following command in the body of your
email message:
subscribe poly-dykes
Bifem Poly
Bifem-poly mailing list - Bifem-poly@inorganic.org
http://fold.inorganic.org/mailman/listinfo/bifem-poly
BOOK EXCERPTS
The following passages are from "Embodiment -- an Approach to Sexuality and Christian Theology" by Dr. James B. Nelson, Professor of Christian Ethics at United Theological Seminary of the Twin Cities. This book was published in 1978... it is argued that possessiveness of an emotional and possibly a genital sort is a major detriment to the marital relationship. Thus, a distinction must be made between "infidelity" and "adultery." Adultery has a straightforward meaning: sexual intercourse with someone other than one's spouse. Infidelity, on the other hand, is the rupture of the bonds of faithfulness, honesty, trust, and commitment between spouses. On the positive side, the argument goes, fidelity is the enduring commitment to the spouse's well-being and growth. It is commitment to the primacy of the marital relationship over any other. Compatible with marital fidelity and supportive of it can be certain secondary relationships of some emotional and sensual depth, possibly including genital intercourse.
... Women, many have noted, have particularly suffered from the traditional definition of monogamy. Thus Rosemary Ruether writes, "Monogamy has especially atrophied the personal development of women who were expected to get their entire emotional feedback through a relationship to a single man while he in turn developed his personality through a multiplicity of friendships, business relationships, and even sex relationships."
... Historically, she (Ruether) notes, monogamy has been closely linked with the private property relationship of man over woman in the patriarchal society. And while the church preached a single standard of exclusive sexual fidelity, in many ways it acceded to the double standard. In the modern period, however the notion of romantic marriage has demanded not only sexual exclusivity but also lifelong companionship and sexual satisfaction. Ruether wonders if we have not lifted up the wrong priority by apparently prizing sexual exclusivity over enduring, intimate companionship and personal fidelity. We might have more of the latter if we were not so insistent as a church upon the former.
... Sexuality, indeed, is an inevitably component of all interpersonal relations. And it is not the case that genital exclusivity in marriage necessarily means that other friendships must, for that reason, be devoid of sensual a warmth and emotional depth. Nor must genital exclusivity mean the possessive "ownership" of the partner. It can be -- and frequently is -- reflective of the kind of commitment from which emerges a genuine sense of freedom.
... Marriage indeed has a future. And its forms will change. What is frequently called "traditional Christian marriage" itself is a product of historical development, and it is not as old as is often believed. Yet it has served many well and doubtless will continue to do so. But the future will likely be marked by plurality more than uniformity in marital forms.
Nevertheless, I believe that as marital forms take their shape from the reality of God's incarnate love there will be certain characteristics and distinctive qualities about them. They will be covenants -- and not simply contracts. They will be enduring covenants -- pledges of ongoing faithfulness to the well-being and growth of each partner. They will be covenants of intimacy -- in which Eros is undergirded, infused, and transformed by agape. They will be sacramental covenants -- whether or not officially sacraments of the church, they will yet be those unique arenas in which the healing and humanizing love of God is vividly experienced. And they will be covenants which, in one way or another, genuinely enlarge the partners' capacity for communion with others and expand their willingness to be part of God's work of giving new life and renewal to the world.
If you're new to this site, we recommend you visit its home page for a better sense of all it has to offer.